Jane Hamsher & FireDogLake Are Not “The Left”
Tweet
As Matt Yglesias points out here, that site is effectively a PUMA-style operation whose opinions are nothing like most of the people on the actual left.
50 Responses to “Jane Hamsher & FireDogLake Are Not “The Left””
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
What Time Is Super Bowl 2012 (Super Bowl XLVI)?
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Actually, Yglesias is pointing out that the “traditional” left is mounting operations to push health care through. And they have to, since Obama has been inept in getting it done so far. No, he’s not a senator any longer, but effective presidents know how to work Congress. What they don’t do is tell Rahm to tell Harry Reid to give Senator Lieberman whatever he wants and kiss his ass up and down Pennsylvania Avenue.
I’m actually not Hamsher’s biggest fan, but I love Tbogg. That said, if you really think trying to alienate the “netroots” or “far left” or what have you is a good idea, then, well, you’re dumb. FDL might be “lefter” than DailyKOS, but frankly the latter site has done a hell of a lot more for taking our country back from the neo-cons than organizations like, I dunno, Media Matters for America.
I don’t see any mention of “PUMA” either. Fail.
Jane Hamsher has become, lets just say…not so useful.
Wow. It’s okay to have a different position on the issue than FDL, but to say they are not the left is wrong. What makes Media Matter or you more left than FDL? Stop with the bashing because it want help the cause.
I’m not much of a FDL follower, but I do know about them and have read some of their stuff, and this bashing of them does no good. In my opinion.
Eh, they serve their purpose. FDR had Huey Long. In a few years nobody will remember or care about firebagging (that is, assuming the bill passes). But yeah, using FDL as a synonym for ‘the left’ is tripe.
Also, they do have some good bloggers. Tbogg, Ackerman and Blue Texan in particular.
Jane Hamsher isn’t ‘helping the cause’ either. She lost all credibility the moment she joined Grover Norquist to take down Democrats.
Wanting to kill the bill is EXACTLY what the Republicans want. Does Jane honestly believe that by killing this bill that she’s going to get a bill she wants?? She can’t possibly be that stupid. Does she want 3 million more insured or 30 million more insured?? For those wanting this bill to be perfect: You’re living in a dream world. Get out of the clouds and back down to reality. There was NEVER going to be a bill Jane wanted. NEVER.
PUMA meaning Party Unity My Ass. They only care about their pet causes and nothing more.
Essentially they have taken a single-payer or die approach.
Oliver seems to be pointing to the fact that FDL is not the mainstream left. Which would be correct.
The vast majority of people on the left want this bill to pass, as flawed as it is while FDL will kill any bill if it isn’t even close to their liking.
Jane Hamster is only one person and I don’t think people in the Senate are mauling over the health care bill thinking, “What does Jane Hamster think or what would she do?”
Focusing this type of attention onto a progressive blogger or blog has no baring on if the HCR passes or not. As Liberals we should be putting the pressure and attention on the moderate Democrats in Congress that actually have a role in passing health care.
Trust me I am not a fan of Jane Hamster, so this isn’t me standing up for her. I just think it’s a waste of time focusing on a blogger instead of Congressmen that cause road blocks or watering down the bill so that it’s not affective.
I can’t really argue with that. That said, I think moderate Democrats want healthcare reform as much as the Republicans.
if you really think trying to alienate the “netroots” or “far left” or what have you is a good idea
Again with attacking me for things I didn’t say. To be perfectly frank, this site here was in the netroots long before Hamsher even knew what a blog is, so why would I be attacking the netroots? Your baseless accusation doesn’t even make sense as a slur.
Also, I dunno what your point is in setting up some kind of fake competition between Media Matters and Daily Kos. Both orgs are vital to the left, and while I don’t speak for anyone but myself, I’m 100% positive that David Brock and Markos would concur with that conclusion.
Jane Hamster is only one person
Right, the person who runs FireDogLake, the site I’m writing about here.
“while FDL will kill any bill if it isn’t even close to their liking.”
Ah yes, the “Jane Hamsher is more powerful than President Barack Obama, Senator Harry Reid, and congresswoman Nancy Pelosi combined” argument.
Perfectly valid logic.
And by the way, there’s no guarantee that the crap Liebercare bill is going to go through. People like me have decided to grin and bare it, hoping something better will come along in the future. People like me also find it highly amusing that after eating our bowls of crap provided by president Obama, we’re being asked to chow down on second helpings while we watch him flail about or possibly just not give a shit about pushing through the legislation that would make his legacy on par with those of FDR and LBJ (well, LBJ domestically, not the Vietnam stuff).
If HCR fails it goes on Obama first and Democratic leadership second, not a leftie blogger. Honestly, is it paranoid of me to think all the anti-FDL stuff is just trying to soften the inevitable blow to Obama’s presidential reputation of HCR fails? Because that’s the definition of playing not to lose, as opposed to trying to win.
Honestly, is it paranoid of me to think all the anti-FDL stuff is just trying to soften the inevitable blow to Obama’s presidential reputation of HCR fails?
In a word? Yes. If health care fails to pass it isn’t because Jane Hamsher throws feces on her blog. But that doesn’t excuse the throwing of feces.
Jane lost me, but I do love me some Blue Texan and Tbogg.
Instaputz, anybody?
So your blog post is basically saying Obama is incompetent re: passing important legislation, but what’s really important is that smear FDL.
So please clarify — is she totally meaningless or is she the big bad librul blogger we’re supposed tremble before?
This is a real blind-spot for you Oliver. You aren’t making any sense.
Say what you will about the main site. NOBODY insults TBogg on MY watch.
Dude, you aren’t “the Left” either.
For a while a blogger called Norbizness was “the Left”, but then he turned into a comment troll whose self-appointed duty was to make fun of posts like this for distracting bloggers from issues that matter, an example of which he never gave.
Stop bashing other bloggers and keep the heat on idiots like Stupak, Nelson and Lieberman. They are the real obstacles to this bill getting passed.
Stop bashing other bloggers
You don’t tell me what to write, I won’t tell you.
If anyone has the blind spot here is you. I’ve said numerous times the missteps Obama has made on this. At the same time I’m tired of the Hamsher temper tantrums and the media accepting them as the official default position of “the left” which is what Chait did.
Support for the public option is not a view that’s held on the “actual left”? Same goes for preferring the House bill over LieberCare?
Interesting.
Support for the public option is not a view that’s held on the “actual left”?
Of course not, BT. If you state it simply as ‘support for the public option,’ you’d get 100% approval from progressives, excluding any ‘single payer or bust’ outliers. But FDL’s apparent position of preferring the bill (and I’m assuming a bit) be defeated is where they part ways.
The argument is not whether FDL is on ‘the actual left.’ Rather that their preference that the bill die is a minority position and that the ‘vastly better than nothing (which is what we get if it fails)’ position is much more common. In other words, assuming FDL speaks for the left ain’t such a good idea.
Again, I’m really curious as to how much power you think Jane Hamsher has, even if she does get over-projected as the voice of “the left” on MSNBC once in a while.
I doubt Rahm trembles at hearing her name.
She has every right to be pissed off at how Obama bungled HCR. Every American does. If she’s decided to write him off, so be it. Personally I haven’t. But I’ll be damned if I’m supposed to keep getting turds thrown at me by “serious” Democrats who know how to play the game, who know that it’s all about compromise, who know how calm and cool and collected Obama is on this, etc.
FFS, we haven’t even gotten the Lieberman-approved bill passed yet. Jane Hamsher is the least of your problems. Obama’s inability to play hardball is.
I’m almost certain Tbogg has taken the “hold your nose and pass Liebercare” position. So say what you will about Jane Hamsher (someone who I’m defending here but in all honesty I don’t have strong feelings positive or negative about her) but it’s incorrect to say that FDL-the blog has monolithically come out against Liebercare.
Yes it’s her website but still, this is a misleading/crap post.
Oliver, it is unfair to compare Jane to PUMAs.
The PUMAs were mostly a media invention. To the extent they were real, they were angry because Hillary ran a weak campaign and lost a fair fight. They turned their anger on the Democratic Party.
When Barack was nominated, we had every reason to believe he would withdraw troops from Iraq, would hold banks accountable, would support Medicare for all, and so on.
He hasn’t. People are justifiably frustrated. They should consider whether they are so frustrated that they want to see Sarah Palin as President. But people are people, and they need to blow off steam now and again.
Jane has never been destructive. Blunt, yes. Abrasive, sometimes. But I have never seen her try to hand power to the right.
Let’s agree to disagree on lots of things, and work to elect better Democrats.
Working with Grover Norquist and throwing temper tantrums isn’t about building a progressive movement.
This post isn’t about the substance of the bill. It’s about the coverage of the bill and people taking one pointof view and slapdashing it on all of us. I’m pretty sure my position of “It’s not the best bill in the world but we should pass it because it’s a step forward” is far more representative of most of the left than Hamsher’s. Yet her opinion keeps getting played as if it reps all of us.
Seriously, why can’t you ever respond to what I’ve written rather than what you think I’ve written? I’m a pretty blunt writer, I don’t write in circles or riddles.
So if your argument is “Jane Hamsher is not the left,” fine. But as mentioned, she’s allowed other FDL bloggers to openly express the “hold your nose and pass it” argument.
My sense is that Jane Hamsher, at the end of the day, has very little real power at all. So trying to establish a “real left” in opposition to little ol’ her is kind of silly, and disturbingly reminiscent of the “third way” Clinton approach (play nice with the GOP, don’t ever try any of that crazy stuff like actually criticizing the GOP on national defense or pointing out their blatant hypocrisy on spending for wars but no paying for them, etc.) that sent us into the woods during 2001-2006. (Or 1998-2008, if you prefer.)
IMO there’s a genuine element of setting up scapegoats for Obama’s failures as a president but we can agree to disagree on that.
Meanwhile, I think Andrew Sullivan is on to something re: Obama and Rahm’s problems:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/creeping-clintonism-or-how-rahm-is-a-scaredycat.html#more
Here’s a hint: they have nothing to do with Jane Hamsher.
Deciding that Joe Lieberman should get whatever he wants re: HCR isn’t very progressive either.
So trying to establish a “real left” in opposition to little ol’ her is kind of silly, and disturbingly reminiscent of the “third way” Clinton approach
Seriously, I give up. You refuse to argue about things I actually said and instead keep inventing things. Jesus.
If John McCain stands against torture, which he does on alternate Thursdays, should we support torture?
If Ken Starr stands against Liz Cheney’s McCarthyism, as he has, should we support demonizing lawyers?
To quote myself: Some people genuinely believe that what is critical is making healthcare insurance universal, so that it is perceived as a right. I think they’re wrong. I believe that what is critical is creating a health insurance system that so many people like that it becomes political suicide to attack. Even if it’s not universal, it can be extended to become universal, as happened with Social Security.
But I accept that others have a different opinion. I think of them as potential allies, people who I need to persuade. I do not think of them as the enemy. The enemy are those who profit from misery and death.
If you really believe in reforming the rotten health insurance system that we have, understanding that latter point matters.
Bailing out the insurance companies by making failure to buy junk insurance a federal crime isn’t about building a progressive movement either.
NOTE Nice infantilizing rhetoric on “tantrum.” But then, you know how women like Jane are…
“But FDL’s apparent position of preferring the bill (and I’m assuming a bit) be defeated is where they part ways.”
That’s not my position, and I don’t think that’s the position of most of the bloggers at FDL.
Since when are you the arbiter of what is and isn’t “the actual left”? Your blog post (and that of Yglesias) border on “shut up and sing the damn song even if you hate it” Republicanism. Screw that.
Obama is a disaster. So is this health insurance company welfare bill which grants a de facto power of taxation to private, for profit corporations.
Obama’s next trick is to gut Social Security. Will you be leading the “shut up and sing” crowd on that when it happens (and it is surely in the cards) as well?
I’m a Democrat and a liberal. Apparently, this blog is for Obamacrats and cheerleaders. No thanks.
WRONG!
PUMA (Party Unity Means Action) has been intelligently discussing the economics of single-payer vs. Obamacare, and the secret dealings of Obama with Big Pharma and the health insurance cos immediately after his inauguration. While the other left blogs patted themselves on the back for the election and subsequent parties. Additionally, PUMAs have always pointed out how Obama has a record of saying one thing and doing another when it comes to action (i.e., Exelon, taking action on his constituent’s complaints of having raw sewage backing into the sinks of their Rezko apartments) and the use of an unprecedented political thuggery pointed out by the late Stephanie Tubbs-Jones.
Moreover, it was Obama himself who said that only now single payer “is not feasible in this political environment.” Uhh, sorry, how did the political environment change much from when Obama was campaigning ‘cept for the DEMOCRATS having control of all branches of govt? Or did he just not get the political realities of DC until he stepped in the White House? Oh yeah, I get it, he’s trying to be bi-partisan. My a$$.
As for who the REAL LEFT is these days, I believe anyone who can support a president who rails against “government bureaucrats” ineptitude for running medical programs and uses republican-talk “Medicare will be insolvent in a few years” in recent speeches … cannot purport to be a real leftie!
I’m not so sure that your position is far more representative of most of the left.
What I do know is, I don’t like this bill’s mandate to buy with no public option. I think that ought to be a deal-breaker, and if I had a vote I’d vote against it too. If that puts Jane Hamsher and I on the same side as Grover Norquist, then that’s just a case of strange bedfellows on this one issue; in no way do I interpret that to mean that Jane Hamsher or I now believe in shrinking government to where we can drown it in the bathtub. And that’s what your blunt, clearly-written post implies. You accuse Jane of apostasy, but I think she’s truer in fighting for a progressive vision and standing up for progressive principles than you are; you seem to be all too willing to accept half a loaf (or less) in some vain hope that more will be forthcoming at some future date. When did progressivism become all about compromising one’s core ideals? What happened to “crashing the gate” and fighting for what is right?
I guess I missed the “temper tantrums.” When did that happen?
Write whatever you want, but this is very disappointing to read from you.
it was Obama himself who said that only now single payer “is not feasible in this political environment.”
Actually both he and Sec. Clinton said this as far back as 2007.
Since about last summer or so.
this post is an example of compare/contrast fail
love you oliver anyway
signed me, left of most every democrat/liberal/progressive in my district
Whatever that means.
Gonna fix the factual error on his, Oliver? Hamsher’s no PUMA. That’s just throwing mud.
And I’m no defender of Hamsher, since she’s one of the prime movers behind the public option roach motel. It’s just that post, as the old joke has it, isn’t even wrong.
That’s not my position, and I don’t think that’s the position of most of the bloggers at FDL.
Well frankly that’s good to hear. Though the head honcho at your site appears ready to go down guns blazing:
“If we have to whip health care, if we have to run a campaign to enforce the pledge made by members of Congress to vote against a bill without a public option, we will. It may not succeed and I wouldn’t kid anyone about its chances of holding 65 votes, but we’ve already got the page set up — it’s a thing of beauty, replete with primary filing deadlines and each signature that appeared on the July 31 letter.”
This thread is dead but I can’t resist commenting because the op is completely misinformed. Jane Hamsher is not a PUMA which you would know if you went to an actual PUMA site. At the Confluence, for instance, they detest Jane Hamsher because of the primaries, and the fact that Jane has lost faith in Obama matters not a whit.
By the way, according to the most recent Gallup poll, a plurality of Americans believe Obama’s bill should be scrapped. In other words, they agree with Jane, Kuccinich and the GOP. The majority still want hcr, but not THAT hcr.
By your definition, I guess that makes 48% of Americans PUMAs.
[...] This has the weirdest thing going on that I’ve ever seen. Clusterfuck is an understatement. The neoprogressives are now saying that any one that isn’t in line with the current version of Health Insurance Hell isn’t a real liberal. (Thanks Matt Y) Hell, one of these deluded Obots even called Jane Hamsher a PUMA because she wants the public optio… [...]
Oh Really, is that what PUMA is? Nope, speaking as someone who is perfectly fine with being called PUMA even though some think it is a dirty word…..PUMA is about ONE THING…counting the votes of non elitist democrats and NOT stealing primaries with the help from the DNC.
That’s it… and as far as LeftRight, please get over it. There were PUMA of every stripe from leftist to liberal democrats to independent and even moderate republicans.
IF you want to be helpful to saving America from it’s present predicament, start thinking corporatist VRS Populist and get the hell over trying to be the most “left”.
Oh, so Jane will no longer be used. Good for her.
OY! To say someone is not as left as someone else is not an insult. I am a liberal (real leftists hate liberals BTW. Anyone working with/belonging to the democratic party and calling themselves a leftist is an ignorant political dilettante.) and I would be happier to vote for a more populist democrat even if he or she were less liberal.
BTW… in case anyone is confused Secretary Clinton is both more liberal and more populist than Obama. We knew it then and he has proven us right in the present.
Am I still POed that my vote was thrown away along with the majority of democrats, hell yes it is no different than 2000.
ummmnnn no, Hillary rand a great campaign, that is why more people voted for her and the Obama mob had to cheat like crazy in the caucuses and with the help of the DNC to select him as the nominee.
What do I most dislike about Obama? That he used both race baiting and sexism to appeal to guilty white liberals, AAs and sexist males of both ethnic-groups.
as is calling her PUMA is really a bad thing. What does it mean, anyone who is not a Obot is PUMA. I wish Jane had the sense to be one when she would have helped. But she just recently saw the light about how very incapable and right wing Obama is.
Jane is simply disappointed as are many democrats and independents.