alternative hippopotamus

I’ve wanted to discuss the Forbidden City Online for a while, so I’m glad that Lambert asked in comments.

That’s going to take a little poking and prodding, however. As I’ve learned, the Forbidden City needs a machine capable of high-end graphics. My HP gaming tower is perfect for the application, but my other machines limp. And, I’m not 100% sure what parts of the project may be on hiatus.

If I may, though, I’d like to suggest a completely different application that works on any machine. And, it equally pertains to the mysteries of the orient. Ladies and gentlemen, The Interactive Way to Go.

It’s important to notice and recommend the good work you see being done. Particularly so, when you have said something critical, noting the positive becomes that much more important.

In that light, I was glad to see this from Vast Left, seconded by Lambert:

I’d much appreciate it if you’d avoid “bots” & “Obots”
By vastleft on Mon, 03/23/2009 - 6:48pm

Dehumanizing nicknames (sheeple, for another example) do little to advance understanding.

I’m all for being critical of the bullying groupthink that made a sham of a mockery of the primaries, but please allow for the possibility that the folks who were part of all that might belong to our species.

+100
By lambert on Mon, 03/23/2009 - 6:59pm

That epithet always gave me the creeps, and now I know why.

What personally discouraged me about the primaries is that relatively small differences in political viewpoints became an enormous gulf. At this point, using language like “obots” is just obnoxious, and should not be tolerated by the left. I don’t believe there’s an equivalent epithet for Hillary Clinton supporters, but I’m not so involved with the jargon that I might have missed it.

But, back to why I posted this: thanks to Vast Left and Lambert. Largesse is its own reward.

One of the most fact-free commenters I have ever read weighs in on economist Brad De Long:

Old cranks
By gqmartinez on Sun, 03/22/2009 - 2:42pm

Seems to be an increasing number of those these days.

I think its becoming clear who Obama’s 25-30% will be. Can they drown out all the old cranks though? I don’t think so. They almost require no comments since they seem to be parodies already.

So, Brad De Long, simply for creating a FAQ on the bank bailout that isn’t overtly hostile to the Obama administration, can be compared to the Bush 25-30%. Furthermore, according to this commenter, Brad De Long is already a parody.

Some people, let’s call them “old cranks,” are jerks. Some are twits, who aspire to be jerks. Having no factual grounding, they criticize those who have some understanding of their fields. These critics are jerks in potentia, working on their dissertations.

I continue to observe the machinations of those who flatter themselves into thinking they are more progressive than you or me.

There is certainly a need to critique any figure from the left, including Obama. For that matter, including Hillary Clinton. What I am observing, however, is not criticizing someone from the left. What I see is more like a series of petty outrages borne out of grievance for events now well into the past. A grievance, or list of grievances, that I would argue is largely but not entirely imaginary: that the DNC conspired to elect Obama, that Obama cheated in the primaries, or that his use of misogynistic language fooled people into voting for him. Ironically, many of the bloggers who argue this way insist that Obama supporters are under some form of narcotic influence.

Snort!

One is tempted to say they are carriers of Obama Derangement Syndrome. Here, I’ll note that Liberal Rapture refers to ODS as derangement by what he likes to call the “obots” who have “drunk the kool-aide.” I believe if he examines the etymology of the [X]DS’s, he’ll see that X refers to the object of disapproval, e.g., Bush Derangement Syndrome was what possessed critics of Bush. So, Obama Derangement Syndrome would refer to bloggers such as Liberal Rapture and Cannon Fire. They who are reflexive critics of Obama.

You’re smart people. I’m sure you get it.

Joseph Cannon provides a clear demonstration of ODS at work. Take, for instance, his post: Obama acts like Bush II, yet the Kossacks refuse to admit reality.

As evidence of the latter he quotes not a post at the Daily Kos, but comments on a post. The problem that Cannon has with the commenters is that several of them wonder out loud if the Obama administration wants to lose its case on executive authority, so that it’s not in the hands of a Republican administration. I would guess not, but it’s certainly within the realm of possibility. And this is indeed the nature of the Kos forum: to ask each other their thoughts. To put forward ideas and see if others agree. Fair enough? Yet Cannon doesn’t feel the need to say why he disagrees with the commenters. It’s sufficient for him to point and smirk.

Now let’s examine the premise, contained in the post’s title, that Obama acts like Bush II. Sorry, but that’s over the top. While I don’t think Obama should be able to assert state secrets to keep evidence out of court, I hardly think that’s the same thing as wiretapping citizens without a court order, torturing prisoners at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, extraordinary rendition, or assertions of executive privilege that led Scott Horton to assert that we’ve been living in a dictatorship. I think most of us rather like it that Obama will close gtmo, that he signed the Lilly Ledbetter law, that he’s stopping the federal prosecution of medical marijuana laws, and that he’s released the OLC memos supporting the existence of a Bush police state.

Will Cannon re-examine his hypothesis: i.e., that the obots have drunk kool-aid and worship The One? We’ll find out. As to his question: “By the way, he [ed: Rush Limbaugh] recently referred to Talking Points Memo as a ‘far left blog.’ Wow. What does that make Cannonfire?” I’d say that the author is wrong in thinking he’s running a lefty blog. He’s currently running a grievance blog. He’s done some good things in the past, so I’m hoping that he can do better than his recent work.