Poutrager's Self-Absorbed Delusions

By now I'm sure you've all gotten pretty well versed on the poutragers poutrage about the NM OFA Directer using Deaniacs blog post in an email. If by chance not, the folks at The People's View have been doing a great job of covering it very thoroughly.

What has interested me most have been the reactions of a couple of "professional lefties" and their incredible delusions that are so obviously wrapped up in total self-absorption.

The first comes from Keith Olbermann who, in naming the NM OFA Director "Worst Person in the World," said this:

The Firebagger Lefty blogopshere got the President nominated in 2008.

**Scratches head**

So, that would be the nomination battle between Obama, Edwards and Clinton?

Keith...really, that whole episode wasn't that long ago. Even my feeble brain can remember what happened. Deaniac describes it very well.

First, the Lefty blogosphere - myself included - supported not Barack Obama but John Edwards. After Edwards dropped out, there was plenty of support for then-Sen. Hillary Clinton, and it remained that way until Clinton herself started campaigning majorly negatively and made bad mistakes - like the "red phone" ad a so forth. I might also remind Keith that by the time Edwards dropped out, Obama was already racking up and ahead in elected delegate count, a lead he never lost. Given the blogs' support of Edwards first, and split second, it is not an overstatement that Barack Obama won the nomination despite the Lefty blogosphere, and certainly not because of them.

I was also part of the lefty blogosphere at the time. And that's exactly what happened. If anyone can be credited with getting Obama nominated it was the Democratic caucus-goers of Iowa and the field organization the campaign put in place there. No one - especially the netroots - was paying attention to him prior to that win. Most of the lefty blogosphere assumed the race was going to be between the establishment Clinton and the insurgent Edwards. They never saw Obama coming. And as Deaniac said, once it came down to Clinton and Obama, the netroots went into a fevered war over their allegiances, which were split between the two. It was not pretty!

So excuse me Keith, someone needs to awaken you out of your delusions about the "Firebagger Lefty Blogosphere."

And that brings us to the second delusional one. Drumroll please...Jane Hamsher. Here's what she said in reaction to this poutrage.

But if this is a brilliant political strategy on the part of OFA, someone is going to have to explain it to me. I know the goal is to attract the much-prized Independent for 2012. But who do they think is keeping Obama’s poll numbers afloat?

She then captures a screenshot of Gallup poll numbers showing that liberal support for President Obama is at 70%.

The conclusion she's trying to draw is that critiquing Paul Krugman and the Firebaggers (what Deaniac's original blog post had done) is the same as critiquing the 70% of liberals who support President Obama. I don't think so.

Since he got elected (and as we've shown above, even before) the Krugman Firebaggers have been on a poutrage journey to tear down anything the President tries to do. They attack his policies, his personality, and his motivations. Truth is, what Deaniac was doing is critiquing that 30% of liberals who DON"T support President Obama. It's the rest of us - the one's Ms. Hamsher calls the dumbest motherfuckers in the world - who make up the 70%. We agreed with Deaniac's blog post and found it encouraging that an OFA staff person would use it.

In light of these examples its tempting for this recovering therapist to want to diagnose such delusional statements. I'll simply suggest that folks look up the symptoms for narcissistic personality disorder and leave it at that.