President Patrick?

Not ruling out a run, Politico reports.

Neighborhoods: 

    Topics: 

    Free tagging: 

    Comments

    Another moonbat president? Nah..

    By on

    By the time the current leftist moonbat occupant of the White House leaves office; with all the damage he's doing to the country, it will be about 50 years before Americans even think about electing another leftist moonbat. By that time, Patrick will be too old.

    up
    56

    Moonbat

    What, exactly, is a moonbat?

    Other than a sentinel catchphrase/radioactive label that says "person using this term is not rational or sane".

    BTW, does anybody know why we keep getting these governors who preside over a state where the governor is pretty much an afterthought, and don't show their faces for years at a time (except when there are megastorms), and who then think they have any meaningful executive experience?

    up
    34

    Moonbat or not...

    By on

    I'd have to think after the last few years, he has zero chance. (based on his record, not that of the current President.)

    up
    34

    To be fair, people who use the term "moonbat" may not

    be congenital idiots. They may have suffered a traumatic brain injury, e.g., from being dropped on their heads repeatedly as infants. Or they could have huffed a little too much oven cleaner. Adverse effect on the brain of late-stage syphilis is another explanation.

    Then there's that brain-eating amoeba that gets you if you don't use filtered water in your neti pot, though admittedly nasal lavage is probably a little too hippie-dippy for Herald comments-section habitués. I just want you to consider alternate explanations before resorting to the most obvious diagnosis.

    up
    35

    People who use the term

    By on

    "wing nut" are no better than those who use the term "moonbat."

    up
    25

    Self described moonbat..

    By on

    Thank you MC Slim JB for that informative explanation of the term Moonbat. Having read your insightful description I can now better understand why it is you post on this site as you do. What you said was pretty much a personal introduction to who you are and what makes you tick.

    up
    25

    Please go on....

    By on

    I ask because unlike the originator of the phrase, I've never known MC Slim to be anywhere as sleazy in his dealings with restaurants. Unlike the Stockyard, the Hanover Street Chophouse, the Kowloon, that pie place Howie's kid works at or any number of places that Howie and Sandy can sleaze a free meal from. Last I checked MC Slim pays for all of the meals he writes about, which puts him about a thousand points ahead of ole lardass in the integrity column.

    Now when MC Slim starts adding car horn versions of "La Cucaracha" in an audio file along with his reviews of Latino restaurants the way ole bigot Howie does when he reads the police blotters but strangely only reads items with Hispanic criminals, then I'd say you have an insight into the way MC Slim thinks.

    up
    26

    So, which type of user of the term "moonbat" are you, jakester?

    Congenital idiot, or adult-onset idiot?

    My favorite bit of Howie Carr restaurant stupidity was when he entertained Anthony Bourdain, who was in town shooting his "Friends of Eddie Coyle" inspired episode of "No Reservations!" Carr took Bourdain, who lives in New York City, to a deli. (One that advertised on Carr's show, natch.)

    Carr is in exactly the same end of the restaurant "criticism" business as the Andelmans, which is to say, he will strap on his knee-pads for anyone who waves $20 at him.

    up
    20

    Lead poisoning

    Around here, good odds that childhood lead poisoning was involved (from car exhaust - not eating paint).

    up
    13

    Escaped from the Twilight Zone??

    By on

    Oh MC, does anyone but yourself even know or care what you are talking about? Reading your posts is like watching an episode of the Twilight Zone

    up
    25

    Let me explain it again Slime, er, I mean Slim

    By on

    When the person speaking the Looney rhetoric is confused him/herself which you so obviously are, those who read or hear it, rational humans, cannot help but be confused about what you say since you, yourself have no clue. Answer your question there Slimshadey? Think you've got it now? I can repeat it a few times if you need me to.

    up
    23

    But see slummy, that's the

    By on

    But see slummy, that's the thing. This isn't a discussion at all. I'm right, you're wrong and if you were to go through 10,000 more years of evolution, you still wouldn't have the intelligence to know it or to grasp what anyone says. But here again, not your fault. You are at an inherited/genetic disadvantage and way out of your league. Does your Mom know you are on his computer?

    up
    20

    Ah, the devastating ripostes of kindergartners

    "Aren't people who use 'moonbat' adorable, like clumsy little five-year-olds?"

    jakester: "You're a big fat stupid poopie-brain."

    "Er, jakester, you're proving the point."

    jakester: "I know you're a big stupid-head, but what am I?"

    "Your wit and logic are unassailable. Bravo."

    up
    14

    Jakester

    If you're going to cast aspersions on somebody else's intellectual capacity, it helps if you can write in coherent sentences yourself. #protip

    up
    17

    Itchy -Huh?

    By on

    Itchy, whatever do you mean? Or do you know?

    up
    15

    Sounds like you're getting sleepy itchy

    By on

    Itchy, your posts are falling fast. Take a time- out and maybe with some rest, they'll improve. Couldn't get any worse. I'm kind of embarrassed for you now.

    up
    13

    Scratchie, I think you must concede jakester's superiority

    in this round of The Dozens: Nursery School edition. I don't see how grownups can match his mastery of the playground-level rejoinder, like finding clever ways to mock someone's posting name. "Sick burn, lil' bro! You totally, uh, made a hilarious pop culture reference from 1994!"

    Face it: he's the P.G. Wodehouse of the Spongebob set.

    up
    15

    nonsense

    By on

    My mother has been using the term for decades, and I guarantee she never read or heard a word of Howie Carr (nor is she even from Boston.)

    Basically, moonbats are people who are a bit nuts. My standard example: the people from Save Our Swans, a group that shows up to Cambridge city council meetings and exploits the rule that anyone must be given X minutes to talk. So every meeting, they stand up and speak about out CCC, DCR, or some other group is trying to murder the poor swans.

    Moonbats are often retired, overeducated, overconcerned, and bored.

    up
    16

    Translation

    "Leftist" -- "someone politically to the left, not left of the center as defined by elections and polls, but left of the center of the 10 people I know."

    "Extreme" -- "someone politically further left or right than any of the 10 people I know."

    "Moonbat" -- "Extreme Leftist"

    Hope this helps.

    up
    27

    it will be about 50 years

    it will be about 50 years before Americans even think about electing another leftist moonbat.

    ROFL. Hope you enjoy eight years of President Clinton.

    up
    15

    Okay then

    Hope you enjoy another eight years of a democrat in the White House.

    up
    12

    Not that I recall. In 2008,

    Not that I recall. In 2008, it wasn't unreasonable to assume that the GOP would nominate a candidate who appealed to undecideds in the center of the political spectrum. They basically did, but he was up against a very popular opponent and made the mistake of choosing a moron as his running mate.

    Nowadays, after the rise of the Tea Party and the clown show in 2012, it's hard to imagine a scenario where the GOP wins a majority of nationwide votes any time in the near future.

    up
    13

    Poor John McCain: he coulda been a contender

    In fact, he had my vote on the basis of his superior experience over Barry. Then he had to go and pick that ridiculously vain, shallow, undereducated twit for his veep, causing most rational voters to seriously question his judgment. Everything we've seen from Palin since confirms what a titanic mistake that was on McCain's part. What a waste.

    up
    21

    somewhat correct

    By on

    I would have voted for McCain, too, but for that twit Palin, but McCain has become totally deranged since then. war, war, war.

    up
    11

    Agreed: McCain's decline since he lost has been sad

    But up to the 2008 election, he seemed like a solid, sane, experienced guy with some useful independence from the worst of the party orthodoxy.

    Not entirely sure how he went off the rails afterward, though partly it's that he faced a Baggerish primary challenger to keep his Senate seat, which always brings out the worst in a Republican candidate. The rest I attribute to bitterness against Barry for beating him.

    But you've got to lay that all to him picking Palin. Any of his other short-list candidates (Romney, Pawlenty, Portman) would have been enough of a non-liability for him to probably win.

    up
    10

    It's not just Palin

    It wasn't just Palin per se; it's what the appointment of Palin said about a potential McCain presidency. The president has a very small number of levers he can move: he can make speeches, he can issue executive orders, and, most importantly, he can make appointments. By choosing Palin, McCain gave us a glimpse of how he would make important appointments. Having demonstrated a cavalier and ridiculous approach to that part of the job, he branded himself as unworthy of the Presidency.

    up
    21

    leftist?

    By on

    There's a leftist in the White House? Are you sure about that? Unless maybe you're thinking of someone on the janitorial staff; they might actually have left-leaning political views. The actual Executive Branch electee is a little bit right-of-center, though.

    up
    36

    Reagan was left of Obama

    Obama is actually more conservative than was Reagan.

    -Obama increased troop strength in Afghanistan by 68K, and has presided over the killing of more terrorists than any predecessor. Reagan cut and ran from terrorists in Lebanon when US troops were attacked.
    -Reagan appeased terrorists, including cutting deal with countries holding American hostages and trading arms to terrorists for hostages. Terrorism increased as a result, including the creation of the Taliban, financed by the Reagan administration.
    -Reagan gave blanket amnesty to over three million illegal immigrants, resulting in a huge influx of illegal immigrants.
    -Reagan raised income taxes eleven times; Obama never has. Obama is the biggest tax-cutter in presidential history, cutting 654 billion in 2011 and 2012 alone.
    -Reagan tripled the national debt, from 900 billion to 2.7 trillion. Obama has actually reduced the deficit, currently falling at the fastest rate in 60 years (from 10.1 percent in 2009, to 7 percent in 2012).
    -Abortions are at their lowest rate since 1973. Reagan as California governor signed legislation resulting in over two million abortions.
    -Reagan supported the Brady Bill, the most significant gun control legislation of the last fifty years. Gun control has actually relaxed under Obama; it is now legal to take guns in national parks, and it wasn't under Reagan.
    -Obama has only had one wife, to whom he is still married, and is a real father to all of his children. Reagan was our only divorced president, and was estranged from four of his children.

    You want a moonbat, look no further than the Gipper. Somebody so far left as Reagan could never be elected today.

    up
    32

    Yes, Patrick for President.

    By on

    Yes, Patrick for President. That is the only way that history will be able to look kindly upon the so-called presidency of Obama; Patrick will be incomparably incompetent.

    up
    43

    "so-called"

    By on

    I am confused -- is he not actually the president, or not actually Obama? Either way, someone has a lot of explaining to do!

    up
    19

    So-called presidency -

    By on

    So-called presidency - because he's hardly presidential. He does seem to do his best, however, to be a TV star, Hollywood regular, great divider, etc.

    Lulz

    We could have elected Paris Hilton after Dubya and she would have seemed presidential by comparison.

    Poor girl , got knocked out

    By on

    Poor girl , got knocked out of the Daytona 500 last night, got banged up good in a wreck. O, the story is about Devalue , not Danica . Surely you jest ,President ? Too many drapes in that White House ,too many Presidential vehicles of conveyance to be changed.

    up
    16

    Maybe but there are many of

    By on

    Maybe but there are many of them, plus the aircraft, and who knows what else would tickle his fancy to change. Maybe direct deposit to the EBT fund , right from your paycheck .

    up
    16

    EBT fund

    By on

    That would be the ones the corporate welfare queens grab from?

    Last I checked, about 400x as much $$ from our paychecks went to directly subsidize profitable corporations, never mind that EBT subsidizes WalMart, Wendy's, McDonalds, etc.

    But its just so easy to BLAME THE POOR, amirite? Christian, too.

    up
    18

    Those corporations put up

    By on

    Those corporations put up physical properties and support the capitalist way of life , which our country subscribes to. I was referring to the out of control system now in place that nurtures abuse of the tax paying citizen that gets up everyday and goes to work. Some jobs suck but they persevere at them. Dont shit a shitter , there are poor and there are lazy.

    up
    11

    That "out of control system"

    ... costs us far less than the "out of control system" were our tax dollars subsidize profitable corporations through direct subsidies.

    Never mind that that "out of control system" is mostly distributing our tax dollars to WORKING people who aren't getting paid enough to live on because the profitable companies they work for rely on our tax dollars to make up the difference.

    This isn't Reagan's 1980s. Please get the facts on the WORKING poor and the true extent of corporate subsidies (direct and indirect): http://thinkbynumbers.org/government-spending/corporate-welfare/corporat...

    up
    13

    Swirls That is my perception

    By on

    Swirls That is my perception as a private sector tax paying worker all my life. i got the dole one week for the blizzard of 78 because i couldnt drive to work, and the state paid one week unemployment. And i be fluxed I was going to walk 5 or more miles so I could rig around in that stuff.So my perception of life is from my experience , not from reading textbooks.

    up
    12

    Well Swirls , aint that a hit

    By on

    Well Swirls , aint that a hit in the head. My first job was in a market working the produce , i had to hide in the cellar working because of my age. Then i progressed to hauling the produce , and the meat . my father was a farmer from Ireland , and we knew poverty , working poverty .And in between my working career and my pension full of self funding work hours , i did get to acquire some higher education , the places i attended might shock you, and i was majoring in economics.But alas , Swirls , the reality of life got in the way. And this EBT business is out of control, it is creating a culture of perpetuation. I know poverty , i know working , and i know bullshit. what we have now is bullshit. if you need soup , go to Catholic Chariities, but they wont pay for tattoos and the such there, for that you need EBT . sorry to be harsh on you Swirls, those are the hard world three dimensional facts, your deflectional arguing cant cut through the bullshit.

    up
    10

    LMAO

    By on

    LMAO. That is all. I needed a good joke this morning.

    up
    17

    Lazy

    To be honest, I didn't know whether it was *s' or *'s, and didn't feel like checking.

    Ah!

    Ah, I know its/it's but I wasn't even paying attention to that. I figured someone picked up on my error in "Bachelors" and "Masters," thus being more concerned with that.

    Thanks for the clarification -- I was getting confused there.

    I'm pretty sure you meant

    I'm pretty sure you meant nothing of this, but this reminded of those arguments from people trying to raise concern for "gifted" programs. Thinking about it again, they have a point. The test of an education system is all students. Many other systems takes the brightest and somehow even waste their abilities.

    Yeah.

    We elect a lot of Presidents from this state. Care to take a guess as to who was the previous president from Massachusetts before JFK?

    (smada ycniuq nohj)

    Um

    By on

    We can count Cal Coolidge, right? What with him being Governor and spending much of his adult life here?

    up
    13

    Governor Milquetoast

    By on

    I don't really have an opinion one way or the other on this guy. He's forgettable and passive. I think his favorite saying is "We don't have all the facts so I don't want to comment on that."

    up
    26

    More like he likes to pretend

    By on

    More like he likes to pretend he has no idea what's going on in the state and treats reporters like assholes when they have the nerve to ask him difficult questions.

    up
    25

    No

    By on

    He likes to use that as a rational for not addressing major issues publicly.

    up
    21

    Oh come on

    By on

    He can express an opinion and say that there is an ongoing investigation and he doesn't want to comment further. I want to hear it with some emotion, not a monotone derp that sounds like he's thinking more about his next trade mission to a foreign country than the death of children.

    up
    13

    Maybe he should have hired an

    Maybe he should have hired an image consultant to help him spice things up a little. Then people could complain about what a big phony he is, 'cause he had to hire an image consultant.

    up
    10

    Patrick is a former Assistant U.S. Attorney

    By on

    Regardless of how you feel about Patrick, the guy is a former A.U.S.A. Lawyers in general, and former prosecutors in particular (Chris Christie perhaps being an exception, but maybe not if you listen closely) do not make off the cuff comments (or express opinions) because they know what often seems like a throwaway comment can be re-construed in the future to be someone's idea of an admission.

    It seems silly to many, but in the hyper-sensitive litigation and prosecutorial world, that's the way it is.

    up
    10

    If you think that's bad

    Envision Coakley as Governor, where those words will really mean "hold on a bit - I need to go figure out a way to scapegoat somebody weak and grandstand about it while not going after any of my campaign donors".

    up
    19

    Good luck with that, D. Even

    By on

    Good luck with that, D. Even the super liberals in Massachusetts are annoyed by your incompetence. Go back to western Mass and take your consulting gigs.

    up
    12

    Patrick as POTUS

    By on

    President Patrick, Iran yesterday tested a Nuclear Warhead in the norther part of the country. Patrick, "That's anecdotal."

    President Patrick, can you please comment on the recent terrorist attacks on US soil. Patrick, "That's anecdotal."

    President Patrick, can you please address what corrective measures your administration has taken to correct the ACA website. Patrick, "That's anecdotal."

    President Patrick, would you kindly elaborate on what your administrations goals are in the upcoming year. Patrick, "That's anecdotal."

    NO THANK YOU!

    up
    23

    not that bad a governor but no chance

    By on

    Patrick hasn't been that bad a governor. He got the state through the financial crisis without major disruptions.

    He's got no chance, because like it or not, he's going to be identified with Obama as a black man with great oratorical skills. So people will see Patrick as another Obama. And people are sick of Obama by now. Yes, it is unfair and racist, but that's life.

    up
    13

    Racist?

    Who cares if he's black? The guy is supporting a lady who lost a kid. He also spent a good amount of time in Asia when we had issues here in MA to deal with. I hope to never see him in politics ever again based on his performance.

    up
    19

    yeah he should fire her

    By on

    He is not tough enough to fire that Olga DCF woman. Obama has the same problem - could not fire Sibelius or Nuland when they should have been fired. And Bush with Rumsfeld for that matter.

    But I still think he is not that bad a governor. These things with DCF/DSS happen in any administration.

    up
    11

    Racist?

    By on

    Are you sure it has nothing to do with the fact they are close friends and ideologically similar. So i guess if i don't vote for Hillary i'm a misogynistic, masculine, wife beater.

    up
    15

    no, i am

    By on

    the designated "misogynistic, masculine, wife beater" on this page.

    I am not voting for Hillary, either. I am concerned she might launch the nukes to kill Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky.

    Seriously, Hillary shows warmonger tendencies and might get us into World War III just to prove how tough a woman is.

    With a certain kind of voter, Hillary has no shot anyway

    They will either say, "She's not as tough as a man", or if her record proves her to be that tough, it will be, "Well, her overcompensating for not being a man is dangerous". Some people will use the excuse of her gender any way they can, because they'd rather vote for a surefire loser from the next clown car of GOP candidates (e.g., batshit loons like Rand Paul and Ted Cruz) than anyone remotely liberal.

    The Baggers will never determine the outcome of a Presidential election in this country, at least not in the way they hope to. All they can do is drive the eventual GOP nominee toward the extreme-right fringe in order to get nominated, forcing them to tack back to the non-insane center for the general election, which makes them look like flip-floppers with no moral compass, or more-transparent-than-usual cynical liars. This kills their chances of winning the persuadable moderates who actually elect Presidents; see Mitt "Etch-a-Sketch" Romney for the most recent example. The fake-populist Tea Party is the worst thing that ever happened to Republicans who want to win. And I'm perfectly fine with that.

    up
    12

    Hillary is a rightist

    By on

    What war has she opposed and how has she taken on Wall Street? She's a corporate flunky and neoconservative warmonger.

    Partisan Democrats are the most deluded people around. Go back to watching MSNBC.

    up
    10

    And ...

    Until the Republicans can come up with somebody to front them who isn't virulently batshit insane, and stop confusing the messenger with the message, she stands a pretty good chance if she runs.

    You can't get elected if you aren't on the ballot. We all claim to want better candidates - so where are they?

    up
    12

    So, you're saying Hillary is not liberal enough for you?

    I agree: there are no genuine liberals in the race at the moment. Who would you like to see nominated instead, deselby?

    Most people I hear wielding this line of attack are actually right-wingers. I'm not sure what their point is: "Obama / Hillary / Democratic candidate X isn't really that liberal, so you should vote for.... a Republican"? Help me out here.

    The fact is, most left-leaning moderate independents like me have to hold our noses and choose the Democratic candidate because the Republican alternative is much, much worse. It's the pain of a two-party system. Our weird de facto three-party system of the moment -- Democrats, country-club Republicans, and Baggers -- seems to be hurting extreme conservatism, which I believe to be a good thing.

    (Also, people who get their news from Fox News, CNN, or MSNBC are all making terrible media choices, but Fox News watchers are demonstrably stupider and worse-informed than most.)

    up
    10

    there is no hope

    By on

    I don't think this guy Schweizer who was the gov of Montana has a chance, but Hillary is just about everything wrong with Democratic party.

    Liberal imperialism, sucking up to Wall Street, preoccupation with identity politics to the detriment of straight white guys like me.

    At least Rand Paul is not a warmonger and a pimp for the surveillance state.

    Maybe someone sensible will slip through on the Republican side.

    up
    16

    Awww!

    Won't somebody please consider the plight of the straight white guys like Deselby?

    I mean, the poor souls are losing their unearned privileges by the minute because women and minorities and gays dare to believe that they are human!

    up
    12

    we're just dropping out

    By on

    Yes, the deck is stacked against us getting jobs. No set-asides or scoring handicaps for us.

    It's better to stay out of government and corporate jobs. By no means get married. One night stands, baby.

    How many more laws would President Hillary push for to stack the rules of evidence and law against us?

    up
    11

    Poor Little Bunny

    By on

    So sorry to hear that you are having so much trouble now that nobody hands you trophies for showing up and the world expects you to behave yourself around women.

    up
    10

    I'm doing OK

    By on

    but I am not going to vote for someone who is going to use my kind as a whipping boy to mobilize her voter base.

    Hard to imagine anyone as obscure as Schweitzer

    taking on Hillary and winning the nomination. Her biggest assets are name recognition (with strong favorability ratings, despite how much she is loathed on the right), organization, and money money money.

    I would love to see the GOP nominate a reasonable candidate, but I'd put a thousand bucks against that happening in 2016. The Bagger hump is too tough to get over, which is ridiculous given their actual size. What's the short list of reasonable Republicans who might seek the job?

    Two words: Jon Hunstman

    As you (and many others) point out, the reality as it stands is that no competent, center-right national GOP nominee will make it through the primary. However, if Hunstman were to run again and, through some fluke, make it as the nominee, the Dem nominee would be in for a real fight.

    Fortunately, the Tea Baggers of the country will do their damnedest to make sure that doesn't happen. Thankfully.

    (Although, to be frank, I think he'd be a great president regardless of party ideology).

    His Daddy was running and

    By on

    His Daddy was running and bankrolling his entire campaign. Not a serious candidate when that's your base.

    By all measures except unemployment and debt,

    the President has done a spectacular job of dragging the country out of the giant economic crater his predecessor left behind. Maybe if his jobs bills had not been stymied by the do-nothing Congress, we'd be in better shape there, too. As for the debt, ask Dick "deficits don't matter" Cheney what he thinks.

    up
    14

    Nope, it didn't

    By on

    Obama was reelected because he was competent - not in spite of his competence.

    "It's the pain of a two-party system."

    It's the pain of a two-party system.

    So how about voting for an independent, a third-party, or do a write-in. It's this kind of "logic" that entrenches the two-party system. Maybe your first non-two-party vote won't make a big difference, but your - and others' - continued protest will break the system at a certain point. We're at a point where this should probably be happening, but instead, everyone just "holds their nose" and makes it worse.

    I used to think this way about third parties

    Then I watched Nader take away just enough votes from Gore to give Bush the election. Show me a way to reform the current electoral system so that a third party candidate has a legitimate shot of winning instead of just hurting the lesser of the two remaining evils, and I'll think about it. At the moment, I'm too pragmatic with my vote to consider it. Too bad it's a fallen world.

    up
    10

    Interesting; hadn't seen that analysis before

    I tend to buy the conclusion that Gore blew it by not asking for a full recount. I'd also argue that keeping Clinton at arm's length was a strategic misstep, too. Most impartial observers would call Bush v. Gore an act of naked theft, one of the Supremes' most shameful moments in modern history (at least before Citizens United and the gutting of the Voting Rights Act).

    up
    12