Obama's liberal base 'disengaged'

[Lasher]

Source: USA Today

Liberal and progressive organizations that helped propel him to the White House are turning on him now, little more than a year after he took office. Their collective discontent, on issues from health care to nuclear energy to the handling of terror suspects, could mean bad news for Democrats during this fall's congressional elections.

Polls show liberals and blacks still approve of the job Obama's doing. That approval, however, doesn't necessarily mean they will make the effort to vote, and many of the activists and groups that worked to get people to the polls in 2008 say they're not inclined right now to help Democrats in the fall.

"The energized base which transformed the nation and elected our first black president (is) now disengaged," Democratic political strategist Donna Brazile says. "If this was September, I would hit the panic button."

White House spokesman Robert Gibbs routinely brushes off questions about whether Obama and the Democrats are losing key constituencies, but he says the notion that the president is taking liberals for granted is "silly."

Read more: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-03-10-liberals_N.htm?csp=34&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+usatoday-NewsTopStories+%28News+-+Top+Stories%29&utm_content=My+Yahoo

[babylonsister]

1. Brazile? Oy. nt

[Cha]

7. More mediacrap to stoke the

ugly. They looked real "disengaged" in Missouri today, doncha know. Latest Breaking Bullshit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=388x18210

[Captain Hilts]

165. OFA is having problems getting people. Attendance at a rally is not indicative of larger patterns.

[rpannier]

9. +1

:rofl:

[polpilot]

304. Obama don't need no stinking 'base.'

He's made new friends!!

[Demeter]

92. Say Rather That Obama Turned Off His Base

by turning his back on them and on the promises he gave, and it would be a more honest headline.

[h9socialist]

159. Obama is NOT the problem . . .

What's turning people off are all the compromises, and backroom deals, and procedural bullshit that are inherent in the process. People tend to be governed by their own moral impulses. Law-making in Washington is a process designed to give private property the upper hand against democratic majorities. If don't believe me, go read James Madison's 10th Federalist Paper. Obama is a good guy, but he's running a country with a Constitution that is horribly outdated. It does no good to direct political fire toward Obama, when the system itself is the villain! I am for going way beyond this legislature -- single payer, my ass! I want full medical socialism. But we're all in trouble if we can't even get a watered down piece of legislation enacted. If you really want political change go read the original European Union Constitution, and then imagine how we might amend ours to read more like it (with education, healthcare and gainful employment established as basic human rights!).

[EFerrari]

205. Obama has more power than just about any president has had

in the history of that office. Yes, he owns part of this train wreck. He's not in the Senate any more and he came in with a huge mandate. What is he doing with it?

[leeroysphitz]

223. Do you mean "the compromises, and backroom deals" that Obama made with pharm and H.I. co's

before the process even began?

[Cherchez la Femme]

309. And who, exactly, is turning off all you mentioned?

ObamaRama, that's who.

Neither of them, especially the POTUS, is in any way a Socialist. These DLC'ers??
Corporatist, yes; but Socialist? NFW

Open your eyes. He's the one that threatens Dem Senators & Congresspeople to his "bipartisan" (i.e. suck-up to the Repukes) BS and if they (the Democrats, of course) don't vote his way he'll do his best to oust them from any White House meetings & communication and give no help getting them reelected.
THAT'S his bully pulpit!

Reminds me of Dwight Shrute. "Shun!"
And as wise.

ObamaRama's M.O. reminds me nothing more than Tom Delay's. Except ramming through their legislation and F* the other side of the aisle.
Now that's saying something.


Who instigates these compromises, anyways? Big beefy Harry Reid? Are you saying oh poor Barry Obama is powerless faced with all these strong, dedicated, moral, idealistic, motivated House Democrats?!
Oh, but it's the system! :eyes:


Give me a big f'n break. Socialist & helpless my sweet ass! It is THEY who are the problem, promising to be the solution was just something amazingly popular to mouth simply to get elected.
Want proof? Where's the Change? With the Obama-approved non-Change of all the Bush crap we all screamed about at the time, Hope has lost its feathers and flown out a Wall Street top story window. *ker-splat*


And it's everybody's fault but Obama! :rofl:

[KTinOhio]

372. Let's do the math...

Obama's approval rating is approximately 53%. (This is last week's figure from Research 2000, as published in Daily Kos.)

Obama received 53% of the vote in 2008. Very few of those who voted against him then are supporting him now.

So, I have to ask ... who is propping up Obama's numbers?

[Cherchez la Femme]

408. Ah, polls...

I saw one with 47% approval. Which one should we count? The one you like the best?
I don't trust polls one bit, not the one mentioned above, not the one you used.

And if the polls are so fucking great, why the monstrous fear, even from the White House, of the smack-down the Democrats may well receive in the next (at least) election?


Lot's of contrary 'evidence': all's I know is what I see,
and not just from me,
but wide and deep disaffection.
You can't argue with that,
but then maybe you want to :)

[h9socialist]

396. Have you ever considered . . .

. . . that your indictments might be better directed against "the system" than at any one individual?

[Cherchez la Femme]

407. And who's leading "the system" now?

What has "Changed" other than the figurehead?

That so-talked about Bully Pulpit is mighty dusty...

[wpelb]

354. A constitutional convention?

"Obama is a good guy, but he's running a country with a Constitution that is horribly outdated."

The only way we'll get rid of the present constitution--assuming that is what must be done--(at least in an orderly fashion) is to have a constitutional convention. That's not likely to happen, since it could be hijacked by anyone with any extreme agenda on the left, right, or otherwise.

[h9socialist]

395. I don't disagree with you . . .

But the fact remains that we have a system that is more worried about affording representation to property than to people. And I agree also that there are dangers in opening up the whole thing to change. But sooner or later ta system designed for the world on 1787 is going to flounder. A lot will depend on who has the political guts to lead the nation in a period of radical realignment.

[freddie mertz]

212. That is how I see it. I was ready and willing to pound the pavement for him on HCR.

And did so at the Specter town hall this summer.

Then he turned his back on us, and drove us away.

[RedstDem]

123. She knows what shes talking about

Obama is to the right of Clinton so far, lets hope he gets it figured out soon.
the path he's on, is definitely one term. Lets hope the Repugs find someone thats moderate to replace him.

oy

[apnu]

134. The GOP will not find anybody moderate. They are still trying to purge their moderates

Collins and Snowe are the last of the moderate Republicans. The house is purged, and so is the Senate. McCain will the the last "moderate" Republican Prez. nom. for a long time.

My guess is they will go with a Palin/Orly Tavitz ticket. The more looney the better they seem to believe. Chances are that will be the saving grace for Obama.

[aquart]

250. They purged their moderates under NIXON.

Now they're purging mere conservatives.

[Oak2004]

411. Nixon started the process, but even us liberals were still in the party through the Ronny years

Then the purge began in earnest in the '80s, with astoundingly well funded "grassroots" primary challengers to every R who so much as made a passing nod in the direction of reality and common sense. At first these "grassroots" challengers lost. But eventually, they overwhelmed the party liberals and moderates. And yes, now they are purging the last of the conservatives.

[WatchWhatISay]

272. Yes, don't look to the GOP to solve our problem for us

Like, maybe if we are really lucky, they will be nice just this once and elect somebody moderate? Are you kidding?

This is our problem and we are going to have to fix it ourselves by finding someone to replace Obama that is better than their guy.

And that is not even being discussed at this point, but we better quit waiting and hoping and looking for some miracle, or it will be too late soon.

[sabrina 1]

279. My guess is they will run Romney

which would be serious threat to Obama as Romney is able to present himself as 'rational' even though he is not. We could only hope the Republicans run Palin who would be no threat to Obama. I don't think even they are that stupid. She is merely a distraction.

[Mithreal]

332. Maybe the perpetual campaign is already in full swing against Romney?

Sometimes the President's strategy looks like just that to me. Get so close to the opponent's position that they have little to run on.

[sabrina 1]

339. Interesting thought. Especially on Healthcare where Obama's

bill is practically a carbon copy of Romneycare. I wonder how that would work? Romneycare is not working very well in Mass but Romney could hardly use that against Obama. And Obama would be foolish to try to use it also, as Romney could legitimately ask if something is such a failure, why would Obama be pushing it?

[Mithreal]

341. I don't think it is any accident.

[sabrina 1]

344. I'm not sure what you mean, but I think you are saying

that both parties want this so it wouldn't be much of an issue? If so, I agree.

[msanthrope]

264. Donna Brazile doesn't know what she's talking about--which is why

she has no actual power in the Democratic Party, isn't consulted by the Democratic Party, and like Susan Estrich, is only called upon when someone needs a faux-liberal for a talking point.


Brazile drove Gore's campaign into the ground....her fuckups made the debacle in Florida possible.

[laughingliberal]

285. You mean Al Gore's campaign that garnered more votes than any Presidential candidate in history at

at that time?

[avaistheone1]

297. +100

[appal_jack]

368. Gore would have done better without Brazile.

Gore would have done better without Brazile, from whom I have never heard a single principled, impassioned, or even inspiring statement.

And he would have done better without Joe Lieberman as VP nom: yuck.

And without the Salvage Logging Rider having been passed under such an 'environmental' Vice President.

And without the NAFTA having been passed under such an 'labor-friendly' Vice President.

And without the Telecommunications Act of 1996 having been passed under such a 'progressive' Vice President.

And without the 1999 repeal of Glass-Steagal Banking Act having been passed under such an 'liberal' Vice President.

But that's what triangulation and corporatist governance brings to Democrats: cognitive dissonance, failure to inspire 'the base,' huge losses of principle, and even bigger losses at the polls.

If Obama chooses to continue down that path, he can do it without me. Democrats should have learned by now.

-app

Edit to say that even with the slightly greater vote tallies on Gore's side, it was Gore's opponent who slept in the White House for 8 (long) years. It was B*sh's (paid, shilling) supporter who were rallying outside election boards, while dispirited Democrats wandered around in a diffuse daze in 2000. A more inspiring campaign by Gore may have brought Democrats to the streets too. Maybe the election would have been stolen anyway, but we'll never know.

[jgraz]

378. Gore would have done better without Gore.

No one is more to blame for his failure to crush Chimpy like a bug.

[appal_jack]

379. tru dat. n/t

[laughingliberal]

388. untrue dat. n/t

[laughingliberal]

386. Gore did crush Chimpy like a bug. Chimpy's brother, I think, had something to do with

him not getting in the White House. Then again, I'm from Tennessee and worked for Gore's nomination in 1988 and am more familiar with him than most.

It's kind of nuts, this way of thinking. When we read of a coup in another country by a ruthless group of fascists do we blame the leader they came in and overthrew? Why do we treat this bloodless coup in 2000 differently?

[laughingliberal]

389. Absolutely no evidence of Gore would have done better without Brazile

I do think he would have done better without the year long impeachment of the President he served under. Way better.

He still got more votes than any Presidential candidate in history up to then. Who is responsible for the theft of Florida? That and only that is the reason he was not President. Those who stole Florida are the only ones responsible for that. Period.

[olegramps]

157. Don't you know that he is playing chess? Problem is we are the pawns.

[jgraz]

376. Actually, I think we're the opposing pawns.

or maybe we're the board. :shrug:

[proud patriot]

381. +2

[Dinger]

406. kkkarl rove's buddy

Fuck that.

[midnight]

2. Those who care about ending war, feeding the hungry, educating our children

are not disengaged... We are having to move on. We are not waiting for another speech. We are talking. We are working. But we are not disengaged....

[rtassi]

111. +1

[SomeGuyInEagan]

178. True, many in the base who elected him are moving on, looking for someone better

It's a shame, what could have been accomplished in the first year of his presidency with the overwhelming support of the nation and admiration of people all over the world. The first 100 days could have been legend.

[tango-tee]

227. I very much agree with your assessment.

What a transformational president he could have been. And now all of our hopes and dreams are lukewarm dishwater.

BTW - is this Eagan, MN?

[grahamhgreen]

182. +1

[MUAD_DIB]

I'm curious, and I mean my next question with all seriousness to you.

Let's say that you were the POTUS, not Obama, but the POTUS.

*What would be your first moves, what would you propose in terms of direction for the country, and how would you go about it: keeping in mind that all actions have consequences both good and bad.


*LBJ, when he became president, realized that there was a rather large divide between what he could do as POTUS and what he had done as Senate Majority Leader. When trying to use the same pressure as POTUS that he had when he was SML he was met with resistance: seeing how the whole separation of powers works. He did usher in the "Great Society" to his credit, and those Southern Dems that walked away and joined the GOP showed the true colors of their sheet...but that is a different matter.

Both Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have their roles, responsibilities and they are not subservient but partners in government with the POTUS. The only reason that I bring that up is that there seems to be an idea that the POTUS has a magic wand that can do anything the people want him to.

[TheEuclideanOne]

338. You know that stuff he talked about in his campaign?

I would do that.

[Jackpine Radical]

222. Disenchanted, not disengaged.

I still care--I care desperately--but I don't have much faith in the national political process so I'm putting more energy into other avenues, like local citizen involvement.

[theFrankFactor]

302. A-fu*kin'-men!

Congressional Democrats and the whole corporate power structure that has made us all chumps needs to go! There is only one party at large, The Unitary Corporate Party.

[theFrankFactor]

303. There Will Be a Massacre of Democrats This Cycle - They earned it!

and we suffer for it!

[fascisthunter]

348. thank you

[eridani]

3. Total betrayal of campaign promises on health care doesn't help

He campaigned against Clinton on mandates.
He campaigned against McCain on taxing benefits.
He campaigned for a public option.

[emsimon33]

67. Why pick just health care? He is destroying public education in this country--

from preK through university.

The Democratic power elite think that the base has no other alternatives, but in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts we showed them otherwise--we can just stay home.

Dismantling the 50-state strategy was just plain dumb. What hubris to think that they did it alone. Without Dean's work, Obama would have been toast.

[eridani]

84. Because I'm a health care policy nut

I rely on madfloridian and others following education to keep up with the atrocities perpetrated on the notion of education as a public good.

[emsimon33]

248. OK, good reason

[reflection]

278. Amen to that.

madfloridian is an invaluable asset.

[graywarrior]

4. Yeah yeah sure sure

Z-z-z-z-z-z-z

[Cha]

12. Red meat to those who so want it to be true.

:nopity:

[Mithreal]

53. If you mean rightwingers, absolutely

[graywarrior]

135. That's exactly what I meant.

They stink of desperation.

[Mithreal]

258. Agreed about the reichwing and I think they know it too.

[goclark]

295. +1000

[spiritual_gunfighter]

243. Ignore this at your own peril n/t

[graywarrior]

326. I'm shitting my pants right now

[NoFace]

5. You can see that 'turning away' action take place right here on DU.

I chalk it up to people just being 'rebels' that are never satisfied and will throw mud at whoever is in office.


We knew President Obama was a moderate when he was running. Anyone that expected otherwise has themselves to blame.
Not Obama.

[Cha]

10. No, you can't...those carping on President Obama

have always done it. There's a solid force behind the President right here on DU that isn't going anywhere.

[nightrain]

103. actually Cha, your comment "those carping on President Obama

have always done it" is certainly not true. My experience with Obama starting with his campaign and election was elation, then there was inauguration misstep with anti-gay Rick Warren, poor choices on his advisors, like Rahm and Summers and Geithner, shortly thereafter a stream of missteps around shutting single-payer advocates out and the secrecy, and more.

That "solid force behind the President" seems to have blinders on. No longer is it sufficient to shout "My President right or wrong!". Those folks just look silly and ill-informed. I can imagine the dissonance inside. It would be okay to take a head out of the sand and look at what's actually happening.

[RainDog]

399. exactly.

Cha and others on this board have constructed a reality for themselves that has nothing to do with what has actually occurred since Obama began his campaign.

early Obama supporters included well-educated white people who are the same people who are now disgusted. to claim that those who are unhappy with Obama's choices always opposed him is total and utter BULLSHIT.

but it allows people like Cha to dismiss the real problems that are occurring within the party when the president cares more about homophobes and Wall Street than those who have voted as democrats all their lives.

[nightrain]

405. quite my experience also... thanks for the support

:)

[SkyDaddy7]

112. Obama did not do EVERYTHING they wanted...

in the first year so down with him. There is no room for doing only what is politically possible...Then working for more with time. Obama is suppose to do it all already!

[okieinpain]

118. well he is the messiah! n/t.

[stillwaiting]

119. For me it's not about Obama doing EVERYTHING that I want.

He has done very, very, VERY little of what I want, and neither has he advocated for those things.

Worse, more of his actions (and his cabinet's actions) have been in pursuit of things that I do NOT want and would expect much more from a Republican Administration.

When "compromising" and "bipartisanship" enables Democrats to pass and implement neo-liberal policies I am not a fan.

And on social issues he and his cabinet have been a disgrace.

If he begins to actually fight NOW for the principles he supposedly believes in while he still has a large majority in Congress he can win me back.

If he waits until we lose a bunch of seats in the House and then starts to "fight" for these issues I will not be able to support him in '12. I'm not that easy.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

174. Yes, starting to "fight" after there's no longer a majority in Congress

will allow the Washington playacting to continue as usual.

"See? I'm fighting for you. But I don't have a majority."

Yeah, yeah, what have we been hearing all these years? "We can't implement a progressive agenda because we don't have a majority in Congress."

Well, the Dems have their majority. It's put up or shut up time. It's time to start undoing the worst acts of the Bush administration.

[dflprincess]

238. I had Ed Schulz on when I ran for lunch today

and he actually said if we want a real health care bill we need to elect more Democrats to Congress - I nearly went off the road. Just how big a majority will they need before they can actually accomplish something?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

252. Maybe if we elected a few dozen Socialists to Congress

we'd get real health care reform.

More Democrats? Not so much.

[Upfront]

200. Still Waiting

You called it right as I see it as well. I know many good Democrats who have walked away from Obama and the party. What Obama has done and has not done is the reason. If he had even tried to pass single payer and failed, I would still be there. Not now.

[swilton]

315. If he waits until we lose a bunch of seats in the House

and then starts to 'fight' for those issues - it will seem to me the same as what he's doing with the health insurance CEOs right now - when within the past week at a WH meeting with Sibelius he supposedly stormed into the meeting unannounced and read the CEOs the riot act about some letter from a constituent....a total fraud show put on for the benefit of the media and those of his disciples who still remain dreaming of his being the messiah...an act that was totally meaningless and only for show - like closing the barn door after the horse is out.

I have to admit - I was in a safe state and didn't vote for him because I thought a lot of his campaign persona was manufactured....But he has moved policy-wise to the right of Clinton on numerous issues - the man has proven that just because he gives a good speach, he can't be trusted.
If he fights for those issues after we lose seats, there is no way what he says he advocates will pass, it just won't happen. I think the man is a closet Republican...

[EFerrari]

140. You confuse "possible" with "expedient to appeasing corporate America".

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

226. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

166. Obama didn't do ANYTHING we wanted is more like it

The DLCers like to post a laundry list of little things that he did, but he's totally botched the BIG things.

[TankLV]

173. BINGO! You "get it"...

That's it in a nutchell...

[closeupready]

183. Yep, lol, you nailed that one. And it's always the same list, with different indefinite articles or

making some nouns singular instead of plural, or vice versa. :rofl:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

189. I haven't kept track of how many times I've seen that list

but it shows up with tiresome regularity.

It's the Amy Klobuchar (Minnesota DLC Senator) approach. Proudly proclaim your opposition to using cell phones while driving and your advocacy of swimming pool safety, but waffle endlessly on health care, war, human rights, and other biggies.

[SomeGuyInEagan]

216. Ah, Klobuchar ... there's big nothing for you.

Must really stink to be a state's senior Senator who is constantly upstaged by the state's junior Senator, who's been in office only a few months. Sure, the money is good, but at some point even Amy must get tired of hearing how great Al Franken is ... I just hope she is hearing it in her own home.

[Cha]

259. Oh really..you don't like anything on his list of accomplishments?

"Many of his detractors, and even some of his wavering supporters, will be surprised to learn that in his first year, Barack Obama has already fulfilled at least 79 campaign promises. This is one of the most accomplished records of any first year in office, and it has come with considerable difficulty in working with and around a Congress fraught with obstructionism and distracted by its own mythology regarding specific points of policy, and in the face of the most uniform and inflexible opposition any president in recent decades has faced."

"The 79 promises kept, as fact-checked and reported by PolitiFact.com, the Pulitzer Prize-winning fact-checking service of the St. Petersburg Times, are as follows:

■No. 6: Create an Advanced Manufacturing Fund to invest in peer-reviewed manufacturing processes
■No. 15: Create a foreclosure prevention fund for homeowners
■No. 16: Increase minority access to capital
■No. 33: Establish a credit card bill of rights
■No. 36: Expand loan programs for small businesses
■No. 40: Extend and index the 2007 Alternative Minimum Tax patch
■No. 50: Expand the Senior Corps volunteer program
■No. 58: Expand eligibility for State Children’s Health Insurance Fund (SCHIP)
■No. 76: Expand funding to train primary care providers and public health practitioners
■No. 77: Increase funding to expand community based prevention programs
■No. 88: Sign the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities
■No. 110: Assure that the Veterans Administration budget is prepared as ‘must-pass’ legislation
■No. 119: Appoint a special adviser to the president on violence against women
■No. 125: Direct military leaders to end war in Iraq
■No. 132: No permanent bases in Iraq
■No. 134: Send two additional brigades to Afghanistan
■No. 154: Strengthen and expand military exchange programs with other countries
■No. 167: Make U.S. military aid to Pakistan conditional on anti-terror efforts
■No. 174: Give a speech at a major Islamic forum in the first 100 days of his administration
■No. 182: Allocate Homeland Security funding according to risk
■No. 184: Create a real National Infrastructure Protection Plan
■No. 200: Appoint a White House Coordinator for Nuclear Security
■No. 208: Improve relations with Turkey, and its relations with Iraqi Kurds
■No. 212: Launch an international Add Value to Agriculture Initiative (AVTA)
■No. 215: Create a rapid response fund for emerging democracies
■No. 222: Grant Americans unrestricted rights to visit family and send money to Cuba
■No. 224: Restore funding for the Byrne Justice Assistance Grant (Byrne/JAG) program
■No. 225: Establish an Energy Partnership for the Americas
■No. 239: Release presidential records
■No. 241: Require new hires to sign a form affirming their hiring was not due to political affiliation or contributions.
■No. 247: Recruit math and science degree graduates to the teaching profession
■No. 266: Encourage water-conservation efforts in the West
■No. 269: Increase funding for national parks and forests
■No. 270: Increase funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund
■No. 272: Encourage farmers to use more renewable energy and be more energy efficient
■No. 277: Pursue a wildfire prevention and management plan
■No. 278: Remove more brush, small trees and vegetation that fuel wildfires
■No. 284: Expand access to places to hunt and fish
■No. 290: Push for enactment of Matthew Shepard Act, which expands hate crime law to include sexual orientation and other factors
■No. 300: Reform mandatory minimum sentences
■No. 307: Create a White House Office on Urban Policy
■No. 325: Create an artist corps for schools
■No. 326: Champion the importance of arts education
■No. 327: Support increased funding for the NEA
■No. 332: Add another Space Shuttle flight
■No. 334: Use the private sector to improve spaceflight
■No. 336: Partner to enhance the potential of the International Space Station
■No. 337: Use the International Space Station for fundamental biological and physical research
■No. 338: Explore whether International Space Station can operate after 2016
■No. 342: Work toward deploying a global climate change research and monitoring system
■No. 345: Enhance earth mapping
■No. 346: Appoint an assistant to the president for science and technology policy
■No. 356: Establish special crime programs for the New Orleans area
■No. 359: Rebuild schools in New Orleans
■No. 371: Fund a major expansion of AmeriCorps
■No. 380: Bolster the military’s ability to speak different languages
■No. 391: Appoint the nation’s first Chief Technology Officer
■No. 394: Provide grants to early-career researchers
■No. 411: Work to overturn Ledbetter vs. Goodyear
■No. 420: Create a national declassification center
■No. 421: Appoint an American Indian policy adviser
■No. 427: Ban lobbyist gifts to executive employees
■No. 435: Create new criminal penalties for mortgage fraud
■No. 452: Weatherize 1 million homes per year
■No. 458: Invest in all types of alternative energy
■No. 459: Enact tax credit for consumers for plug-in hybrid cars
■No. 460: Ask people and businesses to conserve electricity
■No. 475: Require states to provide incentives for utilities to reduce energy consumption
■No. 480: Unprecedented expansion of funding for regional high-speed rail
■No. 483: Invest in public transportation
■No. 484: Equalize tax breaks for driving and public transit
■No. 494: Share enviromental technology with other countries
■No. 498: Provide grants to encourage energy-efficient building codes
■No. 500: Increase funding for the Environmental Protection Agency
■No. 502: Get his daughters a puppy
■No. 503: Appoint at least one Republican to the cabinet
■No. 506: Raise the small business investment expensing limit to $250,000 through the end of 2009
■No. 507: Extend unemployment insurance benefits and temporarily suspend taxes on these benefits
■No. 513: Reverse restrictions on stem cell research
Most of these items are complex campaign pledges that Pres. Obama has been able to follow through on. Some just show he’s a man who follows through on his word, something the media should take more note of. But PolitiFact’s research shows a long list of serious political accomplishments, many of historic import, yet the mainstream media continues to report on the delays seen in enacting the most complex and comprehensive reforms undertaken in a generation, many of which —like healthcare reform, energy policy reform, terror prosecutions and financial regulatory reform— are actually moving forward at a historically meaningful pace, and will likely be achieved in the first half of 2010.

<more>
http://www.casavaria.com/cafesentido/2010/01/05/5658/2009-examined-obamas-first-year-in-review/


The Obameter Scorecard

Promise Kept
96 Compromise
33 Promise Broken
16 Stalled
84 In the Works
272 Not yet rated
2 PolitiFact has compiled more than 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter.

We rate their status as Not Yet Rated, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.

The report card at right provides an up-to-the-minute tally of all the promises.

Other ways to browse the Obameter

All promises
PolitiFact's Top 25 Promises
By Subject

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

[HughMoran]

268. Trying to talk logic to the professional haters club?

You're wasting your time.

[Cha]

274. Au contraire, Hugh..

I'm posting this for those who read DU and respond to logic. :)

[HughMoran]

276. True, I suppose that many lurkers read DU and don't post

Most like me get discouraged at the utter insanity of the hate filled people who infest threads like this and don't bother to add our 2 cents, knowing that the right-wing talking points that will be hurled back at us will be shocking, to say the least.

[liberation]

251. Holy Strawman argument Batman!

Seriously, can some of you use any argument which is not utterly intellectually dishonest or morally bankrupt?

[Cha]

They'd be complaining anyway..that's what

they do.

[fascisthunter]

350. and you'd be spinning as usual

[obxhead]

282. I can understand that EVERYTHING could not be done,

but that fact that NOTHING he campaigned on being done is a valid argument. This is not the HCR he campaigned about, gitmo, war strategy, gay rights.....

[SkyDaddy7]

291. Obama is not a dictator or the Messiah...

He must have votes to pass HCR, he must have votes to close Gitmo, As for the war strategy I respect those who opose but I support it so far, and for gay rights I think the ball is in motion for drastic change...I am sure DADT will be over soon. Obama is not the evil person many make him out to be.

Everyone will be reminded very soon what evil is when the GOP is back in control!

America is a very ignorant country and it will take more than a year to roll back decades of right wing brain washing. IMHO.

[fascisthunter]

349. I doubt readers will be convinced that's true

[krabigirl]

392. Well, I never really wanted him in the first place, but was 100% behind him in Nov..ro

I am not going to lie and say I was gung-ho about Obama during the primaries. But of course I supported him over McSame..bleh.

[donco6]

127. I haven't.

I totally supported Obama all through the primaries and the election. It started to waver a bit with his invitation of Pastor Dumbass to the inauguration. Then the backing off of any GLBT support. And finally, his disastrous support of NCLB and RTTT - rushing to trash teachers and bash public education - that was it.

[madfloridian]

203. Not true at all.

We supported Obama, and I don't "carp."

I am dead set against his destruction of public education. He knows what he is doing, it is being done with his blessing.

[frylock]

204. bull fucking shit

as much as you'd like that to be the case, it's not anywhere near the truth. people put their trust in obama, and feel betrayed by his continual selling out. you just keep on whistling past that graveyard though.

[Name removed]

241. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[HughMoran]

265. Agreed - many have never supported and never will support any Democrat

I've been reading much of the stuff many hardcore 'permanently unpleasant' people post on other sites for year - not only are they not supportive of Democrats generally, but many have never been and never will be Democrats.

[psychopomp]

367. I don't think I've done any "carping" BUT

Pres. Obama's campaign might not find me donating twice like I did the first time around if I keep finding articles like this:
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/03/obama-supports-dna-sampling-upon-arrest/

They might not find me donating at all!

[austin78704]

385. I haven't always harped on Obama

But I did once he disappointed me.

He showed great capacity for leadership during the campaign.

He has shown little of that since his inauguration.

[EFerrari]

15. Oh, baloney. It is not moderate to back the wholesale firing of a schoolful of teachers

on bad information, weakening the position of unions in this job market. It is not moderate to back or at very least wink at a violent right wing coup in Honduras. It's not moderate to hire the architects of the financial meltdown to "fix" it just as it's not moderate to keep BushCo's war criminal Pentagon leadership in charge of two useless "wars". It's not moderate to continue a rendition and torture policy and allow Gitmo to stay open. It's no moderate to craft an insurance mandate with industry lobbyists and try to pass it off as health care reform.

None of that is moderate. A moderate would still have liberal support. It might be testy but it would be there. This administration is not moderate.

[Mithreal]

55. +1 well said

[Iowa]

60. +1

[NoFace]

87. Considering the other options..it's moderate. Not sure what your guideposts are....

...but great grandstanding speech! You should run for office. Hyperbole and all.
You'd fit right in.
:applause:

[sabrina 1]

97. I'd vote for her!

Unless she was running against Kucinich ~ :-)

[Jackpine Radical]

224. Kucinich-Ferrari--

Works for me.

[sabrina 1]

329. That would solve my dilemma

I like that ticket ~ :-)

[EFerrari]

121. No, considering the other options, those actions are not moderate. n/t

[donco6]

130. It's unprecedented. Even the supt. is backing off.

On what planet could that be called "moderate"?

[Raineyb]

202. Planet Rah Rah

Either that or the definition of "moderate" has taken yet another shift to the right.

I'll concede that it's possible that it's a combination of both.

[donco6]

234. +1

[liberation]

281. Well, they don't say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit for nothing.

And I see you are well acquainted with its retarded sister, snark. So congratulations I guess...

LOL. Keep insulting and abusing them liberals... see what happens. Good luck winning elections trying to syphon votes from moderate republicans who would rather stick a white hot iron rod up their rectums than vote Dem.

[icee]

95. +100

[SteveM]

116. This is true. President Obama will NOT attack the GOP's program...

He and the people around him hold as a high priority "disengaging" from the "left." Since the 70s, the Democratic Party's "leadership" has put a high priority on both disassociating from its "liberal wing," and convincing corporate America that it is no longer a threat. It is doing this right now.

You are quite right about your views on what is "moderate." One can be a leftist, yet moderate; one can be centrist, yet not moderate. Truman had it right: given a choice between Democrats who act Republican on the one hand and real Republicans on the other, Americans WILL vote Republican.

Obama's biggest problem when running for re-election will be lack of on-the-ground support. Oh, he'll get most of the degraded "left's" vote, but he will not have them on-the-ground, chatting him up, or providing the extra $ to win undecided or "independent" voters.

[KoKo]

162. Maybe they are betting on picking up disenfranchised Repugs who are turned off by Palin

and the rest. It's a clever strategy. Trash your Lefty Dems so that you appear more Conservative...hug more Repug Conservatives as the Beck Fringe starts to annoy folks and he can Win Big in 2012. Plus in the Mid-Terms he picks up Repug votes for the DLC Candidates or they applaud the Repugs that win.

He ran on "reaching across the aisle" and "change you can believe in." Seems like the "change" is that Democratic Party throws out it's activists and what used to be the "base" while having the DLC join up with the "Moderate Wing" of the Repug Party. That's the only rationale I can come up with for Obama's appointments and his actions and non-actions since the inauguration and a bit before.

[SteveM]

175. Libs, progs, lefties have 3 choices:

(1) Take over and hold the Democratic Party. The far right has done this with the GOP, so it's not impossible.
(2) Form another party. Historically, this is a long-shot.
(3) Stay with the current situation and expect a right-wing authoritarian society, well within a generation.

[KoKo]

197. imho...#'s 1 and 3 are probably the only ways.

Third Party's take so long to build and we are in desperate shape.

[SteveM]

398. Yep. The only way this will happen is if the Democratic Party collapses of its own irrelevancy.

[No Elephants]

322. There are third parties already.

The conventional wisdom, both inside and outside the Democratic Party, is that the Democrats need to court indies and moderate Republicans. However, they can safely stonewall the left because the left has nowhere else to go as the left will never vote Republican.

[SteveM]

397. Yes, and probably fourth and fifth parties...

but none has risen in power enough to challenge the others and have a chance of winning (I have voted for some of these).

I agree with the conventional wisdom. The "left" has no where to go, and no real party. The only thing going for the left is the decline of MSM, which is solidly antagonistic to the left. Hardly much of an advantage.

Don't you find it remarkable and a little frustrating that the populist sentiment, once strong in the Democratic Party, is now co-opted by the right, up to and including street demonstration "style?" You know there has to be considerable ironic glee in the RW camp.

[Riverman]

311. That appears to be the Strategy. Leon Panetta said it several years ago.

He and the DLC's see the country as center-right - well after all Panetta if from the Monterey Peninsula - Pebble Beach, one of the wealthiest areas of the country. They know where their bread is buttered - by their corporate masters. That is how they want to see the world. So, occasionally sounding moderate or liberal to get elected and viewing the more progressive factions as "they'll be with us no matter how we ignore them or treat because they don't have any other choices..." is their winning strategy. Rahm! They give a rats ass about real policy issues that matter most to Americans - war, jobs, education, medical care! The only change they believe in is winning political power in order to enrich themselves. Obama is in effect a DLC'er, call him any term you want, but he is hardly liberal and clearly not progressive. He has gotten very wealthy since his days as community organizers and it wasn't the result of his advocacy of liberal or progressive causes and policies. If he has an empathetic feeling - which I believe he does, he must continually surpress that welling-up in him. No wonder he smokes so much. Has to numb himself to those feelings, doesn't he?

I also believe that he is a good man, honest, hard-working, highly intelligent and capable. The best in my lifetime - Ike to Barrack. But, let's not kid ourselves, - get ready to fire up your flame throwers - if he were 100% white, given his background, he'd be more of a moderate New York state style Republican, or an upstate Pennsylvania Blue Dog democrat. Fundamentally conservative but willing to consider some socially moderate policies. After all he is surely not without some conscience and empathy for the plights of others. Right?

I really like Barrack Obama and I wish him well and feel lots of empahty for him, but I wish he would find the most liberal instincts in his heart and follow that, not Rahm's brain!

[No Elephants]

333. Didn't Panetta start in politics as a Nixon Republican? And now, he heads the CIA?

Maybe his view of American is bent.

[The Shadow Knows]

249. Obama is too clever by 1/2

Obama's Fatal Flaw is that he envisioned himself being capable of enlisting the help of Republicans in the Creation of a successful Obama Presidency. (Even G.W.Bush would not be that foolish. Even Laura Bush knew the secret of politics - "You win by making your opponent look bad.") Obama's very core is not of leadership based on core principles, but of mediator-in-chief of any issue with opposing positions. He wants to satisfy both sides by compromising both sides. If slavery were THE major issue of the day, he would try to work out a North-South compromise about slavery. Obama's naivete in real world politics contain the seeds of his own defeat ... even if he fools some progressives yet again.

[RedstDem]

125. True, Obama's neads to take a left turn

If he wants me to think he's a moderate....

I'm so tired of the hidden fascism in this country, left and right

[ericblair]

370. Exactly right

The "hidden facism" is pervasive in our society. You'd have to be brain-dead not to see and feel it.

[ronnie624]

191. *

:thumbsup:

[glitch]

209. Thank you. And that goes for "Centrist" too.

IMO this article soft-served the topic, the situation is much worse than "disengaged".
Here's my sports analogy for the team players here: the home team fans in the stands are angry -- those who are actually watching the game -- the desperate and confused cheerleaders -- who are focused on the stands and have never been into the game anyway -- and a home team with a quarterback and offense deliberately throwing the game. Why are they throwing the game? Who knows, and from the stands view who cares. Maybe they really like the other team better. Maybe they were bribed. Maybe they think all games should end in a tie. Maybe they feel they don't deserve to win. Maybe they don't even know they're in a game. It doesn't really matter why, what are we going to do about it?
And who's coaching this shit anyway?

[EFerrari]

214. These guys.

[glitch]

221. Yeah, those guys.

What we need is a very committed marching band. We can take the field.

[slay]

294. Agreed - this is NOT a moderate administration - it is to the right

As a liberal I'm pissed, and will NEVER vote for another corporate Dem ever again. Obama talked a good game when he was running, but like most politicians, it turned out to be all smoke and mirrors. All the reasons you listed are why you, me, and lots of other liberals are pissed and feeling betrayed. People have been so brainwashed by right-wing bullshit what they consider moderate is actually far, far to the right. The repulicans, with the aid of the dems, have waged such a propaganda war that Americans now think the right is the middle for some reason! Wake up people! The unfortunate reality is - there is no left in American politics! The media won't allow it. See how they mock Kucinich at every turn yet Sarah Palin is all over tv like a superstar - she was even on Leno the other night!
What happens is ture liberals are primaried by big money DLC'ers who can run a "moderate" (wink wink, nod nod), outspend, and often beat the liberal candidate who doesn't have corporate backing - that way, we don't get our voices heard. I hear they plan on doing this to Kucinich next - one of the most liberal voices for the people out there. This sucks. :(

[EFerrari]

394. Dennis has challengers all the time. Markos doesn't know what he's talking

about. Dennis will be fine and thank heavens because it's good to have a progressive Democrat in the House. :hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

299. [phone]

[Canuckistanian]

316. +1

[fascisthunter]

351. danke!

[liberation]

17. Yeah, that's it...

Are these the new talking points? The old "give him enough time" and "pony" not getting as much mileage as they used to I guess. LMAO.

So let me see if I get it straight: he doesn't have to do the right thing when you can claim he did not promise to do the right thing during the campaign (let's just for a moment ignore what that argument is actually implying), and when he breaks a campaign promise he had to do so because the circumstances demanded it.

That about covers that right? No wonder that Reagan is one of Obama's idols, they both must have gotten teflon wholesale. Although, I must say the whole new meme of blaming the victims is very creative. So chapeau!


At this point is becoming comical...

[NoFace]

23. How many political cycles have you been through? Because...

...you sound about as idealistic as I was 20 years ago.

The 'right thing' huh?
If only real life was as simple as internet chatter makes it sound....

[Mithreal]

56. weak to extreme and quacks like a conservative, sounds too much like

“Anyone under 30 who is not a liberal doesn’t have a heart; and anyone over 40 who is not a conservative doesn’t have a brain.”

You've outgrown your idealism? Whatever. Find it again.

[NoFace]

69. I'd rather be a realist if you are addressing me.

Politics is a messy business though, or so it seems to me, so anyone that turns tail and starts complaining the moment everything doesn't go as planned should choose something a little less ,um, 'real'?

Haha.... I'm horrible at 'internet snarky' so, excuse my lame 'put-down response'.
Maybe if I hang out here longer I'll be better at snazzy zingers and pithy come backs?
LOL

Hopefully not.
:)

[Mithreal]

76. Easy to mischaracterize until you get a better feel

The complaining word I wouldn't choose to use and here's why. I learned when you tell someone who can do something about a problem it isn't complaining. I consider most DU'ers to be responsible enough citizens that they are actually engaged, involved, you know, show up, not just vote. If anyone says complaining, I generally think poor use of that word or they have chosen impotence in which it makes perfect sense or they are stuck not knowing what to do.

Life is messy, why should politics be any different.

People come here to vent, for support, to flesh out ideas, feel like they are not alone, even to find a shoulder on to cry, to share joy and pain.

Real life is more complex than the words we use to describe it. Pretty sure that is a known known.

If you enjoy this place, then welcome.

[NoFace]

82. Thanks....by the way, what are you talking about?

:)

I think I know...I think you're saying that the word 'complaining' is meant for powerless people.
Is that right? And DU'ers aren't powerless so...me using that word is inappropriate. Right?

hahaha...and you were the person asking me if I was going to have a test at the end of the night or something?
Funny! :)

Anyways, not sure what that has to do with Obama's base turning on him....I mean...I dunno maybe it does...
I understand people need to vent, share pain and joy, tears and smiles, grief and news of the 50 Weirdest Sea Creatures...that type of thing....

I would think that kind of thing would be done in the lounge not in a thread titled Obama's Waning Support or whatever. But I'm new here so what do I know

Anyways, thanks for the welcome.
I don't get online much anymore anyways...
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/01/11/television.tv.death/index.html
...but it'll take quite a lot to scare me off a forum.

I've been at CD for years and if I can weather that leper colony ...well, let's just
say that DU seem very cozy and friendly to a left leaning individual such as myself.
:)

Maybe, I'm a little gun shy from being around those nutballs?
Anyways thanks...we'll see how it pans out.

[Mithreal]

257. Discussion flows, not advocating being a dead fish though.

Have a good one.

[liberation]

342. Funny, all you "realists" had no problem asking us "idealists" to vote for Obama

It seems the problem "realists" (which I assume that is another euphemism for "compromised sell out") have with us "idealists" is when we expect Obama to deliver on all that idealistic "hope and change" he was selling.

It gets really tiring being lectured on reality by those who assume "realism" is a convenient excuse for passing the buck. If the "realists" are having trouble wrapping their head around the concept of why liberals and those on the left are not willing to stand by a center-right administration through thick and thin... I recommend they re-evaluate their level of connection with "reality" before they self elect as definers and keepers of it.

[Zenlitened]

401. Excellent post. - n/t

[donco6]

132. I've been through quite a few.

And the right thing is always the right thing to do. As opposed to the immoderate wrong thing.

[bertman]

151. How many political cycles have I been through, NoFace? Starting in 1970, figuring every

other year for congressional elections, that's about 20. How about you? Obviously you are so much wiser than the rest of us, maybe you could explain why we should support a party and a President who consistently veer right on every major political policy item. Maybe you could explain why I should believe in the Democratic party as a bulwark against fascism when the Democrats have proved to be corporate shills only slightly less odious than Republicans.

When President Obama and the Democratic party leadership begin working for the best interests of the people of this nation I will begin working for them again. Until then, this 40+ year Democrat is looking for a new group that will act like populist Democrats instead of just calling themselves Democrats.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

169. Let's see, I cast my first vote in 1972, and the first election I remember clearly

is 1960, although I have vague memories of the 1956 conventions being on TV. The first president I remember is Eisenhower, although I was born during the Truman administration.

So I'm not a naive kid. I know what it's like to have a president who can persuade Congress to accept groundbreaking legislation that is offensive to a significant minority (LBJ and Civil Rights) and a president who can appeal to the public to implement his agenda (Reagan, even though I didn't agree with anything he did).

Either Obama is incredibly clueless and willing to go along with whatever his DLC advisors tell him is "politically possible," or else he was always a faker (that's my opinion) and put on this vague rabble-rousing persona to fool people into thinking that he wasn't a corporatist.

[liberation]

256. Oh noes! another pragmatists...

Luckily I grew up in a family with plenty of old people who were still idealistic and had the decency to stand up for what it is right.

[okieinpain]

120. yep he's a failure, off with his head!

[liberation]

261. No he is not a failure...

... it just gets really tiring that we just came off from 8 years of "shut up, don't think, and the president knows best and if you don't like you can leave" To start another cycle of "Shut up..."

I believe in giving credit where credit is due. And blame when deserved. Also, I have no problem dealing with complex political thought and concepts, so I do not shy away from ideology. I have no issues claiming my leanings as a liberal... What it gets weird is when centrists and moderate conservatives can't for the lives of them figure out why a liberal would not be firmly behind a moderate conservative like Mr. Obama. It is not rocket science really...

[donco6]

133. +1

[juajen]

29. How could you see this "turning away", when you only joined DU in January? NT

Sorry, but a couple of months is not long enough to give an opinion on how DU is treating President Obama. Of course, perhaps you've been lurking?

[NoFace]

30. Of course that *could be the case* or I could just be making a statement based on...

...what I am observing right now. Take it for what it's worth.
Didn't know I had to be here a requisite amount of time to have an opinion.
:shrug:


EDIT:
I didn't mean to say "Democratic Underground is turning away".
What I meant was, "You can see evidence of that 'turning away' here"




"You can see that...ON Democratic Underground."

NOT:
"You can see that ..WITH Democratic Underground."
:D




So anyway...sorry for the mix up...thanks for participating!
Have a great night!

[The Shadow Knows]

255. Obama "Moderate Change Has Come To America."

Strange,I don't remember ever hearing Obama saying Moderate in front of the word change.

[ProSense]

6. "Liberal and progressive organizations " What a crock.

Lefty Groups Planning Massive TV Ad Push In Health Reform’s Final Stretch

Major liberal groups and labor unions allied with the White House are planning a massive TV ad push in coming days to get health reform across the finish line, and are vowing to match the huge amounts conservative groups are spending on the air attacking reform, multiple sources familiar with the plans tell me.

Dean and 500 Followers March for Health Care Reform

[Jennicut]

8. If the media says it, then it must be true!

They want certain ideas planted out there, don't they?
And Donna Brazille? She is the most liberal person they can get on CNN these days. Pathetic.

[girl gone mad]

41. If the media says it then it must be untrue!

Only White House catapulters the truth.

Pathetic.

[SteveM]

117. Donna Brazille. Liberal. Boy I'm getting old. nt

[Cha]

11. I know..it's such bullshit..

dramatic asshole bullshit.

[liberation]

18. Well, it is not like moderate conservatives should know much about liberal organizations...

... so I can see where your confusion must come from.

[ProSense]

21. Pretty certain the chronic critics can come up with a list of

imaginary liberal organizations that used to support the President, but no longer do so.

[NoFace]

38. 'Chronic Critics'..... I like that. nt

[Mithreal]

58. Is there a test?

[NoFace]

74. I'm not sure...is it safe?

[NoFace]

88. ...is it safe?

[liberation]

301. LOL, given the amount of "damage control" you have been doing in this site for a while now.

I assume you can provide a list of liberal organizations who are publicly supporting the President's policies regarding his stand in Health Care Reform, the surge of troops in Afghanistan, the bailing out of Wallstreet, and his recent anti-union stand. Right?

[DJ13]

13. Well when we hear several times per week for a year

that Obama is attempting bipartisanship with Republicans and that their concerns are of the greatest importance, while liberals get thrown in jail for trying to bring single payer to the initial conference on HCR, while the chief of staff calls liberals retarded, while Obama maintains large portions of the previous Republican policies in place.......what do they expect?

We get it, Obama isnt liberal and enjoys governing with the help of Republicans.

Who's fault is that?

[EFerrari]

16. Gibbs is right. It's silly to think the admin takes liberals for granted.

In reality, they're us chasing away with a stick.

[liberation]

19. That was before taking the bus in for a new differential and increased lift...

... they no longer have to go on foot anymore.

[Maccagirl]

413. Silly wabbit....but he didn't say it was a lie did he?

Gibbs is useless.

[Nite Owl]

14. I can't see how the damage can be

repaired. The trust is gone and that is real hard to get back. Maybe they don"t really want a dem majority.

[pundaint]

28. Passing Grayson's medicare buy-in might save the Democratic Congress- at least it would appease me,

if that passed, and troops left Some foreign country before November. Obama is not retrievable - he has demonstrated his cynical willingness to reframe his promises, er lie. It would take a very bad opponent indeed to just get me to stay home when he runs again.

[RainDog]

39. so you'll vote for a republican rather than a republican?

or you'll vote against Obama in the primary?

the problem is that Republicans don't offer a choice. they offer the same thing, which is why people are not happy with the way Obama has chosen to govern.

[pundaint]

46. Not one I can think of, right now, but 5 of 'em did vote to end war today, and

his next term even if he wins will be his last. Primary - for sure, general probably someone green - but Grayson was leading a Repubican primary in Fla, so there's hope.

[ShortnFiery]

63. Face it, it's a pipe dream. Grayson's legislation will NOT PASS through the Senate.

No sale. We're better off with NO BILL than a shitty Senate bill with MANDATES.

Obama's fall from grace is epic and World Wide. :thumbsdown:

[pundaint]

78. The beauty part of Grayson's bill is that it is totally budget neutral, and it provides

real competition to insurance companies. It's concise and focussed. It is tough to mount a sympathetic argument against it. And because it's neutral, it can be done by reconciliation even without the worse-than-nothing Obamacare bill passing.

Hold a good thought, sometimes shit doesn't happen.

[obxhead]

287. I don't think they do.

Once they lose the majority it becomes easier to find scapegoats for why nothing important is getting done. More importantly it allows for further legislation in support of the corporations on the backs of the people.

[laconicsax]

20. Liberals and blacks...

Because there's no overlap between those two demographics.

I know, I really shouldn't expect quality from USA Today.

[madrchsod]

22. i think i`ll sit the next one out...

i`ll vote for my state democrats but at this time i will not vote for obama.

[Bette Noir]

24. "Silly," eh?

Rahm was forced to apologize to representatives of the disabled for using the term "f*****g r*****s," but he never was asked to apologize to US for calling us that. I'd call that taking us for granted.

Obama isn't going to see another donation from me until he starts governing as progressivly as he campaigned.

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NoFace]

31. Word Salad...it's delicious. nt

[Hardrada]

85. Your meaning is opaque, my good man.

Perhaps you cannot help this.

[NoFace]

89. The missing period threw me. Sorry. nt

[SteveM]

124. Ding, ding, we have a winner...

"Rahm was forced to apologize to representatives of the disabled for using the term "f*****g r*****s," but he never was asked to apologize to US for calling us that. I'd call that taking us for granted."

As I said upstream, the Democratic Party "leadership" has worked assiduously to rid the party of ANYTHING resembling the "left (whether due to the cultural excesses of the 60s, the McGovern debacle, or for over-reliance on "special interest" support), and to reassure corporate America that it is not a threat. Seen this way, Rahm CANNOT, MUST NOT apologize to the now-mythical "left." Merely showing up to whatever constitutes the "left" is to legitimize it, thereby undermining what the Democratic Party has been doing for nearly 2 generations.

[No Elephants]

359. Liberals did ask Rahm to apologize, though. He ignored their request, acceding only to Palin's.

[colsohlibgal]

25. The Gibbs and Emmanual Foot In Mouth Race

How dumb are these people? World record dumb. Obama, liberal firebrand running, Mr. Bi Partisan once elected. Get us out of those dumb money bleeding wars? Nope. Come down hard on Wall Street? Nope. Come out forcefully for single payer health care right out of the gate - or at all? Nope.

Obama had an historic opportunity to make a huge difference with all his political capital from a huge mandate and big majorities and he blew it big time by going all weak kneed centrist on us. By appointing corporatists and Wall Street insiders instead of progressives. By putting freaking Max Baucus in charge of health care reform so he could have single payer advocates handcuffed and dragged out on TV - I will never forget that, it's burned into my mind.

For someone who worked really hard to elect him, like me, Obama has been an enormous disappointment. He has a lot to try to make up for in the next year, and then in the next two years after that.

The only good news, and thank God for them, is people like Grayson and Weiner, democrats with a spine and a half instead of none.

[otohara]

32. Enormous Disappointment?

Geez - that bad huh?

I have worked really hard for every Democratic presidential candidate since 1975 and will continue to do so until I can't. I am a proud Democrat - and understand after all these years - not everything on the campaign trail turns to policy. George W. Bush and the GOP handed this president a big steaming pile of shit and he's dealing with a right-wing media juggernaut doing their hardest to make sure he FAILS.

As a life long Democrat and volunteer, I have never witnessed such vitriol towards a Democratic president by Democrats.

Tracking Obama’s promises

Promise Kept 96
Compromise 33
Promise Broken 16
Stalled 84
In the Works 272

[pundaint]

50. When you assign dollar values, those numbers don't look so good, and most of the in the works

column are just pending no's. Did you vote to bend legislation to please the losing minority? Are there a group of kept promises in that 96, which would have made you support Obama over any of the other primary Democrats? It's not just Obama vs Republicans, it's Obama vs Democratic alternatives too.

Not meaning to be the grand inquisitor here, just posing my point with questions.

[Mithreal]

59. delete

wrong place

[Mithreal]

62. Two comments - about the vitriol and drawing down

As long as inconvenient truths are part of the picture I can live with your spin but honestly don't really believe those Draw Down numbers but I will try to remain hopeful on that front while continuing to push back.

Overall, contractors (armed and unarmed) now make up approximately 50% of the “total force in Centcom AOR .” This means there are a whopping 242,657 contractors working on these two US wars. These statistics come from two reports just released by Gary J. Motsek, the Assistant Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Program Support): “Contractor Support of U.S. Operations in USCENTCOM AOR, IRAQ, and Afghanistan and “Operational Contract Support, ‘State of the Union.’”

“We expect similar dependence on contractors in future contingency operations,” according to the contractor “State of the Union.” It notes that the deployment size of both military personnel and DoD civilians are “fixed by law,” but points out that the number of contractors is “size unfixed,” meaning there is virtually no limit (other than funds) to the number of contractors that can be deployed in the war zone.

http://rebelreports.com/post/116277092/obama-has-250-000-contractors-in-iraq-and-afghan

The vitriol you claim may be due in no small part to the feelings of betrayal no matter how well anyone tries to rationalize or explain those feelings away. A lot of Dems talk little differently from Republicans and that is going to cost people like Obama too. We can't blame everything on conservative media, the President is doing plenty enough himself to derail. New Dems are Old School Republicans, what's your take on that?

[midnight]

280. otohara the president surged with troops to give you that current level.

[Cherchez la Femme]

312. IIRC

Obama promised that as soon as he took office, a division a month would be withdrawn.

Instead, more troops were sent in.


Kinda refutes your nice little gif now, doesn't it?

[ima_sinnic]

73. +++1000 yes, the arrests of drs & nurses

after Obama's LIE that "everybody would have a seat at the table"--and he said squat about those arrests. That was for me, too, a defining moment. I watched in growing disbelief all summer as the teabaggers conveniently took over the message, distorting it to "socialized medicine," confusing and distracting people, as Obama said nothing, absolutely nothing. I kept waiting for him to "give a speech," like he always does--apparently the only thing he's really good at--to get the direction of health care "reform" right again--you know, like, be a leader??

"single payer," like legalized marijuana, was treated like a fart at a dinner party, like something polite people didn't talk about, like a joke to be laughed off around the back-room table with the cigars and brandy as the bigwigs greased palms and slapped each other on the back.

He can take his bullshit and shove it. What the Republicans want is far far more important to him than anything We The People who busted our asses to get him elected want. From ongoing and even escalated war and imperialism to public education down the toilet, to bankers and greedhead Wall Street pigs living the high life on my tax dollars while denying credit and charging exorbitant fees, to war criminals and traitors not only running around loose but also appearing on the Sunday talk shows to "give their opinions," to this tragedy of mandated useless health insurance (which he blatantly LIED ABOUT opposing in his campaign), including his secret deals with the corporate palm-greasers -- well, I will not be voting for him again, to put it mildly. By way of his scum chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, he has made it clear he doesn't want or need my vote. I am not part of his "constituency" because I am not a republican and my bank account isn't the size of a third world economy.

From his first days in office, beginning with idiotic and hateful cabinet picks like Judd Gregg, he has been doing nothing but kissing Republican butt and selling the country down the river for "bipartisanship" (read: weak-kneed, pathetic, even traitorous groveling, pandering and appeasement). I voted for him once, and that was a vote wasted.

[bahrbearian]

106. +1, well said

[SteveM]

131. A point on legalized marijuana: so symbolic was pot in the 60s...

the GOP pushed mightily for a huge War on Drugs because they wanted to draw a radioactive bright line between them and the "counter culture Democrats." They succeeded. The national Democrats went right along with the WOD. As the party is constituted now, they will go along with a lot more of the GOP's agenda.

[ima_sinnic]

141. it really chapped my @$$ when Obama laughed that off like on Day 1

--that was the one big change his own bright-eyed, bushy-tailed young supporters wanted, and he wouldn't even consider it. It's been all downhill from there.

[SteveM]

146. Classic GOP: define the opponent; he/she will conform accordingly.

[seabeckind]

235. Yes... n/t

[NewJeffCT]

158. Anybody who saw Obama as a liberal firebrand during the campaign

wasn't really paying attention. I think a lot of liberals projected their hopes & dreams onto him and thought he was a liberal, but most of his talk during the campaign was about governing in a bipartisan fashion and reaching out to Republicans.

My problem is that he has not reached out from a position of strength, which he had after the election. He ditched single payer as an option ahead of time, even if having them at the table would have made the public option look like the moderate choice, instead of the radical/liberal/socialist choice... he included hundreds of billions in tax breaks and watered down the stimulus before even bringing it to the table when he could have proposed a bigger stimulus and added in tax breaks to get bipartisan support.
That sort of thing

[Lydia Leftcoast]

181. I was never fooled by his rhetoric, since I've seen REAL progressives give speeches

and they always have specific ideas. Obama had the vocal mannerisms and gestures of a political firebrand down perfectly, but if you listened to the CONTENT of his speeches, you realized that there was no there there.

However, I voted for him assuming that he was going to be like Clinton, not my favorite, but tolerable.

I was unprepared for one slap in the face after another.

[Cherchez la Femme]

313. They saw what they wanted to see

or, by looks, expected to hear.

Nevermind what he REALLY said. Those who tried to spell it out were shouted down or outright banned.

[KoKo]

199. +1

[newspeak]

346. actually, we had eight friggin years of hell

being lied to, immoral wars, secret meetings, and a whole heap of FEAR, FEAR, FEAR--add in a huge helping of MSM propaganda. I voted for Obama because it was him or more crazies. But, I remember Clinton after Poppy-I voted for Clinton and felt betrayed when he swept the whole Octopus under the rug, when he signed Poppy's NAFTA, when the welfare deform bill was passed and the fairness doctrine stripped--and more and more deregulation.

We are slowly being privatized, corporatized, and brutalized-and some just don't see it. I trust government services, military who answers more to "we the People", than any service to the people given by a corporation. We have LESS representation when those responsibilities that government should be handling is given to a corporations--THERE IS LESS ACCOUNTABILITY AND RESPONSIBILITY by corporations--just look at all those corporate greedy war profiteers in the ME. But, be it a neo-con repuke or a NEW democrat, they are both focused on the same goal--and it has nothing to do with the well being of the majority of Americans in this country.

So, I've observed since Reagan--Iran-Contra, BCCI, S&L theft, fairness doctrine gone, more BS MSM propaganda, more National Enquirer type shitty , smutty worthless news, de-regulation of banking and financial institutions, lying us into a devastating war (unless your a greedy corp.), torture, suspending habeas corpus and posse commitatus, and on and on it goes.

Face it, most are in the "good old boys and girls club"--I said most, that means those who attempt to stand with the people probably have a tough time. And even though they give us a show, I think it's all theater. One moment had me wondering--it was during Ted Kennedy's memorial, when Hatch got up there and went on about the times he had with Kennedy-visiting, sailing, etc... Now Hatch is one of the most religiously conservative members of congress (and I still haven't forgotten how he treated Anita Hill), and it surprised me that Hatch and Kennedy even spent time together.

It bothered me. Maybe too much rubbing elbows together. I would rather see fighting, true opposition than the pandering crap. Because what pandering has done is given the people a terrible health care bill as well as helped lead us where we are today.

[KoKo]

352. Yes We Did...and I'm glad that there are still folks here who REMEMBER!

REMEMBER!

[xchrom]

27. Recommend

[superconnected]

33. Our whole hope for him and our movement was silenced by him, himself.

He want's us to shut up and disengage. I suppose he'll rally us again when he's running and he'll tote something like... *change*.

[NoFace]

35. Yes brother, woe is us! It's all over now! Defeated! Destroyed! Crushed like a wet cardboard box!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=plWnm7UpsXk

[superconnected]

37. Excuse me, if you haven't noticed we've been silenced by him in our quest for change

then you haven't been awake.

[NoFace]

45. If you are being silenced then why are you here wasting your keyboard w/ your 'quest for change''?

Typical, 'if you don't agree with me then you're (insert derogatory term here)' stuff.

Try addressing the issues...it's more interesting that way.
C'mon, you can do it!

[Divine Discontent]

242. prosense, the problems are greatly being instigated by the WH itself. they have shut out many who

thought they'd have a part in the change. why would you not expect people to be tapping keys like you are? well, except that you're doing it in defense of their actions?

[superconnected]

403. I'm just going to block you for offering nothing and just being a jerk.

Eventually after you've been here a while and know what you're talking about, you will open your eyes to Obama and his campaign promise failures. You may even post something interesting then. Bye bye.

[pundaint]

52. Righteous anger due to the obvious misrepresentation of his intentions during the campaign.

We had a few good choices before us in '08. He misrepresented himself to defeat some democratic Democrats.

[NoFace]

79. I always saw him as a centrist...maybe we were watching different elections?

Not like I was excited he was a centrist...personally I leaned toward Gravel (even Kucinich would been more to my liking). But talk about presidents that would've deadlocked congress ...wow. I can't even imagine.

America isn't ready. Apparently...otherwise they would've been elected.

See, everything keeps creeeeeping forward. Getting better but so slowly it appears not to be moving.

At least that's my totally unhumble opinion on it!
Hey! Looky there...I'm getting pretty good at being snarky on the internet now!

I hope it wears off.
:(

[sabrina 1]

101. Actually you're pretty bad at it. I hope it wears off too.

[NoFace]

300. >rimshot

[pundaint]

177. I claimed misrepresentation, centrist is your argument. I'll give you a few examples:

1. Promised healthcare negotiations in open meetings/Delivered behind closed-door deals with PhRMA, hospitals, and insurance companies, wouldn't even talk to single-payer proponents. Now, thinking we're just stupid, he's claiming the bill he's pushing was formed "after considering all the options."

2. Promised no lobbyists in his administration/Delivered hired lobbyists

3. Promised to restore the right of habeas corpus/Delivered renewal of the suspension of habeas corpus

4. Promised to allow imported drugs/Delivered sold it out to PhRMA at the start of HCR negotiations.

5. Promised to restore 24-month Nat'l Guard lifetime deployment max/Delivered higher than promised Afghanistan escalation making the limit impossible


Any one or two promises can be attributed to evolving circumstances, but certainly not lobbyists, public negotiations with representatives of all parties, or the 5-day public posting before signing legislation. Add to that his Obamacare approach maps closely to an approach he ridiculed during his campaign. There's plenty more there, but you get the idea.

Is there anything more fundamental to a system of laws than habeas corpus? It's older than the country. Locking people up without the opportunity to even verify that we got the guy we meant to, is just an abomination.

Hope that helps.

[No Elephants]

330. Who? Dodd? Biden? Clinton? Edwards? Kucinich, maybe, but, IMO, the had no chance of winning.

[olegramps]

170. Your assessment of the situation leaves much to be desired.

[KoKo]

355. He thinks it's "Up to Us" and NOT to HIM..he gave up years of his life to get a Dem Back in Power

...he's "Crusin"...and We're "Brusin." What a charming fellow he is...and so articulate...I'm Proud to have him Represent us after the IDIOT CHIMP.

But, then.....the PTB knew that...didn't they? We would need a "Relief" from Bush Antics and Clinton/Monica.

Are we better off?

[gtar100]

34. Obama is responsible for this and only Obama can change it.

But he is so over-focused bipartisanship that one can only wonder if he'll even consider it. It's like as soon as he got elected he forgot all about the people who worked so passionately to get him elected. All those young people who were filled with hope and joy, forgotten.

[NoFace]

36. Obama doesn't control every media outlet in America, right? Does he have Congress in his pocket?nt

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[girl gone mad]

42. It appears the administration has made a choice.

Turn up the propaganda campaign to full volume in a futile attempt to drown out dissent.

I guess that answers the question of whether or not they actually want to help the American people.

[NoFace]

43. Can you address the topic or are you better at name calling nonsense? :)

[RainDog]

47. that was my topic.

I wasn't calling anyone names. I asked a question.

[NoFace]

48. Your topic is both silly and mean spirited. Let's talk about the disengagement of Obama supporters

...instead.



Good try, but I'm not biting.
:)

[icee]

98. Not biting? That's all you appear to be doing, ad nauseum. The

question is: Despite the usual "media is this, and media does that", is there any truth to what has been cited in the OP? I maintain that there is. I have been an avid Obama supporter since the very beginning. He lifted my spirit in a very bad time. Unfortunately, he has been steered off course by the DLC, which is costing him, not the DLC. The public does not know Rahm Emanuel--they kind of know Barack Obama. So Obama is taking many hits other should be taking. Normally, when this happens a leader will begin to steer a different course. Is Obama doing that? Hard to say... But, concentrating on specifics, do you not agree that Obama has been a little less than stellar? From FISA onward through torture, healthcare, teacher firings, etc, I never know what to expect next. And that's the name of that tune.

[Iowa]

61. I thought the same thing. This guy is like the Energizer Bunny responding to every post.

[NoFace]

93. Amazing ...isn't it? nt

[icee]

99. Divide and conquer . . . Get everyone mad at everyone and

then get someone to monitor it. Then, suddenly, in Freeper News: Outraged Democrats Fighting Among Themselves..."Everything does not appear to be swell these days in Democratland. Take a look at one of their bastions of party politics--Democratic Underground..." You get the picture.

[msanthrope]

266. Yes--and notice it's always the same DUers leading the charge? n/t

[Enthusiast]

77. You have it exactly correct.

He/she essentially disagrees that we should feel anger. We should be all happy and stuff.

What is wrong with you, RainDog? We elected a Democrat to the White House! Happy day!

RainDog, it's our desire for the diminutive equine that is at fault.

[NoFace]

94. Thanks for telling me how I think.

Next? Who's next? Pot shots...come one come all...take a pot shot at the new guy! C'mon people he won't be here all night!



;)

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[JNelson6563]

109. I've been enjoying your posts.

We got us a contingent of barbiturate lefties here though. No matter what, woe is them and a pox on all who are not woeful too.

Julie

[RainDog]

145. ooooh, the "Debby Downer" insult

does it just want to make you throw down those pom-poms in frustration?

maybe you should talk to Tracy Flick about how she handles such things.

hey, guess what? if you read study after study you find that people who are pessimistic are more accurate in their assessments of reality, are less likely to fall for BULLSHIT, and serve an extremely useful purpose in society by telling it some truth.

the interesting thing about the Obama presidency on DU, at least for me, is the number of people who expect lock-step agreement.

I VEHEMENTLY DISAGREE with a president who continues Bush's torture policies, who shields war criminals from justice, who sides with fundamentalists idiots over those who deserve to be treated as equal citizens...

If that bothers you, who cares.

[JNelson6563]

217. I don't see the world as ending any minute now.

"Pom poms" hahahahaha

Thanks for taking the time out from wrist to forehead panic to infer I'm a cheerleader. Back to your regularly scheduled melodrama.

Julie--who believes balance is important, unlike the shit flinging monkeys on DU

[Cha]

263. LOL!

You go Julie girl!

[RainDog]

366. reading comprehension problems?

or just trying really hard to find something to say?

if you don't like shit flinging monkeys you shouldn't act like one yourself.

[Iowa]

293. They're out in force, RainDog...

And they're on a mission. Good posts, by the way. Apparently these things don't matter to them.

I'm involved in another thread where people are actually defending tea-baggers... what stand-up guys they are, how liberals are just as bad, and so on. I bashed the movement and provided examples of what the movement claims to stand for. Three out of three posters (so far) defend them. This place becomes more conservative every day.

[RainDog]

365. they make me sick

they do more to harm the democratic party than any republicans because they treat those who have voted and voted for decades, who held their noses and voted while seeing, over those decades, the debasement of the American people by the neo-liberals.

and they're sooooo compassionate about people who are struggling with real problems in this world that are not of their making. but, what does it matter if it's not a republican with money. or if someone doesn't act like the prez is a rock star.

democrats remind me of the kids who will try to do anything to fit in with the "cool kids," - who everyone knows, over time, are the used car salesmen of the world - then the cool kids shit on them for fun. Republicans NEVER care about bipartisanship, about the will of the majority, about the consequences, the real consequences for people in this nation because all they give a fuck about are rich people.

because they are really are that lacking in basic human decency.

I've just about had it with the democratic party and politics in general because democrats just don't care enough about what's wrong. they're part of what's wrong.

I've met some really nice people on DU in the 8 years I have been on and off this site. I'll be here because of those people and other things of interest to me here.

but it's time for me to create a massive ignore list.

they insult people over and over then run to the moderators to have any post deleted that responds to them in kind or notes the Tracky Flickishness of their presence here.

fuck it.

[Iowa]

369. Yeah, I'm about at that point too...

I'm a liberal, and I value progressive ideals. Obama pretty much cinched it for me. He confirmed that the Democratic party is no longer about a progressive ideology - quite the opposite, in fact. There's really no place for people like us. We have no party. And I'll be damned if I'll continue to support corporatists just because they co-opted a once-great brand name.

[Name removed]

233. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gtar100]

390. That's not where he derived his power in the elections...he had the power of the populace.

He got elected with an incredible momentum for change and turned around after getting elected and instead of putting people into positions that would bring change, i.e., banking regulations, worker's rights, ending war, rolling back the tax cuts, etc..., he hired Clinton conservatives, kept republican appointees in key positions throughout his cabinet, and made deals with the very business leaders that are screwing over the American people, in particular the banking and health insurance industries. He had the power of the country's youth and the progressive communities who were hungry for something new. He could have energized the American people just like he did at the Democratic National Convention and his inauguration speech. The people were ready to back him and fight for his demands. He didn't need to control the media outlets or Congress. We the people have the power to overwhelm the corruption and inertia in the Congress and Senate. He should have kept his ear to the people and move with the tide that rolled him into office.

But he didn't. He hesitated. He turned to the people who despise him the most to try to prove the point that we are "one America", "not red states or blue states, but the United States", ... But reality has smacked back hard and yet he refuses to give up on the notion that republicans will actually stop hating him and help him. Instead, the Republicans found a foothold in their fall from grace when Obama chose to listen to them as if they had the country's best interests at heart. Big mistake.

There are still people out here, myself included, who would be incredibly motivated if he would stop placating to the republicans and started pushing a strong agenda that reflected the values he advocated for on the campaign trail. He is in a leadership position and though the media has a lot of power, and special interests have their great and terrible influence, the power of a loud, vocal and motivated public will overwhelm all of that. But it does take a leader to focus all that energy. Obama showed he has what it takes to do that during the elections. But he hasn't been the same since.

[alp227]

44. Obama ain't that liberal.

His admin has been coddling Republicans on health care and prosecuting terror suspects.

His sec of education is pushing a destructive agenda under the misleading title "school reform" that upgrades the Bush snake oil called "No Child Left Behind".

He actually escalated troop activity in Afghanistan!

[democracy1st]

51. he's everything but liberal,and a strong liberal is what the country voted for and thought

they were getting.

[NoFace]

54. He was centrist from the start.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11880.html

"" Throughout the left-wing blogosphere, the cry has come: Barack Obama is moving away from them, and to the center. “Moving to the middle is for losers,” cried the politically ambidextrous Arianna Huffington. He’s “betraying his claims of being a new kind of politician,” declared Markos Moulitsas of Daily Kos.""

Written 2 years ago.

[democracy1st]

68. true but would you agree a smart politician would seek out whats best for the country ?

[NoFace]

71. I sincerely believe that is what he's doing. I may be wrong though.

EDIT:
Or what he thinks he's doing.

Who knows what he's really up to? Or what's in the best interest of the country? For every single issue?

I know he's done some things such as not televising parts of the Health Care Debate and not putting strings on the Bank Bailout (etc) that I *really* don't agree with. Brushing aside Marijuana Legalization. Some of those things I think he may have done in order to achieve other, more important goals...some of them are inexcusable.

But, whether or not certain decisions are inexcusable, I'm not ready to dismiss the rest of his entire presidency or paint him as some evil Corporate Stooge for the misdeeds so far.

Again, maybe I am just not aware of some horrific breech of justice that he has committed...but I think he's just kinda an average politician doing slightly better than average political stuff. Really can't expect more....not realistically, the man doesn't control everything...he's just the president you know? Not Supreme Leader Comandante Obama or whatever. Yes he made wonderful campaign promises, don't they all? Would he have been elected if he was truthful? C'mon...
:)

'We' elected him, he hasn't changed. We have. Or some of us.

The more liberal nominees we not nominated to run.

To me this indicates that the majority of Americans wanted exactly what the got.
And now some of them are turning against him...which, sadly enough, is to be expected as well.
When times are tough we blame the person currently in charge regardless of whether they are responsible.

Etc Etc.

Please tell me the horrible things he has done and I'll try my best to give you my informed response to them.
:)

Otherwise all this restless muck slinging ...seems needlessly inflammatory, needlessly destructive, needlessly divisive and just plain juvenile to me.

Sorry, but it does.

(LONG POST I KNOW! Sorry!)
:crazy:

[Enthusiast]

Yes, you're wrong, alright.

He can't possibly think what he is doing is right for the country.

He advocates completely overlooking malfeasance by the previous administration. He knows full well this is the wrong thing to do.

After the HUGE bailout we still have no accountability for Wall Street and no new regulations to prevent another bubble and collapse. No regulations on derivatives? Obama knows god damn good and well that this is damaging to the nation yet he is doing what the bankers want.

Obama campaigned on the public option. He understood then, as he does now, that only REAL competition for the insurance industry can rein in costs. He knows a bill with mandates but no public option is not only unpopular but doesn't achieve his own reform goals.

I could go on to include Afghanistan and other issues but I won't bother.

[NoFace]

90. ZING!!!!!

:eyes:

[Lydia Leftcoast]

184. Yes, a specialist in Constitutional law should know that many of Bush's

moves (torture, detention without trial) violate the Constitution, and yet I have not heard him even criticize them, much less bring those responsible to justice.

I was reading about South Korea last night. When they finally got a legitimately elected government, one of the first acts of the new government was to put members of the dictatorship on trial for their crimes. Imagine, officially repudiating the acts of a previous government!

So what does Obama do? Sign a renewal of the Patriot Act.

Way to go, Mr. Constitutional Lawyer.

[Enthusiast]

225. Yes, Lydia, it is

so disappointing. And he plays dumb. As if these inactions represent an acceptable choice. They are not even an acceptable choice by a Republican administration.

[JoeyT]

83. OK, I'll give you something to respond to.

Since you want something to respond to so badly.

What about his massive failures on the civil liberties front?
His DOJ fought to keep warrantless wiretapping. (Directly contradicting an explicit campaign promise, I should add.)
That same DOJ fought to keep and, in some ways, actually expand Bush's indefinite detention of American citizens.
His DOJ has also fought like hell to keep prisoners from being able to get DNA tests that might prove them innocent, even if they're willing to pay for them themselves.

All of this was explained away in the beginning with the baffling argument from apologists that he wanted the court to rule against him to prevent another president doing it in the future or to stop a law from being reversed. Then when his DOJ kept fighting for it (And they still are) there are just crickets or outright denial anytime any of it is brought up. In the last case the SC actually agreed with him.

It's weird how torture, kidnapping American citizens, and fighting to keep possibly innocent people in jail for the sake of expediency created massive amounts of outrage when Bush did them, but now that one of our own either does it or refuses to act to prevent it in the future it's suddenly fine. Somehow "not wanting to be tortured", "not wanting to be kidnapped on a hunch", and "wanting to be able to use evidence in court to exonerate yourself" became ponies.

Edited to add: The usual 5 suspects agreed with him on the DNA thing. A good litmus test for shitty positions should be "Does Scalia agree with me?". If the answer is yes, your position is probably wrong.

[NoFace]

91. Wow, you're so manly and tough. "Since I want something to respond to so badly'? I think you meant:

Since I dare talk reason on an internet board and not bombastic, hypebole driven nonsense designing to crush my opponent with my total dominating mastery of logic and language. >CRUSH< "Hahaha! Fool! You dare try a reasonable dialog?? Hahahah!"

Whatever, I'll look your list over and give it a shot.
:)

Thanks for the reply!

[sabrina 1]

104. The majority of Americans didn't have much choice.

Liberal candidates are not allowed to get to the WH, by the power structure, not by the people.

As for him not doing anything terrible or whatever it was you said?

I can't think of anything more despicable for a Democratic president to do than to tell the public that war crimes should be ignored and they should just forget about them and 'look forward'.

I don't care what label you conjure up, the catchphrase from Madison Ave. 'Centrist' being the latest, there IS such a thing as a country's basic morality. Scoff if you want at torture and the slaughter of over one million people based on lies and call it naive to ask for justice for those crimes. I'll take naive over criminal collusion for the sake of party loyalty any day.

Your little act isn't very convincing. I've seen hundreds of apologists like you on the internet. Attempting to present the same old apologist BS with a different flavor. It just isn't working, so don't waste your time.

This president promised to restore the rule of law. What did that make him, you who have so much respect for labels. Was that 'Centrist'?

We did NOT get what we should have expected. I don't expect my elected officials to support war criminals getting away with their crimes. Don't project YOUR expectations onto others. I don't vote for protectors of or apologists for war criminals. You're right, if he had told the truth, he sure as hell wouldn't have been elected. And that's the whole point, isn't it?

[plantwomyn]

185. Here is a terrible thing he has done.

I attended a OFA meeting on Tuesday and had a long conversation with women that worked for Obama during the 2008 campaign. The initial focus of the meeting was to write our Congressmen and ask them to vote for the Health Care Bill. The conversation boiled down to the realization that NONE of us believed that Obama actually wanted to pass REAL Health Care Reform. We all realized that we didn't have faith in Obama anymore. Here are some of the questions asked.

If Obama wanted the Congress to write the bill, why did he meet with Pharma and Insurance Companies and make deals before the bill even went through the House?

Sen. Baucus unilaterally set up a group of six Senators, 3 of each party, to "negotiate" Health Care Reform. Why didn't Obama call Baucus to the White House and tell him that "We won the election, use our majority"? Instead, after months of delay the Congress left for the August recess.

With all of the Presidents ability to "monitor" what is going on in America, why wasn't the Administration ready for the Tea Bagging during the August break?

Once they realized what was happening, why didn't Change.org get their shit together and get Dems out to the "Town Hall" meetings?

Where was Obama during and after the August break and why didn't he address the lies that the Teabaggers and Republicans were putting out?

There were more but what it came down to was that these women were disillusioned and almost ready to walk away.

The week before we sat though a presentation by OFA that told us that the focus was going to be on getting last elections first time voters to vote for the Dems again in 2010. They also want to register more new voters. The elephant in the room, pun intended, was that the vast majority of "supporters" in the room have voted for at least the 80's and most of us have been voting since the 60-70's.

So what we got out of the presentation was that OFA was taking us "die hard Democrats" for granted. After the "youngsters" packed up and left we "die hards" looked around and realized that Obama had no intention of addressing the promises he made about changing the policies that have been entrenched and codified by the Bush Administration.

It was a terrible thing to see the disillusionment of these women who have worked so hard for Obama. Some had worked just as hard for Roosevelt or Kennedy. I could see in their faces when they realization that we all have been feeling the same things, that we were being used, ignored and taken for granted. These are not uninformed women, nor are they Internet snarks. They read the paper and watch the news. They never heard of DU. They know what they voted for, they know what has and hasn't been done. Obama did this terrible thing. He has lost them and I doubt he has the time or inclination to get them back.

BTW, NONE of the youngsters made it to the second meeting. I guess their cheerleader uniforms were in the wash.

[Enthusiast]

228. Nice post. As you know, plantwomyn, millions of

us feel this way. And it ain't because we want our pony.

I fear for our country. And it isn't terrorism I fear. We can't take more Bush-like neo-con administrations and legislatures. The country is near damaged beyond repair already.

[Cherchez la Femme]

318. Depends on the definiton of Smart

to get reelected?

to think its smart to get THIS country, both major parties (as things stand right now) all pull together?

to make more money? Guarantee a profitable post-presidency?

to think its smart to listen to truly stupid people who YOU think are smart based on your own subjective opinions?

to kowtow to KKKristians?

to please the DLC?

to cozy up to Corporations, especially those who donate lots of money to him?

to please the Republicans, hoping they'd finally like and vote for him?

to denigrate the loony left of his own party then say that's silly and we all really love him?

for a constitutional lawyer to make unconstitutional, but pleasing to a certain group of people, decisions?


And who is "the country"? In many instances it certainly doesn't seem to based on the majorities polled
--Public Option/Single Payer approval for one.



What he considers 'smart' is anybody's guess

...doing 'whats best for the country' is in a loooonnnngg list there, based on most of his decisions so far, and based on above mentioned polling IMO it doesn't even hit his top 100.

[tranche]

195. I don't really buy that. How do you explain Hillary voters?

I don't think they were voting for "liberal" I think they were voting for the previous Clinton administration (which Obama basically built into his own administration).

[cyclezealot]

49. I 've been saying that since Jan 2009

They think Obama can get things accomplished if we just sit back and take a break. Nor will he 'stay the course, if we are disengaged... As soon as the Inauguration was over seems we all went home...
Just saw Naomi Klein's film "Shock Doctrine." I was impressed with a line quoted to FDR.. FDR would meet with labor and hear their demands , his response.. OK, I'll do it, but first you have to go out there and "Make me do it."
Or I can't do it alone. Some of the fault falls on those who are not making him do it.. Why are progressive activists so lazy and think they can just disappear for the next 3 years and let our leaders hang out to dry all alone.

[saracat]

57. Really? Many have tried to make him and unlike FDR, he doesn't listen. Arresting the single payer

advocates was indicative of this. Many of us are calling, protesting and writing about a myriad of issues but the Admin is tone deaf. Even the Senate is perked up and starting to listen.It is unimaginable but we might get a Public Option in spite of the president.

[icee]

102. Curious? Do you think Grayson's bill will make it to the floor?

[cyclezealot]

137. 1 difference, FDR did not have to fight all the lobbyists cash.

The cost of senate races and their dependency upon corporate donors, might be a cause the House listens slightly better than the Senate. Some Congressional Districts are so untypical of American demographics , the lobbyists don't even try , plus House races cost slightly less and influences such a unions are closer . Still, way to many progressives turned over business and went into retirement for the next three years, leaving it to the lobbyists to do their thing.

[saracat]

262. Actually , not true. My grandfather bought off a lot of Senators in his day and they stayed bought.

The legislation the movie industry bought through him still exists.And in those days, folks actually made speeches to congress and were obvious.They used to pay people off directly, not through campiagn contributions. Senators and congress people were bought and sold like crazy back then.All the industries were involved. Railroads and oil were big into lobbying as were corporations.

[cyclezealot]

324. Bribing is an ancient American institution

I suspect Saracat../. But, Billion dollar election cycles paid for by lobbyists money is somewhat new.?

[saracat]

347. Nah. It is the same. Just allowing for new Technology and inflation. They used to lobby through news

reels and radio.The sent flyers and took ads in the papers. Shoot they bought papers and published books. It just costs more now but the idea is the same.

[saracat]

271. I really don't know. It is possible. However I am not sure it is likely.

The blue dogs probably will squash it.

[ShortnFiery]

64. We need to organize. We have the numbers but not the $ nor big media. eom

[NoFace]

66. What about that coffee party thing I heard about?

http://coffeepartyusa.com/

Yey!

[No Elephants]

343. FDR may have said"make me do it," but he did not govern that way.

Obama said it, and, no matter what we do, he ignores us, if not insults "my friends on the left."

I have no clue what you are talking about. I did not "just sit back ad take a break" or "disappear," nor did most people I know. We've been signing internet petitions, calling and writing Senators, members of the House and the WH, etc. People have been demonstrating. We have been contributing to people like Grayson and to liberal challengers, like Halter. The polls say 70% of the public wants a public option, and Rahm curses out people who want one, but doesn't get fired..

If Obama has anything specific in mind when he says "make me do it," he should frickin's say so, because, so far, he's ignored all attempts to make him do it.

[Wilms]

65. Bullshit. We're alienated. n/t

[The Wizard]

70. Obama's liberal base

was told it was insignificant by Obama's DLC triangulating chief of staff. Apparently deciding ignoring the base has no consequences, a flawed political calculation. Congress' foot dragging on health care and ignoring the will of the majority is also a factor. But hey, I'm just a dumb guy with an Internet connection.

[NoFace]

72. No dude...YOU'RE THE WIZARD!!!

[Divine Discontent]

75. we weren't welcome and Rahm & Co dictated the direction of things, and as a bunch of

'f*c*ing r**arded' internut libruls with time to type, our opinions as citizens didn't mean jack shit to them.

It's a shame they're just now realizing what Brazile is stating - we've been saying for 6 months our party is screwed come Nov. because the Democratic Admin. in the WH has behaved an awful lot like the last admin. with secrecy, questionable deals, delayed 'we're gonna get to that' tactics to avoid controversial issues, continued warfare, gave sweetheart deals to big corporations, shut out progressives from having a real seat at the table, and frankly - we get tired on here of having to have the same TEN people who defend them no matter what - that shows how bad it's gotten for our once excited party over the election of this president.

:(

[truthisfreedom]

80. This can be repaired. I know I still have Obama enthusiasm that I keep under wraps.

And I'm really proud of what he's accomplished, and I'm willing to remain silent on my disappointments. His stature is 10 times that of w.

He's a real President.

[pundaint]

81. It would appear that no repair is necessary for you even at this level of performance.

Which accomplishment are you most proud of during the past year?

Remember, we did all the voting, so basic majority stuff is to the voters credit not the Presidents.

[lovelyrita]

96. Are you proud of what the President said in his speech yesterday?

Now, there are some folks who wanted to scrap the system of private insurance and replace it with a government-run health care program, like they have in some other countries. (Applause.) We’ve got a couple — some applause here. And look, it works well for those countries. But I’ll just be honest with you: It was not practical or realistic to do here, to completely uproot and change a system where the vast majority of people still get their health care from employer-based plans.


This infuriates me because it is not true. The argument is that because we have an employer based system now, that is completely screwed up, we have to keep it? That is some crazy logic.

[closeupready]

211. You're correct - it's not true, because 70% of those same Americans support a public option.

n/t

[Cherchez la Femme]

319. And because it works for all those other countries so well

it just couldn't work for us, right? :eyes:

[gleaner]

86. I can't disagree with the thrust of the article ..

Unfortunately the first paragraph contradicts the paragraph which says that liberals still "approve" of Obama. Make up your minds, dudes, do the liberals like him or not?

If they mean activists versus liberal theorists they should say so. I'm not going to bust my progressive gut for him though. I'll check out his opponents in the Democratic primary and the opponents of the blue dogs in this years Democratic primaries and see if I can help do some cherry picking of conservative lite players. I've really had enough of them and they are taking all of us right down the tubes.

[SteveM]

138. Yep, 'bout sums it up.

[nightrain]

100. I don't know if I'd use "disengaged". Perhaps disengaged from

Obama, but not disengaged in general. "Mad as hell" with many of Obama's decisions and passivity is more like it.

[DisgustedInMN]

105. Dems WILL get their collective ass handed to..

.. them as a result of Barack Obama betraying those of us that put him in office. Of that, there is absolutely no doubt. To try and peddle the piece of shit gift to the insurance parasites as some kind of "victory for the people," is merely rubbing salt into the wound.

Shall we now discuss the moral failure to pursue the perpetrators of war crimes in OUR name?

[Peacetrain]

110. Strange and Odd.. Hmmmm. Liberal Base here... not disengaged

Democrats in my area are not disengaged..

[on point]

113. Just moving on to support real progressives. No more fakery.

I have already sent money to progressives challenging Dino sores in primaries, to MoveOn.org which actually promotes change. I will vote selectively for dems this fall, but will in general start to vote green in order to send a message to the DLC national Dem party.

[Ganja Ninja]

114. the notion that the president is taking liberals for granted is "silly."

Some have even used the word "retarded".

[SOS]

115. Disengaged because of Obama?

How about mad as hell at a US Senate that blocks everything that might upset their Wall Street owners?

[depakid]

122. Oh no doubt that people are pissed off at that too

But announcing support for Blanche Lincoln the same day that he goes in front of the Chamber of Commerce and takes an ill informed and gratuitous smack at teachers doesn't exactly breed a lot of enthusiasm.

Nor does "not begrudging" Wall Street bankster their bonuses and comparing them to baseball players.

[RainDog]

148. I think the attack on teachers was the absolute last straw for me.

Obama no longer has my respect.

[depakid]

180. If you're going to take a swipe at teachers (and unions) then you do it in front of teachers

and not gratuitously before the Chamber of Commerce.

[Javaman]

128. Shhhh, what did I tell you about bringing reality to the conversation?

Don't make me come back there!!

[ProSense]

144. Yes, this is the key.

The media and a few Democrats are and have been making Obama the target. It's a convenient way of giving Congress a pass. Well guess what: Obama isn't up for re-election in November.

[EFerrari]

So true and ironically, House Democrats who have been doing

marginally better than the administration or America's crazy uncles, will take the hit for both of them.

[kjackson227]

167. Bingo!

[Deep13]

126. My wife and I realized it just isn't worth it.

Even if we win, we lose.

[RainDog]

139. fucking incredible, ain't it?

Bush steals an election, doesn't give a shit what people think, uses more signing statements than any president in history, lies his ass off and tortures innocent people to win re-election (ask Mickey Herskowitz), bankrupts the nation with an illegal war, creates negative job growth for more than a decade...

and the best we can get is someone telling us we have to compromise with the assholes who back all this shit from Bush?!?!?

honestly, I no longer recognize the democratic party. It used to have BALLS and would go up against the racists, bigots and plutocrats.

[plantwomyn]

192. The "ladies" at the meeting

actually said the same thing. We reminisced about LBJ. What a hard ass he was and how he would have just grabbed these guys by the gonads and made them get things done. LBJ would have ripped the Teabaggers a new one and shoved the Constitution down their throats. One even said LBJ would have moved the border to the Texas state lines, marched the military out of Texas and said "Here's your 10th Amendment Governor Perry".
It was the only good laugh we had during the whole conversation.

[msanthrope]

270. What a load of bullshit about LBJ.....seriously.....

LBJ--the guy who couldn't keep us out of Vietnam? The guy who couldn't stand up to the PTB and keep us from bombing millions?

The guy who bailed in 1968 and left us to Nixon?

Yeah--balls of steel....

Please.

[Cherchez la Femme]

327. I'm no fan of LBJ per se

but I'll give credit where it's due. Without LBJ, Obama very probably never would have gotten elected President of the United States. It was LBJ who pushed through equal rights for minorities -- he probably could have been the only one who could have done that, bar Bobby.

Even many Democrats today would be touting the 'State's Rights' bullshit, so forget equal rights down there.
It's questionable that in many states Obama would be able to go to desegregated schools, eat at the same lunch counter or use the same bathroom as 'whites' (so they could Tap-Tap-Tap without worry of some black guy) or even drink from the same water fountain. Pure sin in Jaysusland!

LBJ also did much to alleviate the suffering of the poor and disadvantaged in the U.S. with many programs.

Nor was Vietnam his war, his biggest mistake was listening to McNamara, that IBM jerk whose penciled calculations were all that were needed to 'win' that horrid, unwinnable war. McNamara finally, but way too late, realized he was in a pea-soup fog of war. akin to what we're in right now.

That war which, of course, still took 2 more terms of the next president to extricate us from, and no thanks to him for that in any event...


LBJ did a hell of a lot more than simply be the hated figurehead for another stupid, pointless war.

[No Elephants]

345. Has Obama kept us out of wars? LBJ got the Great Society throught a deeply divided Congress.

His Democrats in Congress were far more divided than Obama's Democrats in Congress.

Both FDR and LBJ were head and shoulders above Obama on framing an agenda and getting Congress to pass it.

For that matter, even Dummya got Democrats to vote for some serious far right stuff, like the Patriot Act, changes to FISA the War on Iraq, the War on Terra and the bailout. Well, in fairness, obama gets Democrats to vote on exactly the same stuff.

[defendandprotect]

220. What do you really expect from elected officials bought out by corporations????

There is no Democratic Party was we once knew it --

The coup on JFK didn't simply take a president, it took out "people's" government --

and eventually the Democratic Party that would have fought for us. They couldn't leave

that standing. The "free press" or what was left of it was being dismantled and invaded

by CIA "journalists" -- and they backed the Warren Commission Report.

A few in Congress tried to challenge what was going on, but gradually they were all

targeted and moved out of Congress. More right wingers were moved in. That's how it was

done. The very day that JFK was asssassinated, everything began to change.

Watergate was simply another step in the direction of fascism and paving the way for more

fascism and Watergate never ended --

[Cherchez la Femme]

320. the racists, bigots and plutocrats joined up

Witness the DLC, witness the many defenders of the in-defenseless even here. :(

Does anyone have a poll of the 'new, improved' Democratic Party regarding the percentages of Liberals, "Moderates" and Conservatives?
Preferably an agenda-less poll...

[Bluenorthwest]

129. There is a mistake in thinking that general election work and

votes mean a person is part of a politician's base. I worked for the Democratic Nominee and would have for any of them. Obama's anti gay stances made it a chore to promote him, but I did it. That is over and done. The part where we do for him is over, and he's not been returning the favor at all. Behaves as if he got elected by Republicans and evangelicals.

[Odin2005]

136. Because we were stabbed in the back.

[CLANG]

142. Donna Brazile, and I quote:

Brazile says there's time to repair the damage and re-energize liberal activists. "Will it be a tough spin? You betcha," she says. "But I do think President Obama and the party will be up to the task."

Tough Spin? Is that what we have to look forward too? Do they not realize that we know what "spin" means?

Spin=Lies:grr:

[scentopine]

143. Dem leadership softens liberal hate rehtoric from "retarded" to "silly"...

liberals are reviled by both mainstream parties. We need a third party where liberals can fight against the converging two mainstream political parties and offer a real alternative, competition and choice.

[4dsc]

147. Its time for REVOLUTION in the Democratic party

It time for liberals and progressive to make their voice heard in such a way we cannot be ignored by the corporate supporting members of our party.. But who will lead us is the question..

[EFerrari]

150. Even if the left was the majority in the party, how can we compete with

corporate money?

[grahamhgreen]

149. Mission accomplished???? Makes you wonder if this was part of the neocon plan...!

[crazyjoe]

152. "liberals and blacks" ??? how about african americans

[The Shadow Knows]

153. The Obama Party

The reason Obama appears estranged from even centrist elements of the Democratic Party is the underlying FALSE assumption that Obama is a member of the Democratic Party. Logic reveals he is NOT.

Obama is the leader of the smallest party to ever ascend to the U.S. presidency - The Obama Party. It was a necessary cloak to wear in a two-party system. Now that the Cloak of the Democratic Party can be discarded by the Obama Party, almost every so-called disconnect between Obama and "his" party is explained.

I have put together a further analysis of this discovery, and will publish it at some point, but I invite others to re-analyze Obama's actions and in actions in the light of the leader of the Obama Party doing what is best, NOT for the Democratic Party, but for the Obama Party.

[polichick]

171. This sounds like more "He's a socialist, he's a Nazi, he's not one of us" crap. nt

[RedstDem]

179. Your on to something

at least it's CENTER/right party instead of RIGHT/over the cliff right party like the last guy...

[polichick]

155. That "silly" notion is gonna bite them in the ass if they don't wake up.

[SlingBlade]

156. Robert Gibbs: The notion that the president is taking liberals for granted is "silly."

Whistling by the graveyard. I'm surprised Rahm didn't chime in with a Chicago fuck you !

I vote ONLY for tried and tested Progressives in the future.
Lieberman Liberals, Blue Dogs and Centrist need not apply.

"We don't need another republican party in this country"

K&R

[kjackson227]

160. yada, yada, yada... Anybody who can remember the years...

preceding Obama (crime family Bush administration), and who is now disengaged, is DEAD... in mind and spirit.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

213. I'm not disengaged--I'm pissed off

A REAL leader would have signaled the end of the Bush administration by actually CHANGING some of Bush's policies instead of reaffirming them (Patriot Act, unconditional bank bailouts).

[kjackson227]

247. So, I guess bringing our troops home from Iraq (possibly earlier than thought)...

and trying to push through financial regulations to protect consumers mean nothing to you??? If you people would keep current on events, maybe you wouldn't be so bitter. You know as well as I do that top economists (both liberal/conservative) have stated that Obama had to bailout Wallstreet or risk a depression instead of a recession, AND many more jobs would've been lost. You people know this, you just want to bash the President. If you can't see the difference between this president and Dumbya Bush, then you're more misinformed than I thought.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

254. Bringing home troops from Iraq while sending more to Afghanistan?

Not impressive.

Weak financial regulations and saying that it was ok for the banksters to have their bonuses?

Not impressive.

If you can't see the similarities between this president and Bush, you're all starry-eyed.

[kjackson227]

289. And, the President absolutely said during the campaign that...

he would divert troops to Afghanistan, so don't blame him for your hearing problems. The CEO regulations are still a work in progress... I think caps passed the house, but was shot down by the senate, and there were surtaxes placed on this pay in order to get tax payer money back), but they have paid back MOST of the TARP money. Progression is the name of the game, and this president is doing just that, but you can't stand it. Nothing this president does is going to impress you, so I'll continue to keep my starry-eyes "OPEN", while you intentionally grope around in the dark. Have a great day :)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

296. He said that he was going to do something stupid and wasteful and

Then he went and did it. I guess I should have no complaints because he actually kept his most immoral campaign promise

[zipplewrath]

371. Not exactly

He of course spoke several times on the subject, so there is not singular reference. But when he spoke of a "new way" in Afghanistan, he spoke generally of focusing upon the Afghan/Pakistan region. As far as the rest of Afghanistan was concerned, he spoke vastly more of using NGO's and diplomacy. I'd be surprised if he ever stated he'd triple the amount of combat troops to support a corrupt government.

[EFerrari]

393. Are you only able to access your memory or shared reality?

That must be terrible.

[kmac3]

161. Sad Situation For Those Believing

I believe Obama's effort to rule in a bipartisan manner caused him to tip far away from his original promises he won on. His reluctance to admit to himself that the current Republican Party has jointly agreed to be the Party of No and the need to move on without them has caused the present climate and dissatisfaction among the Democratic Party.
:shrug:

[Captain Hilts]

163. I just ran into six in Va. Beach. They feel betrayed. The tribunals were really the last straw. nt

[ProSense]

164. It makes no sense to continually target the President while giving Congress a pass

Let's just look a some statements and things that have transpired over the past week or so:

Senate Uses Budget Technicality To Scuttle Jobs Bill For Vulnerable Workers

Our guest blogger is Melissa Boteach, the Half in Ten Manager at the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

For the past few months, the talk around town has been around the conflicting imperatives of job creation and deficit reduction. Yet, somehow, a provision that would have created hundreds of thousands of jobs for vulnerable workers, without adding a penny to the deficit over the next 10 years, failed to muster the 60 votes needed to pass the Senate yesterday.

A fully paid-for amendment offered by Sens. John Kerry (D-MA) and Patty Murray (D-WA) that would have spent $1.3 billion to create up to 500,000 summer jobs for disadvantaged youth and $1.3 billion to provide opportunities for states to build on innovative Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) programs that are projected to create more than 100,000 subsidized jobs by September for vulnerable workers was scuttled by a 55-45 vote.

These two programs not only provide immediate economic relief for hard-hit families and communities; they have the potential to change the long-term employment prospects of youth and families by offering skills training and work experience so that workers can be full participants in the recovery that will eventually come.

These two programs not only provide immediate economic relief for hard-hit families and communities; they have the potential to change the long-term employment prospects of youth and families by offering skills training and work experience so that workers can be full participants in the recovery that will eventually come.

more

“I think we have got to do everything that we can to get a public option so that is absolutely something ... somebody can and should do,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), who caucuses with Democrats.

Sanders said liberals have not decided who would offer such an amendment. However, Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) led a petition drive to get Senators to sign a letter pledging their support for it. The Progressive Change Campaign Committee, which has been tracking the letter signatories and Member statements, projects 41 firm votes in favor of the public option.

Sanders said he believes supporters will have the votes when the amendment comes up. “I can’t swear it to you, but I do think we can,” Sanders said. “I think that some people for whatever reason choose not to sign a letter but will vote. Yeah, I think we’ve got it.”

Despite Sanders’ declaration, it remains to be seen whether any public option amendment can be written in a way that will allow it to pass with 51 votes. If provisions of the amendment do not meet strict reconciliation rules that require every piece to have a budgetary impact, the amendment might have to overcome a 60-vote point of order — a feat that is nearly impossible to achieve.

link

Single-payer aside, Sanders chalks up the difficulty Democrats have had passing health care to a mistaken belief about party unity when reform efforts kicked off.

"The major error Democrats undertook was to assume we had 60 votes or even 59," he said. "We never had that."

link

Give Me a Break

March 10, 2010

The Senate on Wednesday passed a bill to extend through the end of the year unemployment insurance and help make health care coverage affordable. It passed overwhelmingly, although some senators voiced dire warnings about the deficit. Indeed, as Senator Bernie Sanders has said, the projected $1.6 trillion budget deficit is a very serious problem. It must be addressed. He has suggested ways to do so. He has called out deficit hawk phonies, however, who conveniently forget their deficit qualms when they want to eliminate the estate tax on American’s most fortunate families, for example. In Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal, Sanders accused the paper’s editorial page of the same kind of double talk. “Let me get this straight,” he wrote to the Journal. “You oppose a $250 one-time payment for seniors struggling to cope with spiraling health-care costs during the first year since 1975 that there will be no Social Security cost-of-living adjustment, but you barely batted an eye when Congress sank $700 billion into a bailout for Wall Street bankers.

“You liked the Bush tax breaks for the wealthy so much that you derided the worry warts ‘spooked by the charge of deficit spending,” he continued in the letter to the Journal. “You have been an unabashed cheerleader for ending the estate tax on the country's most fortunate families, without a peep of protest about digging us all deeper into debt. You back the unpaid for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan that are costing trillions of dollars.

“Give me a break,” he concluded.

“Give me a break,” indeed. Just look at who voted against TANF and the http://senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=111&session=2&vote=00036">$250 emergency benefit for seniors. President Obama isn't up for re-election in 2010. It makes no sense to continue pretending he controls the legislative branch.

If members of Congress were hearing outrage from people at a frequency they couldn't ignore, that would be one thing. I doubt that is happening.

[flyarm]

186. The president it the leader of the fucking party..you don't get that yet? eom

[ProSense]

196. Clue:

Congress introduces legislation in committee and commits them to votes in the full Senate or House. Obama does not contol that process. He can do whatever it takes to influence individual Senators, but the bottom line is the Senate has to come to a consensus and each member is responsible for his or her vote. People get a kick out progressives who hold out, and in fact want them to stand their ground and refuse to compromise. It isn't so much fun or useful when the person holding out is Lieberman or Nelson.

It's easy to fan bullshit outrage. For example, who cares if the President advocates bipartisanship? Seriously, who the hell cares? Many the key bills that have passed garnered no Republican support, and on the threshold of each vote, not a single person expected them to.

The amount of energy wasted on the President's appeal for bipartisanship, which works to the Democrats' advantage, is nothing short of ludicrous. Which Senator is going to bring a public option to the floor?

[saracat]

269. 41 so far say they want it .If they can get fifty they can pass it despite the president.

Oddly it seems they can possibly get a PO in "spite of" the president.You really think that the president does nothing but "influence"? His office writes legislation and submits it. I know folks who do that.And as head of the party , guess what? The President can twist arms about funding various races. If certain folks don't play ball, they can be cut. And unfortunately , those who want a PO were the ones being threatened.The President also has the bully pulpit and he hasn't been using it for the Public Option.The presidency has a lot of power.That is why people want the job. It isn't merely an office that makes suggestions.
You hold everyone else responsible for their actions but the president. He also is individually responsible and his actions and lack of action have in no small way contributed to this debacle.

[No Elephants]

353. No, Presidents originate bills, too. They don't formally introduce them in Congress, but they do

get someone else to do so. And, yes, the POTUS and head of the Democratic Partty exerts a lot of control over Democrats in Congress. Not 1005 control over every Rep and Senator, but a lot. Look how fast he got Congress to vote down re-importation of drugs from Canada, for example. This idea the Obama just washed his Democratic Congress and can't do a thing with it is the bullshit, not the anger of peope who feel betrayed.

Obama never introduced a bill with a public option and never fought for it. Oh, sure, there was lip serice to public option while also calling it an unimportant sliver, but he never fought for it. It is obvious to most people that the deals were made with Big Health Insurance and others in Big Health in the early months after the Inauguration. And they manifested. And Obama just could not praise Baucus enough for passing a health insurance industry written bill.

The one thing I agree with you on is that "bipartisanship" is a red herring. It has nothing to do with anything. It is a distraction.

[Captain Hilts]

356. You are IGNORANT on this issue. Members of Congress act as conduits for legislation written by WH.

[Cherchez la Femme]

328. Naw...

not when there's other excuses!

[TankLV]

168. Count me as one of them.

They ignore and ridicule us, yet they keep cowtowing to the repukes and conservadem assholes - and they are STILL wondering why we act this way!!!

GET A FUCKING CLUE ALREADY!!!

[flyarm]

187. +1 eom

[Romulox]

172. Donna Brazile is as "New" Democrat as ever there was...she wouldn't know a "liberal base"...nt

[WilliamPitt]

176. Then we will get what we deserve n/t

[ShamelessHussy]

232. did we get what we deserved? or is that next time we won't get it

again?

reminds me of a sign I saw in a bar the other day "Free Beer, Tomorrow" when you come in the next day the sign reads the same, so there is never no free beer... until tomorrow.

[lonestarnot]

188. No time for a wake-up call.

[BrklynLiberal]

190. It is sad if they are not paying attention to what the people who elected them are saying...

VERY, VERY sad...and I have heard several people I know who went out stomping for Obama saying that they might stay home, or at best, vote third party, if things did not change. That is scary shit!!!!

[Divine Discontent]

244. I am one of them. I said months ago that unless he miraculously started behaving like the guy on

the campaign trail that I voted for, excitedly, then they can kiss re-election goodbye. I will pull myself out of interest in paying attention to politics ever again if he continues down this capitulation centrist BS that has a solid majority of the "active" base (the ones who raise money, give money, make calls, and drive people to polls) disengaged in the next election cycle, due to their, in essense, mocking our attempts to be a part of the change as being "f*cking re(arded".

[olegramps]

193. I read up a bit on how FDR handled Social Security.

I think that President Obama should have taken a page out of FDR's strategy. He had the plan drawn up by a commitee with diverse expertise and presented to congress while at the same time he addressed the citizens and gained their support. Many Republicans were opposed to the plan, but only a minimal number voted against it with many choosing not to cast a vote. The entire process only took a few months. Obama's bipartisan strategy has resulted in a protracted process in which those opposed to the plan were enabled to destroy universal support by launching a propaganda campaign to absolutely distort its merits. By not putting forth a simple plan, FDR's consisted of a few pages, he allowed the opposition to create a monstrosity of thousands of pages while distorting its value to gain opposition from misinformed citizens.

[asdjrocky]

194. Disengaged?

That's a nice way of putting it. I'm just gone, plain gone.

[Name removed]

198. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[asdjrocky]

201. That's so silly.

I'm not working against anything, I'm working for the People.

That's the side I'm on. You really are a piece of work, you know.

[paulk]

206. maybe it's all subjective, and Brazile certainly could be guilty of

that in her opinion, but I do know that I've seen a change among the core circle of my friends out here in the real world. I've even been surprised at the vehemence directed at Obama by some of these folks - people whose rabid support of him during the primaries put some strain on our relationship (as I didn't support him).

I think it's because they feel betrayed - they felt (or were led to feel) that Obama was far more of a liberal than he actually is. So when he acts like a moderate/conservative, their anger is perhaps magnified by that feeling of betrayal.


maybe Brazile is wrong - it's something I hope to find out at the March 16 caucus - it will be interesting to see if the kids who flooded our caucus for Obama last time around ahow up and are still engaged politically.

[Swagman]

207. America-do not give into this garbage. Do not be rattled by them

corporate media shills and phonies

[happygoluckytoyou]

208. OBAMA IS LEARNING.... AND THAT IS GOOD FOR PROGRESSIVES....

we need to keep up the pressure AND THE SUPPORT for Obama.

he is beginning to CONFRONT thr republicans.... his statement about the SupremeCourt decision..... his HEALTH SUMMIT to expose republican malaise.....

HE TRIED BIPARTISANSHIP..... which was an HONORABLE THING TO DO.....

he also has recognized that GOP doesn't want a PARTNERSHIP.....

-------------please do not give up hope yet...... DEMOCRATS NEED YOUR 2010 SUPPORT family and friends alike....

let's try to give the PRESIDENT...... OUR PRESIDENT...... a chance to make this work

THE GOP WOULD LIKE NOTHING BETTER THAN A DEMOCRAT IMPLOSION.....

----------------i am at this moment sending the 2010 NOTE TO MY FRIENDS AND FAMILY.... REGISTER..... VOTE.....

[Crowman1979]

210. I just hope voters don't go into the two-party pendulum BS as in every election.

I'm picking a third party. Screw both of those corporately held political subsidiaries.

[bvar22]

215. Gee, who coulda predicted...

...that letting Joe Lieberman write the Health Care Reform Bill woulda pissed off so many Democrats?:shrug:

"We have come to a clear realization of the fact that true individual freedom cannot exist without economic security and independence. “Necessitous men are not free men.” People who are hungry and out of a job are the stuff of which dictatorships are made.

In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

The right of every family to a decent home;

The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being.

America’s own rightful place in the world depends in large part upon how fully these and similar rights have been carried into practice for our citizens."--FDR

[defendandprotect]

218. Agree -- but the thing that concerns me is that liberals/progress will not stick together ...

we need to stick together to figure out something to do and to continue

to fight for justice and the ideals of democracy!!

[ananda]

219. No, it's the other way around.

Obama and many Dems have turned against the people,
what with being corporate shills and trying so hard
to be "bipartisan."

[obamajunkie]

229. another msm lie

lmaoooo


this article is very funny

got me laughin

[tango-tee]

245. Your moniker about sums it up.

Go sleep it off.

[AllyCat]

230. You don't say. Gibbs is an idiot

[Jefferson23]

231. I doubt Obama has much concern about this. I suspect he will

remind his base that not voting him for POTUS will bring another Roberts to the court.

Vote for me progressives, you still need me!!!!

[Cherchez la Femme]

331. How much you wanna bet

that if he appoints a new Supreme Court Justice he'll go the "bipartisan" (and we all know what that means!) route instead of, if not a liberal then at least left-of-center

--wait, does that phrase mean much anymore???

[Jefferson23]

362. Nah, I wouldn't bet on what Obama will or won't do, lol. I'd probably lose!

But I want very much to be wrong about him, but at this point, I would say that the SCOTUS threat is for one, a real threat for Democrats. The prospect of another Roberts or Alito is a valid reason for people who even though they are deeply disappointed with him on key issues, will vote for him again regardless.



And you may be right, he could go all centrist on the court nominee.

[EndElectoral]

236. I'm afraid Brazile is correct

As a Progressive I come in contact with many others. There is a sense of betrayal among many of them - to big business, to an escalation of war in Afghanistan, but primarily to the capitulation on health care. The lack of really pushing for a Medicare for All single payer approach. Most told me they would have rather seen the bill voted on last March or April on the merits of the bill, and move on. Most beleive the resistance by the Republicans to a single payer approahc would have actually strengthened Democrats in the mid-terms, but the long trend of capituation after capitulation and the allowing of lobbyists to entrench themselves was a mistake. The town hall idea was a disaster which allowed wingnuts to organize and let the media create a picture of massive dissent against health care reform has made us always on the Defensive rather than on the Offense.

It's sad because Obama is such a marvelous speaker. He just has not been able to get those fence sitters in Congress to bend, and instead got caught up in some notion of bipartisaship, and began giving away the store to insurance lobbyists who paid off moderate Dems.

I'm afraid Gibbs is just putting on a non-chalant face and there is panic behind the doors. It is now not about a good bill, but about any bill being passed.

[donco6]

237. We just had an FAC, and they're ALL fed up.

The most popular comment was, "I just scraped my Obama sticker off after he applauded the RI teachers' firings."

[Skittles]

239. disengaged? more like disgusted

[Divine Discontent]

246. ha! true. only disengaged on election day. disgusted at this point. not sure how he thought this

would work out. I mean the president. Being a centrist when you would think he's totally not a centrist. and having that jerk as his staff mgr doesn't help much, does it? They're doing the GOP work for them.

[dflprincess]

240. So what if the liberals are "disengaged" Rahmn made it clear they don't need us

However, it will be our fault if 2010 and 2012 don't go so well.

Go figure.

[CakeGrrl]

253. Well, it's pretty simple. The Republicans are primed and ready to take everything back

if Progressives and Liberals don't think it matters either way.

[Cherchez la Femme]

334. I don't think it's Progressives & Liberals who don't

think it matters either way -- I think it's the White House that thinks that.

[change_notfinetuning]

260. Let me be clear! The honeymoon is over and I'm thinking of getting a divorce.

Too many broken promises, like hanging around with the very people he admitted were bad influences. Not just hanging with them - he's conspiring with them to put me down, humiliate me, and screw me every way possible. And when they laugh at me, he ignores my pain. All those sweet nothings were just that - NOTHING! He doesn't respect me. Why should I respect him? I've about had it. I'm packing my bags, hoping with all hope that he still wants to make it work, by honoring his words. But I'm no Charlie Brown, and I'm not running up to that football ever again.

Hope springs eternal if you'll just show me the change.

[HughMoran]

267. Easy to say, difficult to prove

Polls certainly don't show this, so I'm not sure how they measure this.

I will say that the bitter people here on DU aren't helping any. No matter how many times we're asked to "roll up our sleeves" and help is the number of times a bitter majority spit in his face. Go ahead, add fuel to the fire, I could care less - we all want a resurgent Republican Party with their Tea Klux Klan telling us what to think and who we can talk to.

[angelicwoman]

273. 42% of republicans are "very enthusiastic." 24% of dems are

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/09/democrats-lead-on-generic-house-ballot-but-gop-has-the-enthusi/

[Name removed]

275. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Arkana]

283. Nope.

Gallup shows 89% support from self-identified "Liberal Democrats" for Obama between March 1-7. Unless anything dramatically changed in the last 4 days, this is crap.

[neuvocat]

277. Not a single liberal will vote GOP

or stay at home during election time and risk a return to the Bush era.

[slay]

288. Wrong

There are two schools of thought on this. One - we continue to let the Dems lie to us and do the bidding of the corporate elite behind our backs, or we let the republicans do it out in the open. With the Dems a true revolution is actually harder because for some reason people actually think the Dems might actually fix/change things - HA! At least with the Republicans things will get so bad so fast that revolution could happen a lot sooner. While you are right about one thing - I will NOT vote republican, I will however stay home and not vote. I wish I hadn't voted for Obama. I really do. He has extended the patriot act, he's escalated the war in Afghanistan, bailed out bankers, is too busy trying to be "bi-patisan" to get anything done, NEVER stood up for single-payer, never held the Bush admin accountable for shit, etc, etc, etc. Is this what I would have voted for? HELL NO! So why, unless I'm a sucker, would I continue to vote for a party that is sooooo far removed from how I (and most others) feel Democrats should act? The answer is - I shouldn't. If we continue to elect corporate Dems like Obama, than that is all that will ever be offered to us.

What's the new Democratic slogan these days - "We're better than the Bush era - but just barely." Screw that. If I vote for something, then I want to vote for SOMETHING and not just a bunch of lies, and not just against McCain.

Unless Obama turns things around and becomes a LOT more progressive in the next couple of years (won't happen), then I will indeed be sitting out the 2012 elections, or voting for a 3rd party. Politics has become insanity and I refuse to continue to play their game where they OWN both parties. You do realize the Dems are owned just like the repubs are right?

And I'm not the only one who's gonna stay home - not just in 2012, but 2010. True liberals are PISSED. Obama betrayed us when we needed a strong leader most. If this is the best we can do after 8 horrible years of Bush, you're damn right I'll just stay home until we have some real, progressive Dems on the ticket. :mad:

[county worker]

306. That's called cutting off your nose to spite your face.

You just said it, "let the republicans do it out in the open"

[slay]

308. Oh I've heard your arguement for the last 20+years

and I choose to fight for what I believe in rather than accept the status quo. The Dems are fucking us already, so why not have the republicans do it out in the open? At least they are open about it and don't lie to us the way the Dems do. I have hopes for the Dems, I have no hope for the republicans so I don't feel that sense of anger or betrayal when repubs screw me - it's expected. My first choice would of course be to elect good progressive Dems. But I am done voting for Dems like Obama who betray us. You are of course free to continue to support the status quo. :hi:

If Republicans get elected, a revolution will occur faster because we all know they suck and people can only stand so much suck before they rise up and say enough is enough (at least I hope so!) The Dems only half suck, but (god forbid) I - as in ME PERSONALLY - I - want Dems that DON'T suck. Perhaps that is too much to ask in a nation full of bigotry, hatred, and well, not so bright people. Oh yeah capitalism is part of the problem too. (Just thought I'd throw that in there in case someone else wants to argue with me).

[Cherchez la Femme]

335. No?

I'm sick and tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. From now on, I either vote for who represents what I truly believe in or I don't vote at all.

And the results will NOT be my, or others like me, fault.

It's called Morality. Not the KKKristian brand, but the true kind.

[No Elephants]

358. Two words: Scott Brown. Plenty of Massachusetts liberals stayed home.

[sabrina 1]

363. Many will, but it's Independts that are the biggest problem

right now. They are also disappointed and unlike Liberals, have no loyalty to either party. Add to their numbers, the liberals who DO stay away, and it means real trouble for Democrats in the Fall.

Otoh, it could all be turned around if Obama and the Dems did what the people want, include a strong PO in the HC Bill and push it through using reconciliation.

That would get the enthusiasm back. Passage of the bill the way it is will not be viewed as a victory by liberals, but as a bailout for the Ins. Industry. Passage of a bill with a PO would be a huge victory and would rekindle the excitement about and commitment to a continuation of a Democratic Majority.

I have no doubt that the Dems know this. So why will they not do it? I think the answer is clear, they are bought and paid for just the other party.

[laughingliberal]

284. Rec nt

[Dinger]

286. "Silenced" Is More Like It

It sucks.

[MissDeeds]

290. I'm more than 'disengaged'

I'm fired up and ready to go for a primary challenger. Obama is a huge disappointment. I had doubts about him from the get-go, and voted for him only because my first, second, and third choices lost the primaries, but I never believed he'd be such a weak, pathetic excuse for a Democrat. What a waste. The party had the opportunity to elect a president who could turn this country around and undo some of the damage that had been done by 8 years of rethug rule, instead we get this. And we're stuck with him until 2012.

:argh:

[louis-t]

292. "taking liberals for granted is 'folly'"

The first step toward recovery is admitting you have a problem.

[husky92]

298. They're Toast

I am a life-long progressive and was so enthused when Obama took office, but am now so disillusioned with what has transpired that I think the Democrats are in for a long night in November. I hate to even think about this, but I think so many Democrats reverted back to their "save their asses" mode that all of the things they talked about are just about DOA. Instead of standing up for what many believed in so many got spooked by the likes of Beck, Hannity, Fat-Boy Rush and the Tea Partiers that they backed off, fearing losing their cushy posts in the Senate and House. Too many showed they have no cojones. I'm sick and tired of the right driving everyone's thinking with their load of misinformation. Fox and right-wing radio has polluted the airwaves with non-truths and fear. They appeal to the masses of people that can't think for themselves and the Democrats let them do it. Look back at the last year. It's been a non-stop stream of fear mongering and misinformation being fed to the American people. Obama made no effort to stand up and call their bluff on healthcare. Screw bipartisanship. He should have figured that out in the first month. These scumbags wanted no part of it. Now it may be too late to salvage anything. Young people and independents wanted change, not talk of change. It seems like all we're getting is more of the same. When people start talking about longing for the Bush-Cheney days, you know we (Democrats) are in deep trouble.

[NoFace]

375. The tell-take beginning to 95% of the conservative troll posts I've ever seen posted anywhere.

"I was a life long hardcore socialist, but ever since Obama's second week in office I've totally changed my entire political compass."

Pfffffftftftft.


Try again.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

391. Yeah, I'm a "conservative troll" who has been on DU since the month after

it was founded, and who stood outside in subzero weather in 1981 to demonstrate against Reagan's visit to Minnesota.

(Rule #6 "There is no rule #6. Rule #7 "If you have no logical comeback, accuse the poster of being a conservative troll.")

[brentspeak]

410. Bye-bye, loser n/t

[RedCloud]

305. We thought we had righted America after the JFK murder, but no, Pastor Rick was regaled.

Obama showed his true colors on inauguration day. We had been played for fools. He didn't care about righting injustices. And his one full year wasted kissing resentful Republican ass is an absolute OBAMA-NATION!

[Triana]

307. Imagine that. Gee. I wonder why.

Pfft. President BIPARTISANSHIP has blown our only decent chance to have HEALTH CARE reform - among other things.

[Bluebear]

310. "The bill I sign MUST include the public option."

[Libertas1776]

314. Obama

has effectively disenfranchised a whole another generation of young Americans from voting. It was bad enough when after all that rock the vote, vote or die garbage in 2004 and Bush still won. Its even worse when that garbage actually worked and Obama was elected, and was so fucking similar to the last fucker. So come '12, you can tell me to vote or die but i ain't voting, at least not for Obama. That ship has long sailed.

[slay]

321. I must add a sad +1

is sad that a whole new generation got energized that we really could make a difference - only to have Obama destroy that notion. People are pretty close to correct when calling this Bush's 3rd term - patriot act extended, escalating war in Afghanistan, I could go on and on. I will NEVER vote for anyone who even seems like they MIGHT be a corporate Dem. As far as I'm concerned, unless Obama becomes super-progressive between now and 2012 (won't happen) I plan on either staying home, or voting 3rd party. I NEVER would have voted for Obama if I had known he was going to be this bad. Hope and change my ass! :( :cry:

[Libertas1776]

323. yeah its sadly true

though, come election day I will still vote, but for a 3rd party. there's no way i am voting for him again. At least i can retain some semblance of my dignity instead of pretending that if i don't vote to reelect him the world will end. He's not getting reelected on his on doing, not mine.

[LatteLibertine]

317. I may not vote GOP

and it's possible I may not vote at all. IMO it's way too early to abandon President Obama. I'm going to support him for his the rest of his term then decide if further support is warranted. I'm uncertain what will happen with President Obama, I know what happens if Republicans return to power. It's true there are corporatist sellouts in both parties and the Democrats are the lesser of two evils IMO. They are more likely to support beneficial social programs and to oppose; racist and homophobic agendas.

Doing all that work to get President Obama in office then robbing him of his political power by helping to collapse public support via relentless negative criticism seems silly to me. Working in a positive manner to effect legislation is fine. If there's something you want done you need to help build public support then direct those voices at your appropriate representatives. In addition, that support can be directed at reluctant Democrats to influence them.

Bottom line, large corporations and the most wealthy do have the money and we have the numbers, ie votes. We can "fire" our politicians. Wall Street doesn't have the votes to keep folks in.

[rooftoprevolutionary]

325. his base has every right to be disappointed

just like every american, regardless of political affiliation. both parties are a disappointment to the people. this november, many people i have spoken to feel like they don't know who to vote for because nobody is giving them what they want and deserve.
we have to do better, as a people, as a nation.

[defendandprotect]

336. Grayson in 2012 . . . ???

I'd love to see a list of other names . . .

Love Bernie Sanders, but presume he's not big "D" Democratic enough?

In fact, he's more small "d" democratic than many Democrats!!

[BlueCollar]

337. no shit? Who woulda thunk...n/t

[BlueCollar]

340. No shit...who woulda thunk?...n/t

[NoFace]

373. Maybe: No! Shit who woulda? (thunk),,,n/t

[NoFace]

374. Or: no Shit-who. woulda? coulda? Thunk....n/t

Thunk!

Thunk Thunk!

[plantwomyn]

402. NoFace and NO response

"Please tell me the horrible things he has done and I'll try my best to give you my informed response to them."
Well I told you the horrible thing he has done. Read 185.
Now that you have returned to the conversation with your pithy post, maybe you can give us the "informed response" you promised.

[LaPera]

357. As a liberal I know Obama has little or nothing to offer people like myself......

Obama has never really pushed for the Public Option, Obama won't fight for easier access for unions & workers - Employee Free Choice Act.

Climate change, electronic voting machines, and uncensored Internet access, stopping the wars for profit, closing Guantanamo & cutting the trillion dollar a year Pentagon budget in favor of domestic needs, a free & fair media, regulations on corporations, strong & free public education and making corporate polluters & cleanup & fined...are just a few very important issues that liberals care deeply about and we know Obama will do little to fight for us to achieve them....

So why should we support him?

As long as corporate moderate DLC asshole Rahm Emanuel has influence as chief adviser to president Obama -

Obama will never have anything to offer his liberal base, he'll continue to only caters to moderates like himself who lean right and the republicans and their corporations (as Rahm favors)...95% of all corporations & multinationals are republican supporting.

Liberal are for the progressive rights for the people and workers....Which seems to bore the DLC types that are in power in the executive branch....They like the corporate money far too much to ever be progressive!

[No Elephants]

360. I'm not disengaged. To the contrary, I am fired up about getting real liberals into office. No

more DLC, Third Way, New Democrats, Blue Dogs or their ilk. I will work to get every one of them out of office. And, I am going to listen a lot more carefully to candidates in the future. If they're from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party, fine. Otherwise, tell your story walking.

[hulka38]

361. Wait until people realize the public option was never part of the plan.

[ejbr]

364. k & r n/t

[NRaleighLiberal]

377. It isn't all Obama's fault- it is a collective failure of many. My family is certainly demotivated.

It hasn't driven me any further toward the GOP or away from Democratic principles. It has driven us away from politics as a whole and has made a cynical family much more cynical. Kudos to the media for abetting the process as well.

Capitalism has reached its limits. SElf regulation doesn't work. Criminals (BushCo et al) have been allowed to walk. Two of my daughters NEED health care.

So the system is broken (perhaps permanently).

[jillan]

380. Oh my. November is a LONG time away - jeez!

[DuaneBidoux]

382. File this under "No Shit Sherlock"

[meowomon]

383. Robert Gibbs thinks we don't know we are taken for granted

and are dismissed so easily. This is exactly why the Democrats are going to lose big time. I am disgusted by him. He needs to go. He doesn't do President Obama any favors by treating the liberals like a piece of hair he found in his Big Mac.

[Gman]

384. If you court the flakes, you have a base full of flakes

that can't be counted on. That's what Obama did.

[RainDog]

400. wtf? so, African-Americans are flakey?

care to back up this statement with anything approaching reality?

[Vidar]

387. Recommended.

[Toasterlad]

404. Wrong. We DIdn't Turn On Him. He Abandoned Us.

What happens in November will be the Democrats own fault, as will what happens in 2012.

[superconnected]

414. +1

[Joey Liberal]

409. Not disengaged - Just not happy nt

[newspeak]

412. What's really disturbing is to have these neo-con spewers, the MSM and

teabaggers proclaiming Obama is a socialist--because no way in hell is Obama a socialist unless it's a corporatist socialist. They keep "catapulting the propaganda" to the truly gullible--and it disturbs me by those who buy into their shite "hook, line and sinker." Obama has done everything he can to appease repukes and they still attempt to portray him as a liberal. We know he's no liberal, but the danger lies in the influence of the media to make him seem so. And, as millions of Americans are drowning, I can see those who have bought into the "deregulation is good" "greed is good" "corporations are our friends" "privatizing is good, government is bad" "liberty means predatory capitalism"; sinking the boat (public aid) because they are real Americans, by God, and they can swim without the help of a life raft. I don't think I have ever witnessed such blatant propaganda, than I have for the last nine years. Even during Poppy we had some real journalists left who put their lives on the line (and some died to expose the truth).

[Joey Liberal]

415. Well put, newspeak;)........... nt