Yeah, I've been critical of much of what Obama has done. Here's why--

[Jackpine Radical]

I campaigned for, voted for, and contributed money to Obama despite the fact that he's a long way to the right of where I wish our party was. Electing him was far preferable to allowing Willard and Queen Ann to assume the throne. I think I put more money into Democratic candidates, including Obama, than I have ever done before. The Supreme Court and all that, plus contributing to an environment that permitted the election of people like Elizabeth Warren, Tammy Baldwin & Alan Grayson.

I sure as hell wasn't about to piss away whatever small difference I could make by making a Quixotic third-party gesture.

That was the first part of my civic duty as I see it.

The second part is to hold Obama's center-right feet to the fire, to make my views known, and to promulgate progressive policies. I can't very damn well do that without being critical of him. If people like me shut up, the only voices heard in Washington will be centrist sycophants and critics from the right.

I'll gladly cheerlead when he does the right things, and he has done many.

But don't expect me to nod & smile while we tighten up the Security State, give Murdoch control of the American news media, harass medical marijuana industry while letting banksters skate because they're too big to prosecute, and jail whistleblowers while pursuing the ends of Empire.


If that makes me disloyal, or something other than a Democrat, so be it.

[TheMastersNemesis]

1. I Am With You On This Matter.

Obama has simply continued too many old Bush policies that he could have killed on the spot. He has acted too third way on too many issues. And he has not fully supported unions. His policies on unions and in particular support of public employees has been half hearted at best. The Employee Free Choice Act has never been even mentioned much less acted upon.

What is most bothersome is that he has put forth anything that cuts Social Security like the CPI. It should have never been brought up. And in the latest negotiations he is showing weakness in his continued delusions about bipartisanship. All we have gotten from such a stance is moving backwards.

We always seem to be faced with nothing but bad and worse choices the way things are falling. This fiscal debt crisis is just another example of the choices. In the end we will lose ground again.

We may not be moving backward, but we certainly are NOT moving forward in any progressive way. For some reason Obama seems to be ok with the status quo.

Obama's biggest mistake is appointing Arne Duncan and continuing Bush's education policies. And Obama has essentially abandoned teachers in the process. AND THIS MISTAKE IS AS BAD AS CLINTON PUSHING NAFTA. In the end our school system will be delivered to the right wing and fundy churches.

[Lifelong Protester]

9. I could not agree more with the statement on the Arne Duncan appointment

HUGE MISTAKE, I feel public education as a right for ALL, with an equal (not competitive Race to the Top BS) distribution of what aid we can give for ALL children to succeed, is receding into the past.

[Dustlawyer]

20. Ever wonder why he acts out of character sometimes? It is b/c some of that campaign money

came with a price! We need complete campaign finance reform to have representative democracy again! They scare us with clowns like Rmoney to make Obama seem better than he is! I appreciate all of the good he has done, but he still gives the powers that be much of what they want! Imagine how much could be done if they were not fund raising all of the time. When we desperately need jobs, but all we hear about is abortion, guns ... Don't get me wrong, they are all issues that are important, but in a list of national priorities they do not rank with our economy and environment now! If we had a truly representative government, do you think they would be keeping the Patriot Act and making our loss of rights permanent! Join me in demanding COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFFORM (CCFR)!!!

[CrispyQ]

54. The corruption & rot in our electoral process is a huge part of our problem.

Big money, electronic voting, the media's need for drama & ad revenue, it's all a putrid affair. The representatives are basically in campaign mode every moment of their term. The day after this election the media was asking if Marco Rubio being in Iowa was him throwing his hat in the ring -- for an election FOUR YEARS FROM NOW!

All this & the biggest voting segment in the country is the non-voters.

The foxes are guarding the hen house.

[lexw]

119. I like that! Thanks!

[nolabels]

125. This should be a bumper sticker

It's one where you have to look at it for a second or so, even with the the information that so simple

[jerseyjack]

103. Nonsense, Dustlawyer.

He ain't running again. He could fuck them over as quickly as he fucks over his base. And he could do it with no consequences.

[DrewFlorida]

27. While I can understand you voicing your criticism of Obama,

keep in mind if he was much further to the left he would not have been elected!
I personally am dissappointed we didn't get 1payer healthcare done in the first part of 2009, I see that as a huge failing on Obama's part. Given everything Obama has had to deal with and the obstructionism of the republicans I am overall quite happy with his performance and I choose to support the progressive issues he is making an effort to advance.

I do understand your point of view, but in this world at this time Obama is the best we could hope for even if he doesn't meet the needs of everyone, unfortunately we have approximately 50% wackjob rightwingers in the U.S. making it difficult for him to make even a little bit of progress.

[Jackpine Radical]

79. Yes, the Art of the Possible.

So I'd like to see how far left it's "Possible" to push the policy.

[DrewFlorida]

88. I can agree with that!

[cui bono]

80. No, the people are much further to the left.

Obama is where Reagan was.

And I don't think the extreme right is 50% of this country and actually, the election shows that since Obama got 51% of the popular vote. I think the appearance of that is there since the media gives the extreme right full coverage and the extreme left absolutely zero coverage. They don't even give the regular left any coverage to speak of. Look at the difference in sizes of the Tea Party and OWS and also the anti-war protest of the Bush years then look at the amount of coverage each got. Completely disproportional.

This is why people have that impression but it's really not correct, it's just that the information we are allowed to see/hear is slanted to make us believe that.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

129. "Be realistic! Demand the impossible!"

Brought to you by the 1968 Paris anarchists.

[JDPriestly]

29. Excellent summary.

I think we should start looking for a good, young, progressive candidate. Someone dynamic who is compassionate and attractive to a wide range of people. Someone with a good family life (like Obama), someone whose character will withstand the glare of the media spotlight. Someone who is sincere, forward-looking and has good ideas. In short, not just a person with high ideals, but also a person who is appealing to a broad cross-section of Americans.

And we should start organizing around that person.

Any names? Should we start our own group to identify potential candidates?

One problem is that while we may have a friend or someone in a state office who is really a potential president, that person probably won't get media attention if a liberal.

So we need to exchange names and talk about people we know who might fit the bill. There may be a member of Congress from your state that I haven't heard much about who would be treat.

What is the story on Tammy Duckworth for example?

Is Kirsten Gillibrand a progressive or just another right-winger in Democratic disguise? Who are the young possibilities? And they do have to be young. Campaigning is brutal. Takes an enormous physical stamina.

I would not want to see us fielding a Democratic McCain. Someone whose fatigue shows after a few hours of shaking hands, giving speeches and drinking lukewarm coffee. That was part of Romney's problem. He had never really worked hard physically, and it showed after he campaigned a few hours. We just cannot afford that.

[pscot]

45. I could vote fo Gillibrand or Warren

And I agree with your general thesis. I think your last graph rules out Hillary. She's aged 10 years as Secretary of State, and her health is now an issue. We need someone with the personal charm of Bill Clinton and the ideals of Manny Goldstein.

[Jackpine Radical]

62. Third-Way Manny has ideals?

Who knew?

[JDPriestly]

70. Does anyone know what Gillibrand stands for? How does she present?

Warren is without question a possibility, but she is also in her 60s I believe. We need someone younger to run for president. Just running is grueling. Exhausting. People's heads start to spin after some months of it. We need someone with the physical power to run the race to the finish.

[pscot]

77. I admire Gillibrand.

I was pretty skeptival when Paterson appointed her, but she's smart and she seems willing to stand up on controversial issues. Courage is in short supply in Washington. It seems like Cuomo will run. He scares me. As a disclaimer, all I know is what I read on the intertoobs.

[tomg]

91. I was also very sceptical of Gillibrand

when she was appointed. She won in the traditionally conservative NY 20th and she was - at best - a moderate democrat. In fact she was a member of the blue dogs. I honestly expected more of the same as senator. Since she has been in the Senate, however, she has been great. I have loved being wrong about her. She is one of the most outspoken, unabashedly liberal dems. If it is true that Cuomo will run, I would love to see her go up against Cuomo and kick his ass in.

[CrispyQ]

46. Brian Schweitzer.

I like the guy & I think he has broad appeal.

Someone on CNN commented that the dems might have a bit of a problem in '16 if the candidate is a white male. Their reasoning was that Obama's being black fired up the minority base. It will be interesting to see who shakes out on both sides. I would really like to see a serious third party contender that splits the repub party in two.

[napi21]

120. I LOVE Brian!

I'm a long way from his State, and I'd vote for him for President if he decided to run. THe problem I see if that he doesn't want the job! He's been asked several times if he would run for higher office, and he said he loved the job he has. He never wears a suit, takes his dog to work every day, and love his State. I don't see him changing his mind.

[CrispyQ]

133. I fell in love with him when I read this quote many years ago:

"I have a 72-hour rule. If I stay in Washington for more than 72 hours, I have to bathe myself in the same stuff I use when one of my dogs gets into a fight with a skunk -- stuff to get the smell out."

-- Montana Gov. Brian Schweitzer


Maybe we could appeal to his civic nature - Your country needs you Brian!

[brush]

112. Real reality politics

As much as we like to think the President has the power to accomplish all that he/we wants by edit (not to mention all the GOP obstructionism) just remember we don’t exactly live in the United States of Altruistic Utopia. Let’s get real and understand who we are and how we are viewed in the world. We live in the United States of America, perhaps the most rapacious and imperialistic country to have arisen in history. Since 1893 when we first flexed our imperialistic muscles with a Navy gunboat and overthrew the monarchy in Hawaii at the behest of ex-pat American sugar growers who wanted free reign to operate their plantations, and on through our Cuban double cross at the end of the Spanish American War, add the Philipines, Nicaragua, Haiti, Guatemala, Panama, Dominican Republic, Honduras, Chile, Iran (helping the British to overthrow a democratically elected leader, intent on nationalizing it’s oil industry, in order to install the compliant Shah), Viet Nam, Grenada, and finally Iraq, we have extended the outrageous conceit of “Manifest Destiny” to a global scale to invade at will, occupy or foment coups in foreign lands in order to gain control of their natural resources for huge profits for our corporations like Dole, United Fruit, Standard Oil, Anaconda Mining, etc. These foreign interventions have been cloaked in the mantle of national security and furtherance of Democracy of course to sell them to ordinary Americans needed for military cannon fodder. And many of us have bought it for over a century, some of us, not so much.

But to think that one man can change our foreign policy direction, which has operated, quite frankly, basically the same under either party for decades, in three and a half years is unrealistic and naïve. I of course am not privy to foreign policy goings-on but I would think that sometime soon after a new, first-term president is inaugurated a briefing takes place where corporate and military leaders make it clear to the newby that U.S. interests (that reads “corporate” interests) will remain the direction that our foreign policy takes and any attempts to change it could be dangerous (i.e. JFK). He/she would most likely be told that he/she HAS SOME LATITUDE IN DOMESTIC POLICY like civil rights, healthcare, social issues, etc. but to steer clear of wholesale foreign policy changes and military funding cuts (war is very profitable for corporations after all).

President Obama. He is the first president that has invested in and will continue to champion green issues and perhaps move us away from having to pursue our invasive foreign policy direction towards, and let’s be clear, non-white countries, as we will develop our own domestic alternative energy sources. Other presidents to come could follow his lead

[Fantastic Anarchist]

128. Obama is NOT a progressive.

As soon as we realize that, the better.

[LWolf]

2. Nodding and smiling

while they sell the 99% down the river would be the behavior of a traitor, imo.

A traitor to the issues that shape our lives.

If that makes me unpopular, so be it.

[missingthebigdog]

37. It doesn't make you unpopular, and that's the problem

Disagreeing with the way the President is handling things is appropriate and, really, the way democracy works.

Calling him a TRAITOR because you disagree with him is obnoxious.

[LWolf]

61. I've never called

the POTUS a traitor; I hope that's not how you comprehended my post.

I don't think Obama is a traitor; I think he acts exactly the way a neoliberal/3rd way/self-identified "New" Democrat would.

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. rec.

[jimlup]

4. Well Stated!

Thank you for expressing my view as well.

[Bad_Ronald]

5. It'll probably get me another ToS violation, but K&R

I don't feel like lockstepping today.

[DevonRex]

10. Do NOT compare Jackpine Radical to that troll you agreed with who said eff Obama and the Dems.

Jackpine stated his case by discussing issues, not saying fuck the president and the majority of the membership of DU - including the administrators.

[Bad_Ronald]

13. I was thinking more along the lines of the "don't push your luck" term.

Terms of Service

<snip-a-roo>

One more thing: Don't push your luck.The DU Community Standards state: "It is the responsibility of all DU members to participate in a manner that promotes a positive atmosphere and encourages good discussions among a diverse community of people holding a broad range of center-to-left viewpoints." Members who demonstrate a pattern of disruptive behavior over time and end up getting too many of their posts hidden by the jury (measured by raw number or percentage) may be found to be in violation of our Terms of Service. If you seem to be ruining this website for a large proportion of our visitors, if we think the community as a whole would be better off without you here, if you are constantly wasting the DU Administrators' time, if you seem to oppose the mission of DU, or if the DU Administrators just don't like you, we will revoke your posting privileges. Remember: DU is supposed to be fun — don't make it suck.

********************

[Arkansas Granny]

6. Very well stated. K&R.

[Lifelong Protester]

7. I can only agree

every elected official needs to hear criticism and ideas from his/her constituents, not just 'rah rah-aren't you great?' cheerleading, if not warrented.

Heck, even FDR told a Depression-ravaged America that HE needed to be pushed, needed to be held accountable, in order to take on what he took on.

I say NO DEAL with these Republican bullies and brats. Yes, I am very sorry for those on UC. But a bad deal now will most likely harm them worse in the future, and all of our country. The Repubs can not be emboldened to think they can get whatever they want, despite being handed a decisive defeat in 2012.

[michigandem58]

8. Is he center-right or is that where the debate is framed?

I just think a lot of what he ends up agreeing to is a result of politicl realities, not what he would support given a free hand.

[Lionessa]

11. That is where he allows the policy to end up, most of the time. That's what matters.

And he gives in to those policies pretty easily furthering the impression it is by choice to end center right.

[MotherPetrie]

12. K&R MSE

[sabrina 1]

14. I don't think any democrat should have to explain why they

pressure the people they elected to stick to the principles of this party. It's a shame that you had to do so especially here, but I could not agree more with your OP. It is our civic duty to hold their feet to the fire. Anyone who objects to that doesn't understand democracy and they sure do not understand Democrats

[RC]

35. Yes, why is that?

I don't think any democrat should have to explain why they pressure the people they elected to stick to the principles of this party.

The Party should follow the wants and needs of the people. Not the other way around, as it is now.

That said, we do not elect more Center and Left of Center Democrats because we are not offered many to vote for. And those that do get on the ballot are not really supported by the Party. That is the problem in a nut shell. The Party leadership is Right of Center. That needs to change, before real progress can be made on any recovery from the damage that the bu$h Administration caused.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

75. Yes! Thank you sabrina 1.

[Blasphemer]

84. Thank you and Jackpine. It really is that simple

After Obama's first election when debates about policy ensued and posters started being relegated to "sides" with some imaginary dividing line, there were actually posters advocating blind "stay quiet and don't rock the boat" loyalty as some kind of protection against the GOP. Standing in lockstep didn't ultimately work for them and it certainly wouldn't work for Democrats and others on the left. I think agitation has been very effective and, as it turns out, the GOP did themselves in. I think we have the opportunity to achieve quite a lot of we continue to make noise.

[JaneyVee]

15. I agree, except he's center-Left not center-Right.

[RC]

38. No he ain't.

He is a corporatist and Center Right.

[woo me with science]

57. No, he is a corporatist.

Last edited Mon Dec 31, 2012, 04:58 PM - Edit history (1)

Indefinite detention, "kill lists" and drone wars, pre-emptive war as administration doctrine, spy centers for mining or surveillance of all phone calls and email and internet activity without a warrant, internet IDs and internet-censoring measures like ACTA, military drones in American skies, coordinated violent crackdowns against peaceful protesters, strip searches for any arrestee, corporate education deform, new drilling and selling off the Gulf of Mexico, job-killing free trade agreements, big agriculture appointments, bailouts and settlements for corrupt banks, using Social Security and Medicare as bargaining chips, and austerity budgets in an economy that has already impoverished its middle class.....

These are not moderate or centrist positions. Not by a long shot.

They are extreme corporatist, neocon, and police state policies, not "centrist" or moderate at all. We have a gravely serious systemic problem of corporate money, influence, and power driving policy in Washington at the expense of the people....and this problem exists in *both* parties now.

[Jackpine Radical]

63. Now, THAT's a concise list.

[tomp]

110. that democrats are involved is nothing new. nt

[Fantastic Anarchist]

131. Great post!

[MissDeeds]

16. I agree completely

Very happy to K&R

[kentuck]

17. Why do you hate America?

Why do you question our Esteemed Leaders?

[MannyGoldstein]

18. Perfect nt

[Curmudgeoness]

19. I couldn't agree more....if people... shut up,

the only voices... will be centrist sycophants and critics from the right.

I have always believed that I have to speak up when I do not agree with a certain action or direction. It does not mean that I hate the country or the president, or that I take issue with everything. It just means that I want my opinions considered in the mix.

[NCcoast]

21. Well said!

Thank you citizen.

[latebloomer]

22. Absolutely

He needs constant pushing, and even then I don't trust him to oppose the interests that keep us in constant war while neglecting human needs, and whose greed is destroying the planet.

[Cleita]

23. You speak for many of us.

Those who would shush us are either far to the right themselves or deluding themselves about where his politics lie.

[DonCoquixote]

24. Thank you

Pressure is what makes the machine work for us. I would also say that when we criticize Obama, we are the ones saying "hey Barack, let me call you a cab, the DLC lied to you about how strong those centrist cocktails were." Friends do not let friends drive after drinking dlc spiked punch, especially since we know the Koch brothers hired someone to spike it.

Granted, there are people who simply hate Barack...from those to the far left that still think Nader is a hero, to those on the right who still want Hillary,followed by Bill, followed by Chelsea. But there are those of us who simply want the right things done, and the wrong things avoided.

[Agony]

25. Yeah, right on! and Happy New Year!

[saidsimplesimon]

69. Agony, a perfect song for this thread.

I thank you.

[progressoid]

26. You know what you need?

A pony!



k/r

[Jackpine Radical]

64. Bullcrap.

I'm holding out for a unicorn.

[progressoid]

76. Or a unicorn farting rainbows and M&Ms

[cui bono]

81. Well apparently PBO could just have easily put a unicorn on the table as SS.

Yes, that's what I've been told here on DU. So perhaps you can write the WH and see if that unicorn is still there and if the girls will let you have it. Apparently it's the only one in existence.

[nolabels]

126. Unicorn(s) should never be spoken of in mixed company

[Jackpine Radical]

134. But DU isn't mixed company--

It's a dysfunctional blended family.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

28. Great! You just made the baby Abraham Lincoln cry. nt

[Buzz Clik]

30. "center right." The unintentional comedy of this place brightens up a rainy day.

Considering that nearly ever voter in the mainstream right consider Obama to be a socialist, to hear him called center right is pure comedy gold.

I get it when the hard core, extreme left gets pissed off that Obama compromises, and I agree that some of his compromises are far less than ideal.

But center right?

[JoeyT]

32. That's because they get their news from Fox.

Which is a pretty openly political arm of the Republican party, which is full of scary people. The only people they don't hate that the Nazis did is Jewish people, and if they weren't necessary for their end of the world rapture fantasies they'd hate them too.

It's hard to drum up fear among the ignorant with "Well, he's pretty moderate and values compromise above ideology on most issues. If he'd run thirty years ago, and more importantly had been white, most of you would have voted for him."

If Reagan ran now (And more importantly wasn't white) they'd consider him a socialist communist marxist Muslim atheist too.

[Jackpine Radical]

34. Where would you place the following ideas on the political spectrum?

1) A proposed Family Assistance Program (FAP), intended to replace the service-oriented Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), would provide working and nonworking poor families with a guaranteed annual income.

2) A plan that mandates employers to purchase health insurance for their employees, and provides a federal health plan, similar to Medicaid, that any American can join by paying on a sliding scale based on income.

3) Using the "peace dividend" from ending a war and reducing military expenditures to finance social welfare services and enforce civil rights through the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. so that spending on human resource services would spending for defense for the first time in many decades.


These were all policies proposed or implemented by Richard Nixon.

[Buzz Clik]

51. Yeah, excellent point.

It goes along with the "80s Moderate Republican" comment (see comment below).

Nixon also started the EPA and signed the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.

Today's center-right is way the hell right of where it was in the 1970s and 1980s.

Today's center-right considers people like McCain and Boehner to be RINOs. So, the suggestion that Obama is center right is to suggest that Obama is to the right of McCain and Boehner.

I just cannot take that seriously.

[Jackpine Radical]

65. I'm putting the spectrum in a historical perspective.

I'm 68 years old & been in this stuff since the Civil Rights marches of the early 60's, so I get to do that.

[Oilwellian]

86. Yes, today's center right is far more right than Reagan

Reagan never would have proposed a chained CPI for SS.

[Buzz Clik]

101. God, you guys are like a broken record. So tiring.

Put up a flag or something when you come up with something new or start thinking for yourself.

[sulphurdunn]

71. I was getting woud up

to inform you that Obama has never even suggested anything so progressive. And I thought Tricky Dick was a righty. I guess that's a relative term. Thanks for the comparison.

[progressoid]

39. You should tell that to the "80's moderate Republican" President.

[TheKentuckian]

56. So, you're saying a candidate perceived to be a socialist can indeed win

Good Deal! Centrist games are no longer required.

Yup, center-right unless Poppy Bush and Bob Dole were center-left too. Hell, he is to the right of either on civil liberties.

[woo me with science]

60. The policies are not even moderate. They reflect the purchase of our government by corporations.

Indefinite detention, "kill lists" and drone wars, pre-emptive war as administration doctrine, spy centers for mining or surveillance of all phone calls and email without a warrant, internet IDs and internet-censoring measures like ACTA, military drones in American skies, coordinated violent crackdowns against peaceful protesters, strip searches for any arrestee, corporate education deform, new drilling and job-killing free trade agreements, big agriculture appointments, bailouts and settlements for corrupt banks, using Social Security and Medicare as bargaining chips, and austerity budgets in an economy that has already impoverished its middle class.....

These are not moderate or centrist positions. Not by a long shot.

They are extreme corporatist, neocon, and police state policies, not "centrist" or moderate at all. We have a gravely serious systemic problem of corporate money, influence, and power driving policy in Washington at the expense of the people....and this problem exists in *both* parties now.

[markpkessinger]

105. Yes, center right . . .

. . . On domestic policy issues, somewhat to the right of Richard Nixon in fact.

And "hard core, extreme left?" Are you serious?? Where? Hell, I can barely see a Left at all, let alone a "hard core, extreme left." Please, if you know where they are, do point me in the right direction so I can join their happy band!

[shireen]

31. well said

Political leaders have to be challenged, even if they're in the same party. If they do something dumb, it's our duty to call them out on it.

The president's latest statements on social security are very disappointing. There are other solutions, like raising the caps. And our political leaders need to stop lumping social security with national debt, giving people the impression that they're linked. They are two completely separate issues.

Many current SS recipients with no other source of income are already in a tough spot. The next wave of people to enter into SS will be many that have been adversely affected by the recession. Our retirement plans have rock bottom interest rates. Oh, and the rich keep getting richer. There's still some democracy left in the system, and by creating an increasingly large body of pissed-off citizens, politicians who continue to advocate for the rich better watch their backs. (Not a threat, just a prediction, in case the secret service is monitoring post )

[geckosfeet]

33. It doesn't make you disloyal. But don't expect the owners to stand by and let you fire

broadsides at them. They know enough to be preemptive and they have minions everywhere.

[Octafish]

36. Siegelman in prison and Cheney's foreign policy did it for me.

I like the President, just wonder how much power he really holds if Just Us and War Inc are the gold standards.

[Odd Won Out]

41. Well said

Couldn't agree more

[BobbyBoring]

68. Not Much

To me, the only thing that can explain the difference between President Obama and 2008 campaigner Obama is he is doing what he is told, not what he wants to do. I think we've lost the Republic to that degree. I think the PTB told him before the Inauguration that he would end up like JFK if he kept up with the populist rhetoric. Democracy is an illusion~

[cui bono]

82. Thom Hartmann has said a couple times that Clinton was taken aside after he was

sworn in and told how things were and what he was to do. Iirc, he said Greenspan did it. I've never found anything on it though, but Hartmann is a very reliable source so I tend to believe it.

[Jackpine Radical]

93. The way I always fantisized that it happened was

just after the inauguration, some CIA types take the new President down into the basement of the White House & show him the missing parts of the Zapruder film.

[cui bono]

123. Heh heh...

You never know... sure seems like something's going on when the things that so obviously should be done aren't done.

[cornflake_31]

40. Gladly recommend.

Glad I'm not the only one that feels the same way.

[grahamhgreen]

42. No, it's what makes you a loyal Dem. Promoting R values like a chained CPI or the

RW meme of "tax cuts tax cuts tax cuts, goose" is positively UN-Dem, IMHO.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

43. The last paragraph

couldn't agree more!

The guy needs some help along the way.

[BridgeTheGap]

44. The democratic party, under the leadership of the DLC, went along

with the rightward push initiated by republicans in the late 70s/early 80s. There was a point at which the Democratic party had to make a decision: do we continue to foster a corrupt political system by participating in "campaign finance" via corporate interests(and other less consequential special interests, i.e. labor unions) or do we forsake it and explain why to the electorate? I believe it was the DLC and its apologists that pushed the party to accept legalized corruption ("we can't win without it!" was their justification). I tried to make the case that this was a futile and morally wrong path. If we (the Democratic Party) had taken the "road less traveled", the policitcal landscape of this country would be far different today. It has been said that Obama is to the right of Richard Nixon. I agree. And, yes, still preferable to the fascists and rw kranks showing up in the republican party.

[yurbud]

47. well-said. We should have a separate forum to scold people for not cheerleading

and those who find it productive to read such shit would be welcome to go.

[truedelphi]

48. And remember Jackpine r -

It happens to be New Year's Eve - so here's some dance music while we contemplate the future.

(You might enjoy it a lot):

[Jackpine Radical]

66. Wow, that's brilliant. Love it!!

Thanks!

[nightscanner59]

115. Oh, hell yes!!!

God I'm gonna raise so much hell with that video and laugh all the way there.

[jonthebru]

49. Tip O'Neill said "All politics is local."

I have been observing for the duration that "All politics is personal." There are many who seem that the President owes them what they want him to accomplish.

I personally know some of the local elected council members where I live. They have a significant amount of pressure from all sides to do what any given person or "constituency" wants. I am probably one of the few non judgmental constituents they know who actually has a handle on local politics so they can talk with me. Humbly, I state that I make a great sounding board for them.
Short of seeing real tools I can't personally second guess what the President does to keep some sort of forward momentum.
It is not perfect, he has the most intransigent congress ever to contend with. Its a fucked job, face it.



the most intransigent congress ever

Have a great New Years Celebration of your choice!

[pasto76]

50. yes it makes you other than a Dem, but not disloyal, but at least you are acknowledging that

you can be whatever you want. even died in the wool Dems wish the President would have pushed for more in his first term. But thankfully he is in for a second.

[truedelphi]

73. If it makes some of us "other than a Dem" it is only because the

Democratic Party Leadership took the party to the right of Nixon, and perhaps even Goldwater!

[ann---]

52. So have I, but

my posts were hidden. Very disappointed in this place. need a vacation from it.

[ReRe]

53. K&R...

...to Mars and back. Totally agree. I don't march to the beat of one drum, so-to-speak, but I do know exactly what I am, and that's a DEMOCRAT. If disagreeing is disloyal, then I'll be marching around in political hell with a protest sign.

[CranialRectaLoopback]

55. Too bad voting for your principles is viewed as quixotic.

[colsohlibgal]

58. Exactly

Certainly he's been faced with unprecedented obstruction - but I would have liked him to make a much more liberal case than he has.

The problem is the political baseline. It's all moved so far to the right and most don't see that. I think at best, historically, on most issues Obama is dead center at best.

Oh - and the House did not keep him from really going after the fraudulent Wall Street titans, that was all him. It's a disgrace that so many walked away with millions instead of perp walking.

Oh, and he has no problems keeping the post 9/11 spying on all of us regime going - Boo!- be very afraid.

In the end, on most issues, I see him to the right of Eisenhower and maybe Nixon - just another step on the long slide right post the termination of JFK, MLK, and RFK with extreme prejudice. With current MSN whores like David Gregory as enablers the wool is still over enough eyes.

[RevStPatrick]

59. This is exactly my approach, and feeling about it.

And in real life, not once, ever, has anyone ever ever given me shit for this approach.
Only here on DU, where there are a half dozen or so usual suspects who give people shit for the slightest infraction of their purity tests.

But then, DU ain't real life, so it's not a big deal to me when that happens...

[1StrongBlackMan]

67. As with all things ...

Balance is the key.

I don't think anyone begrudges anyone's criticism of President Obama, or his policies (or Democrats, in general). What causes the up-roar is the criticism with no balancing acknowledgement of achievements.

[cui bono]

87. How do you propose that acknowledgment to happen?

I don't think it can be that whenever someone criticizes him for a current statement or action that they then have to mention that he spoke up for marriage equality. I don't think something like that is realistic and I don't see how someone who is posting a criticism can at the same time acknowledge an achievement if it has nothing to do with the current topic. The posts are made based on something that is actually going on presently and on a certain topic.

A criticism of a certain policy should be taken as just that and not as a criticism of every single thing he has ever done, and the discussion should remain on topic and not diverge into complaints about the criticism. Comments should remain about the policy/action being discussed, not about the messenger or about the fact that it is being criticized. If it is defensible then simply defend it.

I really don't understand why it has to be so dramatic and emotional. I know why it is, but it really doesn't have to be that way as long as we're talking about the policy and not the man himself disassociated from them.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

72. Right there beside you. Our ULTIMATE responsibility is to our COUNTRY, not

our chosen political party. We choose our party affiliation based on shared ideals and principles professed in the party platform. If WE don't fight for these ideals, who will? Freedoms and Rights, once given up are rarely, if ever, returned. Think, Patriot Act, FISA, Habeas Corpus... ALL upheld, even strengthened, by a Democratic president!!

We sit by silently at our own, and our country's, peril. Campaign Finance Reform is critical to restoring the people's voice. Corporate money has totally distorted and contaminated our entire political process, affecting ALL 3 levels of our government.

[bigtree]

74. meh

standard political vigilance

[SaveOurDemocracy]

78. It should be. So why all the "sit down and STFU" when valid questions, concerns, and...

frustrations are expressed here?

[bigtree]

89. I think that many folks come into politics understanding the obstacles

. . . understanding the need to form the necessary alliances and coalitions to advance their ideals or initiatives through the political and legislative system. That attention to the legislative process is absolutely defensible as a defense of those ideals and initiatives; just as those who are focused on the substance behind those ideals and initiatives are anxious to keep them intact and complete. That causes understandable angst on all sides of these issues and debates. All of that's a normal and healthy function of our democracy; our democratic system of government.

[stupidicus]

83. the "purists" are like rightwing brownshirts

minus the clubs.

"The dissenter is every human being at those moments of his life when he
resigns momentarily from the herd and thinks for himself."
-- Archibald MacLeish, poet and librarian (1892-1982)

They have zero tolerance for the cats that refuse to be herded, and refuse to acknowledge that having voted for BHO gives one the right to criticize him, a right we all share as those who hired him.

And of course, what you're really talking about here is avoiding the sense of futility, frustration, etc, that would accompany silence.

"Nobody made a greater mistake than he who did nothing because he could
do only a little."
-- Edmund Burke, statesman and writer (1729-1797)

And finally, all the "traitorhood" it implies is merely a projection of their own

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
--Theodore Roosevelt

[iamthebandfanman]

85. oh youre just a drug loving

dirty hippy utopian nut !

dontcha know?

ive literally been seeing that thrown around at people simply because they dare question dear leader.

sad.

at this point, it doesnt matter tho... this is just a forum, and the election is over..


boots on the ground time..
and half of the defenders of all things D (whether it fits liberal ideology or not) are all to lazy to actually get away from their computer and contribute to real change in the real world...
much easier to be a commando behind a keyboard patting yourself on the back for your loyalty

i almost wish Obama would start a new war somewhere with no justification... just so we can see all the fakes on DU expose themselves (not literally, but it would be interesting to see who came to his defense).

if people think that plants only exist in crowds of people on the street... ha!

there are plants on DU from both sides of the aisle trying to sway arguments and discredit good liberals whove been on DU for a long while..

Im happy Mitt didnt win too... but i dont leave my politics or my ideology in the closet after an election. i dont care who wins...the same causes I cared about before.. I care about now..
i pushed them then, and ill push them now.

im not some fickle brat with a 'puter who thought politics sure was neat 4 years ago and just wants to be a part of a winning team...substance be damned...

im not talking about any particular issue at hand, just in general..
this 'hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil' bullshit is getting old :p

which is why, if anybody had noticed, i didnt re-up on my star by my name... dont worry tho, i havent taken the bumper sticker off my car yet

[Jackpine Radical]

97. A drug-loving dirty hippy utopian nut?

OK, who the fuck ratted me out?

[kentuck]

109. I hear you...

I still have my bumpersticker and gave one to my sister also...

DL DH UN

[Oilwellian]

90. Imagine if all Democrats were equally critical

of our party leaders lurching to the right. Imagine the additional pressure we could apply to bring them back to the center where our social programs were once safe. Instead they choose to join a small minority of Americans who make excuses for proposed cuts to the social safety nets, and imposing austerity on an already ravaged people. The hurting is about to get worse, and it's depressing to see so many self-identified progressives cheering it on. I hope one day to see neo liberals become just as toxic to the Democratic party as the neo cons have become to the Republicans. Only then will we see human progress.

[abelenkpe]

92. K&R nt

[RedstDem]

94. I'm with you

whatever the hell you are....

[Control-Z]

95. I can't say I've ever

seen you join in on one of the hate filled Obama-bashing threads. So, you've got no problem with me. (Not that my opinion means squat.)

[MuseRider]

96. The fact that you feel you need to say this is so screwed up

that it makes me angry.

What you have said is exactly the way things are supposed to work.

We saw people during the Bush** years give up what they stood for, what they believed in and threw in behind him 100%. It disgusted us and here we are with a good many people doing the same thing here.

Sure there are people here who agree with BO totally and always have. You know them and I know them and it is no surprise when they defend him against anything that is not positive or in agreement. It is not supposed to work that way, disagreement is a learning mechanism, but if they are the same in ideology then it is understandable. It is the people who just simply give up everything they have stood for and throw in 100% and never look back and demand that everyone else do the same and attack with the lamest of all reasons that make this not only suck it makes democracy not work at all.

Or those that hated certain policies that were put in place by Bush** or the republicans who will defend them at all costs if put in place or continued by BO or the democrats. That one always makes my head hurt. I am easily confused apparently because I can't navigate that.

Started to celebrate already so I am going to stop my posting . Hope that made sense. Posting while drinking is something I have done several times and usually regretted it...... I still wanted to say something here. IOW, you are democracy in action. The rest of it is simply following and being led. I like your way better.

[Skittles]

98. CORRECT

the people who stood behind bush no matter what disgusted me no end and the so-called "progressives" who lockstep on DU embarrass this board - ENOUGH ALREADY!!

[woo me with science]

136. Amen.

Needed to be said.

[bvar22]

99. DURec!

I'll STAND with you because I'm old enough to remember what Democrats should be Fighting For!

---bvar22
an old, mainstream-Center FDR/LBJ Working Class UNION DEMOCRAT!

[love_katz]

100. K&R

If we don't speak up, then the only opinions heard are from people who want things to be more right wing.

I am glad to see that many people have posted in your support.

Some of us know that we could have better times and that there are better ways.

[DirkGently]

102. + Kinda of the way it's supposed to work, really. (nt)

[scarletwoman]

104. R&K - I stand with you.

To be honest, I stopped bothering to argue on this board quite a long time ago. I just can't see any use to it. However, I unabashedly admire those, like you, who are still willing to speak out and stand up for the values that ought to be central to any democracy worthy of the name.

We are the prey of a foul command and enlaced with a grim design - Obama no less than the rest of us. (Mimi & Richard Farina reference - for those who might remember...)

sw

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

106. President Barack Hussein Obama will go down in history as one of the greatest

president in the history of this great Republic.

No amount of ODS will negate this fact.

Enthusiastically trashing this thread!

Happy New Year, DU!!

[NorthCarolina]

107. Wish I could rec this more than once. nt

[DeSwiss]

108. EXACTLY!!!!!!!!!!!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

111. President Barack Hussein Obama will go down in history as one of the

greatest presidents in U.S. history!!

Trashing this thread!

[Number23]

113. Why did you post this twice?

Didn't you say you were trashing it already?

Besides, if you trash the thread you'll miss the bucket of fun that is the rec list. Never seen so many names of folks that do not post. Been here three, five years and have literally one post to their name or just signed up in the last three months. How odd...

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

114. Maybe when I trashed it the first time, it really wasn't trashed...

Anyway, there's been so much trash-worthy trash threads like this one.

Trying again...

HAPPY NEW YEAR!!

[judesedit]

116. That's what you're supposed to do. Go to whitehouse.gov and comment away. You can pressure your

Congress people, tell everyone you see your opinion which is correct in my view. And blog, blog, blog. Millions of people read this stuff. Get your voice heard as often as possible. We need you. Bushco should've been prosecuted, too, and I hope they are one day. There is no statute of limitations on murder.

[judesedit]

117. I must add,for all of the bullshit Obama has had to put up with, he is doing a fantastic job. How he

keeps his composure with the juvenile GOP constantly lying and obstructing everything the man tries to do, I don't know how the hell he's gotten so much done. And he has gotten alot done somehow. How he can look at them with a straight face gets me. But he does. Bravo, Obama. I can't think of anyone that could do a better job right now.

[AAO]

118. I'm pretty far left

in that I believe the government, with its taxing authority, should defend its people against abject poverty and illness. SS & Medicare at 65 was a minimum guarantee. Now it's anyone's guess.

I think capitalism can be a good system, if properly regulated. But "the people" need to get the slice off the top first. If the Democrats can defend these 2 minimum bedrocks of civilized society, at this point, I would be fucking amazed, and more fucking grateful.

[donheld]

121. Totally agreed.

[Fire Walk With Me]

122. In all likelihood, he's going to sign the 2013 version of the NDAA (indefinite detention).

He just signed the FISA renewal. Where's my Democracy

[MellonCollie11]

124. We are simpatico..very well expressed

And sooooo true!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

127. Boss!

Kicked and recced, sir.

[Honeycombe8]

130. Why do people keep expecting Obama to act like a progressive when he's a moderate?

It defies logic. If you recognize his political leanings, then you will know what to expect and not be disappointed.

If you are truly an Obama supporter, you KNOW that he is a moderate and not a progressive. I've been a supporter of his from the start, and I knew after a couple of campaign speeches in 2007 that he was a moderate.

[bvar22]

137. Back in 2007,

I was posting that "getting a Black Guy elected in America will be the EASY part.
Getting him to act like a DEMOCRAT will be much harder."

So I agree with you.,
but given the limited choices in our electoral system,
and the natural Middle-of-the-Road inclinations of President Obama,
the ONLY avenue open to mainstream-center FDR/LBJ Working Class Democrats like me to effect ANY change back to The Left is to Make our Voices Heard in ANY way possible.

As you so clearly observed above (and Obama has publicly agreed), Obama IS a "Centrist" in a government that has already moved FAR to the Conservative Right.
That is NOT a reason for everybody to the left of Ronald Reagan to Sit Down, Shut Up, and Eat-Our-Peas.
It is a reason to scream our Liberal Democratic heads off,
and to use every opportunity available to point out how FAR to the Conservative Right the policies coming from our Party leadership really are.

Thank You for making this so clear.


[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]

[timesamillion]

132. So sensible

[woo me with science]

135. K&R , once you add post 96.