HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Is the President just pun...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:29 AM

Is the President just punking the base at this point?

"Sorry, base, but a GOP homophobe is the only possible person who can run the Pentagon; there isn't a single, solitary person in our own party who could do it as well."

"Sorry, base, but a torture apologist and domestic wiretapping enthusiast who refuses to answer questions about civilians killed in drone strikes is the only possible person who can run the CIA; say, have I shown you my Nobel Peace Prize lately?"

Coming soon...

"Sorry, base, but an investment banker is the only possible person who can run Treasury; it's a proud American tradition!"

Surely Aston Kucher is going to explain that it's all a prank any minute now, right? Right?

87 replies, 6001 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 87 replies Author Time Post
Reply Is the President just punking the base at this point? (Original post)
Proud Public Servant Jan 2013 OP
leftyohiolib Jan 2013 #1
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #16
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2013 #22
L0oniX Jan 2013 #2
No Compromise Jan 2013 #8
L0oniX Jan 2013 #11
No Compromise Jan 2013 #56
L0oniX Jan 2013 #69
datasuspect Jan 2013 #10
L0oniX Jan 2013 #12
ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2013 #14
L0oniX Jan 2013 #18
leftstreet Jan 2013 #3
L0oniX Jan 2013 #21
pnwmom Jan 2013 #86
OKNancy Jan 2013 #4
rhett o rick Jan 2013 #5
No Compromise Jan 2013 #6
ananda Jan 2013 #7
No Compromise Jan 2013 #9
L0oniX Jan 2013 #19
snooper2 Jan 2013 #13
forestpath Jan 2013 #15
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #17
L0oniX Jan 2013 #20
xocet Jan 2013 #82
iandhr Jan 2013 #23
Proud Public Servant Jan 2013 #33
WinkyDink Jan 2013 #87
warrprayer Jan 2013 #24
JoePhilly Jan 2013 #25
warrprayer Jan 2013 #30
JoePhilly Jan 2013 #47
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #58
JoePhilly Jan 2013 #62
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #66
JoePhilly Jan 2013 #83
rhett o rick Jan 2013 #81
ChisolmTrailDem Jan 2013 #26
Kolesar Jan 2013 #27
99Forever Jan 2013 #35
Eddie Haskell Jan 2013 #42
brooklynite Jan 2013 #50
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin Jan 2013 #53
99Forever Jan 2013 #63
brooklynite Jan 2013 #70
99Forever Jan 2013 #72
brooklynite Jan 2013 #73
99Forever Jan 2013 #74
brooklynite Jan 2013 #75
patrice Jan 2013 #28
AnotherMcIntosh Jan 2013 #29
warrprayer Jan 2013 #32
Romulox Jan 2013 #31
patrice Jan 2013 #37
Proud Public Servant Jan 2013 #39
Romulox Jan 2013 #49
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #60
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #59
OnionPatch Jan 2013 #80
Romulox Jan 2013 #84
patrice Jan 2013 #34
Union Scribe Jan 2013 #36
patrice Jan 2013 #38
Union Scribe Jan 2013 #40
patrice Jan 2013 #45
Scurrilous Jan 2013 #48
Proud Public Servant Jan 2013 #41
riverbendviewgal Jan 2013 #43
abelenkpe Jan 2013 #52
Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #44
Comrade_McKenzie Jan 2013 #46
brooklynite Jan 2013 #51
Nye Bevan Jan 2013 #54
Myrina Jan 2013 #55
Hamlette Jan 2013 #57
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #61
Hamlette Jan 2013 #64
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #65
Jennicut Jan 2013 #67
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #76
Hamlette Jan 2013 #68
grahamhgreen Jan 2013 #77
Hamlette Jan 2013 #79
brooklynite Jan 2013 #71
ecstatic Jan 2013 #78
woo me with science Jan 2013 #85

Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:38 AM

1. or maybe he's saying "go ahead sit out another election" . fallout from the 2010 election

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #1)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:53 PM

16. because he wants to pretend he's being forced to implement far right positions by

the handful of tea party members in the house...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #16)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:02 PM

22. Yes.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:10 PM

2. The rich and their corporations own them and us. There's not a damned thing anyone can do about it.

You're just fooling yourselves to think otherwise. They play us like sheep with their good cop bad cop sitcom dog and pony show. At this point who fucking even cares if our voting machines are rigged. Like it or lump it is your choice. It's funny and a joke that anyone thinks that their vote has a real influence on the controllers. Don't you get it? The rich are in our government ...the least of them will get over $170,000 for the rest of their lives. Do you really dare to believe they have your interests at heart? Muhahahahahah



Now watch the assholes say that $170,000 isn't much. Ta fuck it ain't. Where I live you would be happy to make $17k a year if you can even find a job.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:37 PM

8. learned helplessness- we need to stop just watching, we are suffering from Bystander effect

 



people in Spain have the right idea...

Pamplona's Locksmiths Join Revolt as Banks Throw Families From Their Homes in Spain
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022147610

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to No Compromise (Reply #8)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:42 PM

11. "learned" ...no ...FORCED. We are not Spain. We are THE military corporation. N/T

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #11)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:30 PM

56. why are you here if you don't care and don't think we can do anything about it?

 

why spend your time with activists trying to make a difference?

They got folks out there working for war- We have to work for peace (twice as hard as they do and for no $$ sorry)

"Work For Peace"

Back when Eisenhower was the President,
Golf courses was where most of his time was spent.
So I never really listened to what the President said,
Because in general I believed that the General was politically dead.
But he always seemed to know when the muscles were about to be flexed,
Because I remember him saying something, mumbling something about a Military Industrial Complex.
Americans no longer fight to keep their shores safe,
Just to keep the jobs going in the arms making workplace.
Then they pretend to be gripped by some sort of political reflex,
But all they're doing is paying dues to the Military Industrial Complex.
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary.
The Military and the Monetary,
get together whenever they think its necessary,
They turn our brothers and sisters into mercenaries, they are turning the planet into a cemetery.
The Military and the Monetary, use the media as intermediaries,
they are determined to keep the citizens secondary, they make so many decisions that are arbitrary.
We're marching behind a commander in chief,
who is standing under a spotlight shaking like a leaf.
but the ship of state had landed on an economic reef,
so we knew he was going to bring us messages of grief.
The Military and the Monetary,
were shielded by January and went storming into February,
Brought us pot bellied generals as luminaries,
two weeks ago I hadn't heard of the son of a bitch,
now all of a sudden he's legendary.
They took the honour from the honourary,
they took the dignity from the dignitaries,
they took the secrets from the secretary,
but they left the bitch in obituary.
The Military and the Monetary,
from thousands of miles away in a Saudi Arabian sanctuary,
had us all scrambling for our dictionaries,
cause we couldn't understand the fuckin vocabulary.
Yeah, there was some smart bombs,
but there was some dumb ones as well,
scared the hell out of CNN in that Baghdad hotel.
The Military and the Monetary,
they get together whenever they think its necessary,
War in the desert sometimes sure is scary,
but they beamed out the war to all their subsidiaries.
Tried to make So Damn Insane a worthy adversary,
keeping the citizens secondary,
scaring old folks into coronaries.
The Military and the Monetary,
from thousands of miles in a Saudi Arabian sanctuary,
kept us all wondering if all of this was really truely, necessary.

We've got to work for Peace,
Peace ain't coming this way.
If we only work for Peace,
If everyone believed in Peace the way they say they do,
we'd have Peace.
The only thing wrong with Peace,
is that you can't make no money from it.
The Military and the Monetary,
they get together whenever they think its necessary,
they've turned our brothers and sisters into mercenaries,
they are turning the planet, into a cemetery.
Got to work for Peace,
Peace ain't coming this way.
We should not allow ourselves to be mislead,
by talk of entering a time of Peace,
Peace is not the absence of war,
it is the absence of the rules of war and the threats of war and the preparation for war.
Peace is not the absence of war,
it is the time when we will all bring ourselves closer to each other,
closer to building a structure that is unique within ourselves
because we have finally come to Peace within ourselves.
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary.
Get together whenever they think its necessary,
they've turned our brothers and sisters into mercenaries,
they are turning parts of the planet, into a cemetery.
The Military and the Monetary,
The Military and the Monetary,
We hounded the Ayatollah religiously,
Bombed Libya and killed Quadafi's son hideously.
We turned our back on our allies the Panamanians,
and saw Ollie North selling guns to the Iranians.
Watched Gorbachev slaughtering Lithuanians,
We better warn the Amish,
they may bomb the Pennsylvanians.
The Military and the Monetary,
get together whenever they think its necessary,
they have turned our brothers and sisters into mercenaries,
they are turning the planet, into a cemetery.
I don't want to sound like no late night commercial,
but its a matter of fact that there are thousands of children all over the world
in Asia and Africa and in South America who need our help.
When they start talking about 55 cents a day and 70 cents a day,
I know a lot of folks feel as though that,
thats not really any kind of contribution to make,
but we had to give up a dollar and a half just to get in the subway nowadays.
So this is a song about tommorrow and about how tommorrow can be better. if we all,
"Each one reach one, Each one try to teach one".
Nobody can do everything,
but everybody can do something,
everyone must play a part,
everyone got to go to work, Work for Peace.

Spirit Say Work, Work for Peace
If you believe the things you say, go to work.
If you believe in Peace, time to go to work.
Cant be wavin your head no more, go to work.


http://www.azlyrics.com/lyrics/gilscottheron/workforpeace.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to No Compromise (Reply #56)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:49 PM

69. I'm here for the news ...mostly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:40 PM

10. and you'd have to be a complete moron to think otherwise

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to datasuspect (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:47 PM

12. Being unaware or being willing to ignore is not nessesarally moronic.

I understand that people need to go on with life irregardless of what anyone thinks about our future.



Do hungry children think about the future? I don't think so.

Does the corporate government war machine think about its future? You bet your ass!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to L0oniX (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:50 PM

14. As much truth that is contained in your post, why...

...does everyone here continue to participate in the charade?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ChisolmTrailDem (Reply #14)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:59 PM

18. It helps people when they think they can make a difference. It's like "don't worry be happy" thing.

People got to go on with life no matter what. Knowing the truth does not make that easier. As far as that goes ...one may be better off not reading or watching the news. "He who does not read the news is uniformed. He who does is miss-informed" Samuel Clemens

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:12 PM

3. I'm beginning to wonder who the 'base' is n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #3)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:02 PM

21. "All your base are belong us" n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftstreet (Reply #3)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 03:58 PM

86. All Democrats who regularly vote.

Which doesn't equate to "people who think like the average DUer."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:17 PM

4. Not concerned at all about Jack Lew

He's one of the good guys, despite a VERY short time with Citi. The rest of his career has been working for Democrats and being a pretty good liberal.
Also Wall Street is not happy about his probable appointment.

"I've talked to a bunch of investors and it's seen as a net negative going from Geithner to Lew," says Chris Krueger, senior political analyst at Guggenheim Partners. "Who does Wall Street want? Not Jack Lew."
Lew, 57, spent three years on Wall Street working at Citigroup (C) as the chief operating officer of its alternative asset investment management unit. One of the funds Lew's group invested in was run by John Paulson, who at the time was betting heavily against the housing markets and banks. But that's not the part of Lew's resume that anyone seems to remember. And it's certainly not the important part.


Please read more at this link
http://finance.fortune.cnn.com/2012/11/26/jack-lew-treasury-secretary/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:20 PM

5. Before you know it someone from Monsanto will be leading the FDA. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:34 PM

6. just imagine what would happen to our food supply!

 

It's like we would be able to trust anything the FDA tells us...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to No Compromise (Reply #6)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:36 PM

7. You mean, Monsanto and its ilk doesn't own the FDA?

Coulda fooled me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ananda (Reply #7)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:38 PM

9. of course they do,it was a joke- this is why our food is crap and they release drugs without testing

 


I think they are trying to kill us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #5)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:00 PM

19. Don't start laughing yet. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:48 PM

13. define "base"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:50 PM

15. I'd use a different word than "punking."

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to forestpath (Reply #15)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 12:55 PM

17. LOL. Does it start with an "F"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #17)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:01 PM

20. No! Funking is something George Clinton does. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:16 PM

23. WAKE UP

The far right has a problem with Hagel because he doesn't think we should start WWIII with Iran. That alone makes it a great choice.

Only Nixon could have gone to China. No Dem could pull that off. Its going a take a combat hero Republican to sell cuts to defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #23)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:38 PM

33. Nonsense

Every poll going shows that the public now trusts the Dems more than the GOP on national security; if anything, they trust our party more to make the right decisions. And given the GOP's antipathy toward Hagel, there's no way to argue that he's the one who's going to sell military cuts; they don't even want to confirm him, let alone give in to him on the military budget. We won, and we won in no small part on foreign policy; why shouldn't one of our own be guiding Defense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #23)

Wed Jan 9, 2013, 04:03 PM

87. Yeah, how's that China thing workin' for ya?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:16 PM

24. What a disappointment

Stunned disbelief

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:18 PM

25. Obama hates us.

That must be it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #25)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:37 PM

30. what a sensible post!

as I get older, I find myself becoming more conservative

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to warrprayer (Reply #30)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:01 PM

47. There will be breathless screaming no matter who Obama selects.

And it will come from both his right and his left.

No different that the right calling Obama a socialist and the left call him a corporatist.

He's neither, but why let that stand in the way of a good caricature.

Same in this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:42 PM

58. Right, we elected Obama to continue the Bush/neocon policies..... NOT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #58)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:47 PM

62. That's another good example, thanks.

The right claims Obama is a weak appeaser.

And some on the left claim, as you basically did ... "Obama is just like Bush!!!"

Neither caricature is true, but why let that spoil the outrage.

On edit: I suspect that you voted for Obama knowing his positions. Or you voted for some one else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #62)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:15 PM

66. Obama is selling Neo-con policies to the left. Face facts:

He ran on a public option and an end to free trade:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #66)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 08:01 AM

83. Hagel is a neo-con?

And Obama did not run single payer (although he did want it), and he definitely did not say he was going to "end free trade".

With regard to defense, Obama ran on ending the war in Iraq (which he did) and on escalating the war in Afghanistan (which he also did). And now he's drawing that war down.

The reason the GOP is angry about Hagel is because he wasn't a big Iraq war supported, voted against the surge, spoke out against it, and also supports defense cuts.

Hardly a neocon for those who know what that term means. If he were, McCain and Graham would be thrilled, not flipped out. Hagel is a reminder of how wrong they were.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #47)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 11:19 PM

81. Explain why he obviously prefers to appoint Republicans. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:18 PM

26. Welp! There he is. Apparently there wasn't a single good

Democrat who was qualified to be SecDef.

We've, indeed, been punked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:26 PM

27. Do you want a tissue to weep into? eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kolesar (Reply #27)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:41 PM

35. I'd settle for a Democratic President that ...

... acts like a Democrat.

I'll refrain from saying anything about your fucking condescending "tissue" remark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #35)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:53 PM

42. Me too!

I'm sick and fucking tired of concession and appeasement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #35)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:05 PM

50. You're welcome to try and get Dennis Kucinich elected...again.

I understand he has free time on his hands.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #50)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:11 PM

53. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #50)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:51 PM

63. You got a problen with actual Democrats that ...

... stand up for actual Democratic policies, do ya?

Why are you even here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #63)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:01 PM

70. No, as long as their positions don't fall out of the mainstream...

...like, say, a Dept of Peace.

In any event, the issue of his choices is largely irrelevant, expect if 1) you think they're going t act outside the dictates of the President's policies, or 2) you're opposed to the President's policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #70)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:39 PM

72. And you are in charge of what is considered "mainstream?"

I didn't get that memo.

And just precisely would wrong with a Department of Peace?

Not enough blood, gore, guts, and dead to suit you? Not enough of the Treasury poured down the black hole AKA the MIC?

Did Obama get appointed King? I didn't get that memo either.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #72)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:46 PM

73. I'm in charge of what -I- think is mainstream...

...informed, perhaps by years of working to elected Democrats in liberal, moderate and conservative States and districts.

You're certainly welcome to apply your own standards; just don't be surprised when the rest of the Country (or even the Democratic Party) doesn't follow along with you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #73)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:56 PM

74. Ahhh ...

... I see.


"No true Scotsman."


Whatever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 99Forever (Reply #74)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:02 PM

75. Sorry, try again...

..."No True Scotsman" assumes there is an absolute "correct" position. I make no such claim; just that the majority of the Party, and for that matter the majority of the Country agree, in aggregate, with the policy choices of the President. You're welcome to disagree, and to convice the President (and the Country) that you're right and they're wrong.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:34 PM

28. Some people are not threatened by being who they are AND integrating with different others.

The definition of insanity is doing the same old thing, in this case, assumptions about what are very likely FALSE dichotomies that the individual persons in a given situation are apparently INCAPABLE of working out respectfully AMONGST THEMSELVES IN THEIR OWN CONTEXT.

This is what has fucked us all and it will continue to fuck us all until we learn how to do things differently, otherwise every iteration eventually becomes the rise of fascism that excludes others on abstract grounds, INSTEAD OF TURNING OUR ATTENTION TO WHERE IT BELONGS and that is ON CONCRETE BEHAVIOR.

Do you know the line of work that Edward Deming founded and was laughed out of this country for? which he subsequently took to Japan where he kicked our auto-making butts. There are many forms of TQM, but it's PROGRESSIVE & all about collaboratively getting the bullshit out of stuff, by means of teams/groups dealing with what is actually going on, instead of PERSONAL PRIVATE ideologies (of whatever flavor) warping every goddamned thing that happens, with more or less overt:covert DISCRIMINATION, until it breaks and we just repeat the whole cycle over and over again and again.

If PO's "base" CAN'T produce the numbers TO GET THEMSELVES TO THE TABLE, they ain't his base. The guy is a centrist; his base is those who can make it to the table. And I'm absolutely flabbergasted by people who expect BO to be THEIR KING. In fact, I'm so skeptical of who they are and what they are doing that I've pretty much decided that they are NO friends of the Left.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:35 PM

29. Apparently it is easier to punk the base than the Republicans.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AnotherMcIntosh (Reply #29)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:37 PM

32. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:37 PM

31. Nobody is being punked. Obama is, and always has been, a "centrist". It's his base who

tried to make him into something he's not (an idealistic reformer.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Romulox (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:44 PM

37. **IF** we do it ourselves, an authentic Centrist MUST validate that & if we authentically do that &

then he fails to be an authentic Centrist and validate that political/economic demographic, then there MUST be consequences and, to me, that's a General Strike.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Romulox (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:45 PM

39. I'm not asking for an idealistic reformer

Wanting the president to appoint people from his own party to key positions isn't incompatible with centrism.

Wanting the president to reject deeply unpopular Bush-era security policy, rather than placing one of its architects at the head of the CIA, isn't incompatible with centrism.

Wanting to let someone from outside the banking industry preside over the cleanup of the crisis created by the banking industry isn't incompatible with centrism.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Reply #39)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:05 PM

49. Why should anybody care what party the President's cabinet is from? They represent his views.

His cabinet members are like his eyes, his ears, his arms, and his legs. Chuck Hagel has been hand-picked as representing the President's views. So where Geithner, and Summers, and the rest.

Your issue isn't really with the people the President picks, it's with the values that those pick demonstrate. To that, I simply say, that's who the President is, and that is what he believes in. If the President was passionate about reforming Wall Street, he wouldn't have nominated Geithner (or Summers.) If he was passionate about reigning in the Pentagon, he wouldn't have appointed Bush's man Gates to run the Wars. And if he wanted Single Payer, he wouldn't have put Romneycare forward as his initial offer (after famously taking Single Payer "off the table.)

So there is no "secret" Obama, trying to do the right thing but unable. Nor is there any point in demanding party loyalty in cabinet positions, as if that will transform the President from a defender of the status quo into a iconoclast. It won't. He's not. He's a "centrist", and he appoints Republicans because he agrees with them. He's told you that all along.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Romulox (Reply #49)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:45 PM

60. Not centrist. Far right idealog. Example: putting seniors in "Chained-CPI".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Romulox (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:43 PM

59. A centrist does not destroy 500 years of Habeus Corpus - that is extreme far right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Romulox (Reply #31)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 10:39 PM

80. "Change has come to America!"

He sure sounded like a reformer to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OnionPatch (Reply #80)

Tue Jan 8, 2013, 10:27 AM

84. It's called a "platitude". And "change!" did come: the rich got richer over the last 4 years. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:39 PM

34. Everyone wants to throw a switch & everything'll be different; that's NOT the way it can/will/should

happen and for anyone who can't/won't recognize that fact, said fact WILL be used against what may or may not be their "own objectives."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:43 PM

36. It's certainly not the start of the fearless, bold second term

I was hoping for.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #36)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:44 PM

38. A VERY important player is NOT at the table, yet. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to patrice (Reply #38)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:48 PM

40. I should have said "am still hoping for"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #40)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:58 PM

45. Me too!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #36)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:03 PM

48. You're jumping the gun a bit.

It's still his first term.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:52 PM

41. You gotta wonder: why Hagel, but not Rice or Warren

Three desired administration appointments, three firestorms of protest from the GOP, and which one does the president put himself on the line for? Not the trusted member of his inner circle serving as UN Ambassador. Not the liberal populist stalwart who created the CFPB. No, he slinks away from those two but doubles down on a Republican senator. I mean really, WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:56 PM

43. A People's History Of The United States

Read it....I did....
I would much rather see Obama as President than Romney..

If you want change...get cracking and get 2014 to have a majority democratic congress..Get they guys/girls YOU think will represent you.

Action is louder than words.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverbendviewgal (Reply #43)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:09 PM

52. +1000

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:56 PM

44. I don't think "the base" is what you think it is (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 01:59 PM

46. Making one comment a few years ago doesn't brand you something for life...

 

As a true liberal, you should believe in forgiveness and second chances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade_McKenzie (Reply #46)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:06 PM

51. I seem to recall someone else opposed Gay Marriage at the time, but changed his opinion...

...can't put my finger on who it was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Reply #51)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:11 PM

54. Nope. We were NEVER at war with Eurasia (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:17 PM

55. The Wall Street toady has been at Treasury for 4 years already ...

... where ya been?

None of this should surprise us.
Infuriate? Yes.
Surprise? No. Not one bit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:40 PM

57. When even Greenwald likes Hagel, you have to assume you are too far left to be living in reality.

For gawd's sake. You might like the real world if you gave it a try.

Hagel is an excellent choice. I'm proud of Obama for not caving to the neocons.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #57)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:46 PM

61. LOL - how much will Hagel cut defense?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #61)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 02:57 PM

64. in the "only Nixon can go to China" mode, more than any Dem could.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #64)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:11 PM

65. More than the sequester? Big War is Killing the Economy. Period. We need a defsec who can say this

Can he?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #65)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:25 PM

67. Well he once called the Defense budget "bloated."

And Repubs fear he will propose heavy cuts. Read into that what you will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jennicut (Reply #67)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:07 PM

76. I want a number.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #65)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 03:31 PM

68. Well, I don't know

do you?

And Big War is not killing the economy. High medical costs are doing more damage.

And what do we do for/with all the people who get laid off because of defense cuts? I'd love to put them to work on infrastructure but that wouldn't save any money. So if the cost is your issue, what will it cost to add a few percentage points to the unemployment rate?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hamlette (Reply #68)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:10 PM

77. War is 60-70% of our budget - basic economics. It's killing us.

We employ those people building wind farms.

How does that save money - because wind generates investment income! War is a boondoggle.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #77)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 06:33 PM

79. Nice try. Now, try to stay in the real world for a bit while you look up the facts.

"war" is not 60-70% of our budget. the entire defense budget, which I suppose you know is more than just war, is 20% of our budget. That includes both wars.

And if wind generates investment income, why should the federal government fund building wind farms? Let the investment income fund the farms.

???

I'm I being punked?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #61)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 04:02 PM

71. How much? As much as President Obama wants him to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Public Servant (Original post)

Mon Jan 7, 2013, 05:34 PM

78. Is it too late to vote for Rmoney?



I made 14 small donations totaling $550 to President Obama's reelection campaign because I trust his judgment, and I sense that he is a good man of integrity. If you have evidence proving otherwise, by all means, please share. Let me be clear, my disgust for republicans was pretty much set in stone during the last election. But I figure Obama must have a damn good reason for appointing people who are equally despised by the left and the right. Would you prefer for him to make appointments based on popularity or based on information?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread