HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Cenk is over at Daily Kos...

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:22 AM

View profile

 

Cenk is over at Daily Kos calling for a vote against Obama (updated)

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:19 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

Vote Against Obama in Iowa
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/29/1049662/-Vote-Against-Obama-in-Iowa


What a silly clown this guy has become. Al Gore should snatch the platform from under this moron.

I seriously believe these assholes want a Republican to win. Maybe he's longing for his idol Reagan.


Here's why Cenk really wants a protest vote against the President:

<...>

I follow politics for a living; I'm not unaware of how hideous the Republican choices are. But that doesn't mean that we should pretend that President Obama has been brilliant because we're scared of the big, bad Republicans. That would be fundamentally dishonest.

And to be honest, I'm really disappointed that he does not have a primary opponent. This country is dying for someone who is going to take on the establishment. Who is that going to be on our side - Barack Obama? On that, I know whether to laugh or cry. Every time I think about the idea that President Obama might be against the establishment, I laugh and laugh and laugh. There is never been a guy who was this enamored with the establishment. If he had wrestling nickname it would be The Establishment.

The guy who appointed Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley (and a list of hundreds of others, including two new Fed appointments, one of which is a Republican who worked for the Carlyle Group) is not a guy who is interested in changing the system at all. Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side.

I would have loved a progressive alternative, but apparently we are not going to get one (except for Rocky Anderson running on the Justice Party ticket). Primaries are the perfect place to send a message without taking away votes in the general election. But it didn't happen because the Democratic establishment says we must fall in line because we wouldn't want to hurt the agenda of the president. The agenda of the president sucks and is deeply Republican. I'd love to at least get him to reconsider that agenda for a second.

This moron's fact-free screed is simply designed to stir up anti-Obama sentiments.

Let's take a look at the President's "deeply Republican" agenda:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100219885

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108


Repeat: Anyone who wants to consider the first President to finally enact health care reform, the President who repealed DADT and ended the ban on gays in the military, the President who ended the Iraq war, who strenghtened the NLRB, who reregulated the financial industry, creating a the first-ever consumer bureau and giving the FDIC new powers, enacting some of the toughest environmental rules in decades, including the first-ever rule on mercury, and appointing two liberal women to the Supreme court...anyone who sees this President as a "deeply Republican" is a moron!

Cenk qualifies.

336 replies, 7161 views

Thread informationRemove bookmarkTrash this thread

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 336 replies Author Time Post
Reply Cenk is over at Daily Kos calling for a vote against Obama (updated) (Original post)
ProSense Dec 29 OP
surfdog Dec 29 #1
pleiadian candidate Dec 29 #131
spanone Dec 29 #2
pleiadian candidate Dec 29 #130
spanone Dec 29 #234
Phx_Dem Jan 2 #327
Capitalocracy Dec 29 #147
NNN0LHI Dec 29 #3
Richardo Dec 29 #19
SidDithers Dec 29 #164
flamingdem Dec 29 #173
pocoloco Dec 30 #275
NNN0LHI Dec 30 #276
Enrique Dec 29 #4
boston bean Dec 29 #10
Mr Dixon Dec 29 #25
boston bean Dec 29 #28
bluestate10 Dec 29 #210
stevenleser Jan 2 #324
Phx_Dem Jan 2 #328
FarLeftFist Dec 29 #5
ElboRuum Dec 29 #129
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 30 #264
ElboRuum Jan 1 #314
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 1 #317
ElboRuum Jan 1 #321
UnrepentantLiberal Jan 2 #322
surfdog Dec 29 #6
boston bean Dec 29 #7
Javaman Dec 29 #9
frylock Dec 29 #127
UnrepentantLiberal Dec 30 #265
PassingFair Dec 29 #17
ProSense Dec 29 #20
hfojvt Dec 29 #39
ProSense Dec 29 #89
PassingFair Dec 29 #50
ProSense Dec 29 #87
hfojvt Dec 29 #99
ProSense Dec 29 #110
PassingFair Dec 29 #126
Sherman A1 Dec 30 #262
PassingFair Dec 29 #106
ProSense Dec 29 #109
PassingFair Dec 29 #112
ProSense Dec 29 #115
TheKentuckian Dec 29 #185
hfojvt Dec 29 #119
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #137
fascisthunter Jan 1 #312
A Simple Game Dec 29 #166
Maven Dec 29 #197
fascisthunter Jan 1 #311
karynnj Dec 29 #48
YvonneCa Dec 29 #190
treestar Dec 29 #58
fascisthunter Jan 1 #308
Javaman Dec 29 #8
Union Scribe Dec 29 #11
ProSense Dec 29 #13
Javaman Dec 29 #41
girl gone mad Dec 29 #83
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #139
cherokeeprogressive Dec 29 #199
CreekDog Jan 4 #332
NNN0LHI Dec 29 #14
Javaman Dec 29 #44
Whisp Dec 29 #114
Javaman Dec 29 #163
Maven Dec 29 #198
dawg Dec 29 #12
ProSense Dec 29 #16
boston bean Dec 29 #21
ProSense Dec 29 #24
dawg Dec 29 #29
theaocp Dec 29 #32
ProSense Dec 29 #42
theaocp Dec 29 #47
ProSense Dec 29 #51
U4ikLefty Dec 29 #205
ProSense Dec 30 #252
truebrit71 Dec 30 #285
LineLineLineLineLineLineReply I
ProSense Dec 29 #38
dawg Dec 29 #55
ProSense Dec 29 #62
dawg Dec 29 #78
ProSense Dec 29 #93
dawg Dec 29 #100
ProSense Dec 29 #104
dawg Dec 29 #108
ProSense Dec 29 #113
dawg Dec 29 #121
treestar Dec 29 #60
dawg Dec 29 #69
hfojvt Dec 29 #52
toddaa Dec 29 #72
ProSense Dec 29 #76
Javaman Dec 29 #43
Spazito Dec 29 #15
theaocp Dec 29 #35
Spazito Dec 29 #65
theaocp Dec 29 #68
Spazito Dec 29 #75
theaocp Dec 29 #79
Spazito Dec 29 #84
theaocp Dec 29 #88
Tierra_y_Libertad Dec 29 #18
MineralMan Dec 29 #22
theaocp Dec 29 #37
Iggo Dec 29 #23
bahrbearian Dec 29 #27
ProSense Dec 29 #31
theaocp Dec 29 #40
MilesColtrane Dec 29 #107
JustAnotherGen Dec 29 #26
treestar Dec 29 #64
bigtree Dec 29 #30
JoePhilly Dec 29 #33
theaocp Dec 29 #45
Javaman Dec 29 #46
JoePhilly Dec 29 #189
fascisthunter Jan 1 #315
LiberalAndProud Dec 29 #34
ProSense Dec 29 #71
LiberalAndProud Dec 29 #118
abelenkpe Dec 29 #36
A Simple Game Dec 29 #184
abelenkpe Dec 29 #186
Zorra Dec 29 #49
Bobbie Jo Dec 29 #53
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #54
theaocp Dec 29 #56
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #66
theaocp Dec 29 #70
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #85
theaocp Dec 29 #91
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #92
theaocp Dec 29 #94
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #101
LanternWaste Dec 29 #143
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #149
girl gone mad Dec 29 #116
LineLineLineReply !
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #117
girl gone mad Dec 31 #303
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #145
slay Dec 29 #183
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #230
slay Dec 29 #232
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #240
slay Dec 30 #244
Tarheel_Dem Dec 30 #248
Number23 Dec 30 #299
Tarheel_Dem Dec 31 #304
Number23 Dec 29 #235
Tarheel_Dem Dec 30 #242
slay Dec 30 #245
Tarheel_Dem Dec 30 #249
MjolnirTime Dec 29 #57
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #67
Bucky Dec 29 #153
TheKentuckian Dec 29 #193
JTFrog Dec 29 #59
theaocp Dec 29 #63
JTFrog Dec 29 #74
theaocp Dec 29 #77
toddaa Dec 29 #61
jenmito Dec 29 #73
ProSense Dec 29 #82
jenmito Dec 29 #90
Major Hogwash Dec 29 #86
ProSense Dec 29 #95
jenmito Dec 29 #98
Major Hogwash Dec 29 #80
CakeGrrl Dec 29 #81
fascisthunter Dec 29 #124
phleshdef Dec 29 #96
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #103
book_worm Dec 29 #97
MilesColtrane Dec 29 #102
frazzled Dec 29 #105
Whisp Dec 29 #111
Motown_Johnny Dec 29 #120
fascisthunter Dec 29 #123
Motown_Johnny Dec 29 #134
treestar Dec 29 #141
fascisthunter Dec 29 #122
Major Hogwash Dec 29 #128
fascisthunter Dec 29 #160
Major Hogwash Dec 29 #176
ProSense Dec 29 #133
MineralMan Dec 29 #125
flamingdem Dec 29 #132
DesMoinesDem Dec 29 #135
ProSense Dec 29 #136
DesMoinesDem Dec 29 #138
ProSense Dec 29 #140
Tarheel_Dem Dec 29 #151
DesMoinesDem Dec 29 #154
fascisthunter Dec 29 #161
ProSense Dec 29 #175
bluestate10 Dec 29 #203
fascisthunter Jan 1 #307
ProSense Dec 29 #174
Ikonoklast Dec 29 #150
DesMoinesDem Dec 29 #155
Ikonoklast Dec 29 #157
CherylK Dec 29 #156
slay Dec 29 #182
LanternWaste Dec 29 #142
ProSense Dec 29 #144
LanternWaste Dec 29 #146
ProSense Dec 29 #148
LanternWaste Dec 29 #152
ProSense Dec 29 #158
gulliver Dec 29 #159
tishaLA Dec 30 #267
gulliver Dec 30 #295
Rex Dec 29 #162
yodermon Dec 29 #165
LineLineReply I
ProSense Dec 29 #167
Fantastic Anarchist Dec 29 #168
ProSense Dec 29 #170
Fantastic Anarchist Dec 30 #256
limpyhobbler Dec 31 #301
girl gone mad Jan 1 #320
DeathToTheOil Dec 29 #169
Hissyspit Dec 29 #222
Pisces Dec 29 #171
BlancheSplanchnik Dec 29 #172
tavalon Dec 29 #177
ProSense Dec 29 #178
tavalon Dec 29 #180
slay Dec 29 #179
ProSense Dec 29 #181
Roland99 Dec 29 #187
lillypaddle Dec 29 #188
woo me with science Dec 29 #191
Spazito Dec 29 #192
LineLineReply .
ProSense Dec 29 #194
slay Dec 29 #201
Spazito Dec 29 #202
slay Dec 29 #207
Spazito Dec 29 #211
slay Dec 29 #214
Spazito Dec 29 #217
slay Dec 29 #218
Spazito Dec 29 #219
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #204
slay Dec 29 #208
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #213
slay Dec 29 #216
Spazito Dec 29 #209
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #212
Spazito Dec 29 #215
sabrina 1 Dec 29 #220
Spazito Dec 29 #221
Number23 Dec 29 #237
Spazito Dec 30 #287
penguin7 Dec 29 #195
WillyT Dec 29 #196
bluestate10 Dec 29 #200
LoisB Dec 29 #206
WillyT Dec 29 #223
Major Hogwash Dec 29 #226
WillyT Dec 29 #229
Major Hogwash Dec 30 #277
fascisthunter Jan 1 #310
NorthCarolina Dec 30 #269
BklnDem75 Jan 4 #336
TheDirectPath Dec 29 #224
JDPriestly Dec 29 #225
nadinbrzezinski Dec 29 #227
ProSense Dec 29 #233
nadinbrzezinski Dec 30 #243
ProSense Dec 30 #247
nadinbrzezinski Dec 30 #250
ProSense Dec 30 #251
maximusveritas Dec 29 #228
Festivito Dec 29 #236
got root Dec 29 #231
Agony Dec 29 #238
thesquanderer Dec 29 #239
Better Believe It Dec 29 #241
JI7 Dec 30 #246
gateley Dec 30 #253
garybeck Dec 30 #254
Douglas Carpenter Dec 30 #255
JNelson6563 Dec 30 #257
highprincipleswork Dec 30 #258
Tx4obama Dec 30 #259
highprincipleswork Jan 3 #329
Tx4obama Jan 3 #330
JVS Dec 30 #260
limpyhobbler Dec 30 #261
Vestigial_Sister Dec 30 #263
Sienna86 Dec 30 #266
NorthCarolina Dec 30 #268
Better Believe It Dec 30 #271
ProSense Dec 30 #273
ProSense Dec 30 #272
deacon_sephiroth Dec 30 #270
ProSense Dec 30 #274
WI_DEM Dec 30 #278
dsc Dec 30 #279
ProSense Dec 30 #281
dsc Dec 30 #291
ProSense Dec 30 #292
truebrit71 Dec 30 #280
ProSense Dec 30 #282
truebrit71 Dec 30 #283
ProSense Dec 30 #284
truebrit71 Dec 30 #286
ProSense Dec 30 #288
truebrit71 Dec 30 #289
ProSense Dec 30 #290
truebrit71 Dec 30 #296
Betty Karlson Dec 30 #293
ProSense Dec 30 #294
truebrit71 Dec 30 #297
Matariki Dec 30 #298
ProSense Dec 30 #300
1stlady Dec 31 #302
Douglas Carpenter Dec 31 #305
PA Democrat Dec 31 #306
fascisthunter Jan 1 #309
ProSense Jan 1 #316
girl gone mad Jan 1 #318
ProSense Jan 1 #319
fascisthunter Jan 2 #326
mmonk Jan 1 #313
MrMickeysMom Jan 2 #323
Bonobo Jan 2 #325
1stlady Jan 3 #331
Erose999 Jan 4 #333
mmonk Jan 4 #334
BklnDem75 Jan 4 #335

Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:24 AM

1. I agree

View profile

The guy isn't very grounded

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to surfdog (Reply #1)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 02:36 PM

131. This guy is, though!

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:25 AM

2. i wonder who he's planning on voting for?

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 02:36 PM

130. Who do you plan to vote for?

View profile

The guy advocating for national drones?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to pleiadian candidate (Reply #130)

Mon Jan 2, 2012, 02:36 PM

327. You betcha!

View profile

Those drones have killed a lot of terrorists while keeping soldiers safe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #2)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:51 PM

147. Obama, obviously.

View profile

Just not in the primary. From the excerpt in the OP:

"Primaries are the perfect place to send a message without taking away votes in the general election."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:27 AM

3. I knew he was an asscarrot first time I heard him

View profile

Sometimes you can judge a book by its cover.

Don

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 04:57 PM

164. Yup...

View profile



Sid

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #3)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:05 PM

173. Thanks for the new term

View profile

asscarrot is indeed an addition to the English language. First I've heard of this one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 10:37 AM

275. Do all trolls think the Constitution is

View profile

just "a god damned piece of paper" too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pocoloco (Reply #275)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 10:40 AM

276. Just to be sure here who are you calling a troll?

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:27 AM

4. Cenk is wrong in this part:

View profile

But if all of those people were to go and participate on the Democratic side they might have an effect. If "uncommitted" beat President Obama on the Democratic side in Iowa that would make some news. That might even get the attention of The Establishment. So far, he has only responded to right-wing pressure. He is the consummate politician, so if there was actually a little bit of pressure on his left he might have to respond to it, especially during an election season. Wouldn't it be amazing if President Obama acted like a progressive on some issue because he was worried about the voters?


There are at least two major examples of Obama responding to pressure from the left, and it does no good to ignore these successes. : first, there was Don't Ask Don't Tell, second, there was the reversal of the high rate of deportations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Enrique (Reply #4)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:33 AM

10. could you imagine what Obama might do, if people weren't telling others to STFU?

View profile

I think that is the point. Make a statement. Make a politician do what is right and what the people want.

Unless of course Obama rank and fil democrats don't want bankers held accountable, and like the NDAA, and love more war and drone attacks on innocents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:55 AM

25. SMH

View profile

Bait much?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to boston bean (Reply #10)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 08:30 PM

210. Continue to make the assumption that other democrats agree with your positions.

View profile

You obviously didn't watch Tweety's show tonight. There was serious love for President Obama in that big crowd. So much love that when Tweety did his usual negative tweaking of Obama, the crowd started to mumble in the background, a couple of times that forced Tweety to whiplash on his statements instantly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 2, 2012, 01:21 AM

324. You mean like the people telling Greenwald critics to shut up all over GD?

View profile

Cant have it both ways. Either criticism means you are telling people to shut up, or it isnt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #10)

Mon Jan 2, 2012, 02:40 PM

328. Drone attacks on innocents!??

View profile

That's the biggest whopper I've read here in quite some time. I have never read once of a drone intentionally attacking civilians.

Sadly, civilians get killed in combat by ACCIDENT. Sometimes our own troops get killed by friendly fire. I suppose we should ban them as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:28 AM

5. Sometimes I think they DO want an R to win so they can go on the offensive

View profile

There's not much ratings in pro-govt media but with an R in the WH they (leftist journalists) can go all "Hannity" on the R president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FarLeftFist (Reply #5)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 02:26 PM

129. Sorry...

View profile

But I do not want to suffer 4 years of any p(R)esident just so Cenk can have cannon fodder for the foreseeable future.

And the same old crap about he lied to me, he roped me in, he promised this change etc... Bullshit, Cenk put on his rose-colored glasses and saw what he wanted to see just like every other person who "thought" (read hoped) he'd be some progressive avatar. The wounded acolyte bit is nonsense no matter who is wearing it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ElboRuum (Reply #129)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 05:56 AM

264. Yeah, we should have never put on those

View profile

"hope" and "change" glasses. That was silly. Silly, naive us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #264)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 09:39 PM

314. Interesting.

View profile

The one phrase that was known to every thinking person as campaign puffery is the one that intelligent progressives hung their hats on.

That was pretty naive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ElboRuum (Reply #314)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 10:54 PM

317. Yes, every thinking person should have known

View profile

that he is a liar. I feel so stupid.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UnrepentantLiberal (Reply #317)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 11:43 PM

321. That's the point.

View profile

He isn't a liar. The narrative many progressives embraced "made" him into one. The error was painting over reality with a chosen narrative and then expecting reality to bend to the narrative.

Not once during the campaign did he ever show himself to be particularly (if at all) progressive, but somehow, "hope and change" got conflated and transmogrified in a lot of people's minds as "progressive". He went from centrist to left in three words. Who does that without quite a lot of help from the listener?

Thinking people know the difference between a campaign slogan and a campaign promise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ElboRuum (Reply #321)

Mon Jan 2, 2012, 12:29 AM

322. Yep, I should have known he is a Republican

View profile

who had no intentions of changing anything. The offshore drilling is awesome. Wasn't the oil spill fun? Can't wait to vote for him this November.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:29 AM

6. Cenk is one of those idiots

View profile

That feels the current problem in Washington is that the president isn't liberal enough

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:30 AM

7. He asked Iowa caucus go'ers to use an Occupy strategy

View profile

and vote un-committed. Not to vote against him.

It wouldn't hurt Obama's re-election at all, and might get him to take notice of what people in this country want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:32 AM

9. Exactly right.

View profile

It seems as if the OP hadn't read the article themselves.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #9)


Response to Javaman (Reply #9)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 05:59 AM

265. Too busy writting a reponse

View profile

that said "untrue" and "no facts".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:37 AM

17. There are people on "our side" who want to "control the message" every bit as much as Karl Rove...

View profile

wants it controlled on "his side".

They are craven enough to be afraid of any light being
shined on problems within our party.

Transparency is anathema to these people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #17)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:42 AM

20. Actually,

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:42 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

"There are people on "our side" who want to "control the message" every bit as much as Karl Rove..."

...there are people using Karl Rove tactics on "our side." There primary goal is to create the impression that the President is lacking, weak, a "trojan horse"

<...>

I follow politics for a living; I'm not unaware of how hideous the Republican choices are. But that doesn't mean that we should pretend that President Obama has been brilliant because we're scared of the big, bad Republicans. That would be fundamentally dishonest.

And to be honest, I'm really disappointed that he does not have a primary opponent. This country is dying for someone who is going to take on the establishment. Who is that going to be on our side - Barack Obama? On that, I know whether to laugh or cry. Every time I think about the idea that President Obama might be against the establishment, I laugh and laugh and laugh. There is never been a guy who was this enamored with the establishment. If he had wrestling nickname it would be The Establishment.

The guy who appointed Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley (and a list of hundreds of others, including two new Fed appointments, one of which is a Republican who worked for the Carlyle Group) is not a guy who is interested in changing the system at all. Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/29/1049662/-Vote-Against-Obama-in-Iowa?via=siderecent

Cenk is a dishonest clown.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM

39. what's dishonest or clowning about that?

View profile

Okay, he is trying to be funny in several spots, but nothing wrong with that. The bottom line that Obama is not on our side, has not been on our side, seems as right as rain to me.

But part of that depends on what "our" side is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #39)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:56 AM

89. So

View profile

"Okay, he is trying to be funny in several spots, but nothing wrong with that."

...moronic is now "funny"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:18 AM

50. I agree with him.

View profile

"I follow politics for a living; I'm not unaware of how hideous the Republican choices are. But that doesn't mean that we should pretend that President Obama has been brilliant because we're scared of the big, bad Republicans. That would be fundamentally dishonest.

And to be honest, I'm really disappointed that he does not have a primary opponent. This country is dying for someone who is going to take on the establishment. Who is that going to be on our side - Barack Obama? On that, I know whether to laugh or cry. Every time I think about the idea that President Obama might be against the establishment, I laugh and laugh and laugh. There is never been a guy who was this enamored with the establishment. If he had wrestling nickname it would be The Establishment.

The guy who appointed Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley (and a list of hundreds of others, including two new Fed appointments, one of which is a Republican who worked for the Carlyle Group) is not a guy who is interested in changing the system at all. Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side. "




Many of us voters felt that we had a choice between Obama and Clinton. We were duped.
They were and are playing from the same book.

Your "team" may choose to ignore our awareness at your own peril.

Luckily, the republicans are in COMPLETE disarray and unless they wise up and
coalesce behind Romney, the Democrats don't have a worry in the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #50)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:55 AM

87. I know

View profile

"Many of us voters felt that we had a choice between Obama and Clinton. We were duped.
They were and are playing from the same book."

...Hillary makes Obama look like a RW Republican, right?

I mean, if Hillary had become President we'd have single payer and pot legal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:22 PM

99. no, silly, Hillary is DLC

View profile

But we thought, we hoped, that Obama was not DLC. So we got all fired up and hopeful and we ran down the field to kick that football to the moon, but Lucy Obama yanked it away and said "Haw haw, I am DLC too." and we went flying into the air and slammed on the ground.

Now, we are just a wee bit peeved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #99)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:58 PM

110. Funny,

View profile

"But we thought, we hoped, that Obama was not DLC. "

...I knew exactly who Obama was, and he wasn't DLC, still isn't. See, anyone who feels they were duped wasn't paying attention, IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #110)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 02:06 PM

126. His cabinet was almost completely comprised of DLC bigwigs.

View profile

Some of us who were paying attention got duped.

Some of us who weren't paying attention got duped.

We were all duped into thinking that Obama offered
an alternative to the 3rd Way, DLC powers-that-be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #110)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 05:26 AM

262. I knew exactly who Obama was

View profile

and I knew that we were not electing a progressive. It was the best of two bad choices, but it was the best available at the time.

I had "hoped" for more "change", but I was pretty sure that we were going to get just more of the same and in fact we have done so.

I believe the primaries are a good place to send a message, yet I suspect that even if it were a strong "we are not happy", it will be dismissed.

Romney will be the GOP nominee, Obama will win in the General Election and we will see what comes around in 2016.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #87)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:37 PM

106. You don't understand at all.

View profile

Things would be NO DIFFERENT.

The economy would still be rigged by the same
protected players.

There WAS no choice between Clinton and Obama.
It was a Hobson's Choice.

Which means NO choice.

Still, you would think that it would have taught them
a lesson.

That they should at least pay lip-service to
a progressive agenda....but all they took away was that
we could be duped into voting for something that didn't
exist and now they don't even have to pretend that we
have choices within the party.

I continue to support the Progressive Caucus in the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #106)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:56 PM

109. No

View profile

"There WAS no choice between Clinton and Obama.
It was a Hobson's Choice. "

...you don't understand. There was a choice between Hillary, Obama and a few other Democrats. People made their choices, and it came down to Hillary and Obama.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #109)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:10 PM

112. The "choice" between "Hillary" and "Obama" was NO choice.

View profile

Same team, same players, no choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #112)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:19 PM

115. Um

View profile

The "choice" between "Hillary" and "Obama" was NO choice.


Yes, it was. Go and take a look at the candidates, all of them. If people wanted to choose one of the others, they would have. It came down to two candidates, and you got to choose one.

In fact, if you didn't want to choose one of those candidates, you didn't have to.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #115)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:45 PM

185. Different names, faces, and gender

View profile

Little substantive difference between policies which means no real choice and what little differences there were blew away like dust in the wind as the cabinet was staffed with the Who's who among DLC'ers.

The "choice" was superficial and sure as hell not worth flogging three and four years down the line.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #112)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:25 PM

119. Well I caucused for Edwards, even though he had dropped out

View profile

but there were only five of us, and in the 2nd round, we all went with Obama. So the DFA and Ted Kennedy, presumably thinking we were defeating the DLC wing of the party. Well, we seem to have won the battle and lost the war.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:19 PM

137. Where is the dishonesty there? Did Obama NOT appoint all those Wall Street

View profile

people to his cabinet? And that is a serious issue for his next election. Who is he planning to put on his cabinet next time?

Cenk is using a strategy to get the attention of those in charge. Since politics is all about strategy, why do you object to the people most affected by politics using it also, for a CHANGE?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #137)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 10:53 AM

312. no response to your question....

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 05:27 PM

166. You think Cenk is a dishonest clown?

View profile

Seems to me that everything he said is mostly true, care to provide some proof of his dishonesty?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #20)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:58 PM

197. Everything in those three paragraphs is 100% true.

View profile

Sorry it doesn't fit with the Circle D (TM) agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PassingFair (Reply #17)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 10:52 AM

311. Oh yes indeed... and it is CREEPY!

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:17 AM

48. Do you believe the media will see it as not against Obama?

View profile

What I would prefer is if Obama gets a large number of Iowans out to caucus for him with no opposition. The best story would be if Obama gets more caucus goers than the sum of the Republicans. The caucus could then act as a really cool Democratic victory rally to start the reelection campaign.

I wonder if - under the radar - the Obama organizers are doing what they can to get people to come out and be with fellow democrats to reelect a President who faced really horrendous problems and has made good (but not enough) progress even with the anklebiting Republican Congressmen trying to stop him every second.

Maybe they can provide good refreshments.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to karynnj (Reply #48)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:21 PM

190. I love this post! "...anklebiting Republican Congressmen"

View profile

...is the perfect visual description.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #7)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:26 AM

58. Haven't they been screaming about what they want for three years?

View profile

We know what they want. They want "balls." They want an all powerful Presidency with no input from Congress. They want a President who will act as if Republicans don't exist and have no rights. As if the Republicans cannot get any votes. They think that if the President demands something, the bully pulpit magically gets everyone on the President's side immediately, not daring to oppose him.

They've screamed and stomped their feet for three years, and guess what - we still have a government with three branches and one that does not do vague things like "prosecute bankers" - no, it still insists on prosecuting particular individuals against whom there is enough evidence - probable cause - to bring that individual to trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #7)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 10:48 AM

308. That's my take on this as well

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:30 AM

8. Where exactly does it say that in the article? I just read it.

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:31 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

From the article...

But there is one thing we can do right now that doesn't really hurt the chances of the president getting re-elected and doesn't help Republicans one bit. It is an idea that Occupy Iowa came up with. In the Iowa caucuses you can vote for "uncommitted." In fact, since the 1970's "uncommitted" has won twice on the Democratic side and it beat Bob Dole in 1980. Of course, the Republican Party has shut down this option on their side. They say you can vote that way in the GOP field but they will not register those votes or send those delegates. Of course, they're the GOP; they have no interest in your dissent.

But if all of those people were to go and participate on the Democratic side they might have an effect. If "uncommitted" beat President Obama on the Democratic side in Iowa that would make some news. That might even get the attention of The Establishment. So far, he has only responded to right-wing pressure. He is the consummate politician, so if there was actually a little bit of pressure on his left he might have to respond to it, especially during an election season. Wouldn't it be amazing if President Obama acted like a progressive on some issue because he was worried about the voters?

By the way, this strategy also has the benefit of being accurate. I am "uncommitted" toward Obama. I'm uncommitted from supporting a guy that has walked all over our civil liberties, that thinks tax cuts are the only answer, that gave all of the money to the bankers and asked for nothing in return, that thinks the right-wing establishment has all of the answers. Uncommitted is the kindest word I have.

If you live in Iowa, please send a message to the President for the rest of us. We voted for change last time, apparently you didn't hear us. If you don't hear us soon, you might be the one that gets changed.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/29/1049662/-Vote-Against-Obama-in-Iowa
------------------------------

What he's stating is all about Iowa.

It's about sending a message to the President that we want him to change his policies to stop favoring the center right. That's all.

If you think a strategy to hold a president responcible to his base is bad, well then, that's a pretty odd perspective.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:33 AM

11. Thanks for posting that.

View profile

It's rather different from what the OP claimed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:34 AM

13. He's

View profile

"But there is one thing we can do right now that doesn't really hurt the chances of the president getting re-elected and doesn't help Republicans one bit."

....a bigger moron for that statement.

For someone in TV he appears absolutely clueless about messaging. In fact, I don't think that. I think he's dogwhistling for trolls.

His entire argument is specious. His timing, a weak before the Republican caucus, is not accidental.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM

41. I think you are lost.

View profile

or have read an entirely different article.

All he is saying, as I stated in my first reply is, that we are to hold the president responcible for his actions and to listen to the base.

I honestly don't know how you interpreted it any other way than that.

It seems as if you are more concerned with the beltway concept of "messenging" rather than using common sense as a way to get the president to listen to us.

It's about the people, remember?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:49 AM

83. Do you honestly believe that repeatedly calling someone a "moron" is an effective strategy?

View profile

And it's a week before the Republican caucus, not a "weak".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #13)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 03:25 PM

139. 'Messaging'. Is that what politics is all about now?

View profile

We don't want 'messaging', that is for political operatives who get paid for their efforts, NOT for the American people. We want facts and truth not obscured by Karl Rove-type 'messaging'. 'Messaging' is a deceptive tactic and sorry if the people are now fed up to the teeth with these political games and are getting in the way of all this 'messaging' and demanding straightforward plain talk from those they elect. It might put some political operatives out of business, but that won't destroy the country imho.

We've had enough 'messaging' and too little direct talk about serious issues from those who are asking for our support.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #139)


Response to ProSense (Reply #13)

Wed Jan 4, 2012, 08:36 AM

332. are you calling someone "Republican" for not supporting the President's "messaging"?

View profile

jeez.

way to win over another voter you probably pushed away several months ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:35 AM

14. The headline reads "Vote Against Obama in Iowa"

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NNN0LHI (Reply #14)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:11 AM

44. so you only read headlines?

View profile

that's really sad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #8)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:11 PM

114. and who will persuade the boner and mr. turtling

View profile

to change their minds and act like human beings?

all this angst is way off target. if some would spend all this bile on those cretins instead of the President it might have some sort of positive effect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #114)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 04:54 PM

163. I think we spend a lot of bile on the repukes.

View profile

I also believe that the president isn't a cult of personality. He's an elected official that has to listen to the people just like any other politican.... Listen to me? Will you! LOL

I almost believed all that about politicians listening to us for a second! LOL

I crack me up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #114)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 08:01 PM

198. Certainly not the Conciliator-in-Chief.

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:34 AM

12. Cenk is calling for a protest vote in Iowa.

View profile

He's not advocating support for Republican candidates and he's not advocating *not* voting for Obama in the general election. He's merely espousing a way for those who are digruntled on the left to make their voices heard.

I'm not ready to throw Cenk under the bus.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:36 AM

16. Here's

View profile

"Cenk is calling for a protest vote in Iowa."

...my favorite comment:

I "protest voted" in one Senate primary....I'm now represented by Senator Ron Johnson.

http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1049662/44403925#c47


Cenk is a moron. I wish I could find a strong word.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:42 AM

21. uncommitted in Iowa won't make Obama not the Dem nominee

View profile

unless of course, you are very afraid that un committed can beat Obama...

pretty sad if you ask me. have a little faith.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to boston bean (Reply #21)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:46 AM

24. You know

View profile

uncommitted in Iowa won't make Obama not the Dem nominee

unless of course, you are very afraid that un committed can beat Obama...

pretty sad if you ask me. have a little faith.

...what's sad: the vultures who get their kicks off people like Cenk. His post has nothing to do with a protest vote and everything to do with his anti-Obama agenda.

<...>

I follow politics for a living; I'm not unaware of how hideous the Republican choices are. But that doesn't mean that we should pretend that President Obama has been brilliant because we're scared of the big, bad Republicans. That would be fundamentally dishonest.

And to be honest, I'm really disappointed that he does not have a primary opponent. This country is dying for someone who is going to take on the establishment. Who is that going to be on our side - Barack Obama? On that, I know whether to laugh or cry. Every time I think about the idea that President Obama might be against the establishment, I laugh and laugh and laugh. There is never been a guy who was this enamored with the establishment. If he had wrestling nickname it would be The Establishment.

The guy who appointed Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel and Bill Daley (and a list of hundreds of others, including two new Fed appointments, one of which is a Republican who worked for the Carlyle Group) is not a guy who is interested in changing the system at all. Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/29/1049662/-Vote-Against-Obama-in-Iowa?via=siderecent


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #24)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:01 AM

29. People would do better to try and understand their opponents on the left.

View profile

Listening is better than spewing propaganda, or counter-propaganda from your point of view. People have legitimate grievances against the President. Cenk is not entirely wrong here.

There are two main issues in play here: the direction of the country, and the direction of the Democratic Party.

Re-electing President Obama is essential if we are to move the country leftward (or at least keep it from lurching rightward).

But there are many among us who feel that the Democratic Party itself is too far to the right, too captive by corporate donations and wealthy special interest groups. What are those people supposed to do? Just shut up and get with the program?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:06 AM

32. You're arguing with Prosense.

View profile

As Barney Frank said, it's like trying to argue with a table leg. His mind is made up, already.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #32)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM

42. Moronic! n/t

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #42)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:14 AM

47. Very clever.

View profile

Have a good Thursday. I know I will.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #47)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:18 AM

51. Yeah,

View profile

"Have a good Thursday. I know I will."

...I will too, and the comment was still moronic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #42)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 08:25 PM

205. Stop shouting at the mirror.

View profile

Oh, yeah welcome to my list.

Bye

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to theaocp (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 30, 2011, 11:25 AM

285. Amen to that!!!

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:09 AM

38. I

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

People would do better to try and understand their opponents on the left.

Listening is better than spewing propaganda, or counter-propaganda from your point of view. People have legitimate grievances against the President. Cenk is not entirely wrong here.

There are two main issues in play here: the direction of the country, and the direction of the Democratic Party.

...see your point.

Cenk: "Change was a cutesy slogan he used to trick us into thinking he was on our side... The agenda of the president sucks and is deeply Republican."

I think I understand Cenk: He's a moron.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #38)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:22 AM

55. He's a pundit, so naturally his words are over the top, but ...

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:26 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

Who of us in 2008 thought the Bush tax cuts would have been extended? All Congress had to do was nothing.

It was doubtful the cuts would have been extended even had McCain won the election. Without 51 Republican votes in the Senate, an extension would have been impossible without some Democratic votes.

I'm an investor. I watched in horror as the world economy nearly unraveled in 2008. It was a historic thing, like Pearl Harbor or 9-11 - something I had previously thought was not possible in my lifetime. And I'm so very underwhelmed by the President's response. It has very much been Republican-lite, and literally nothing has been done to prevent another such crisis from taking place within a few short years of now. It's debatable how much more change the President could actually have accomplished in regulating Wall Street, but he certainly could have done more to advocate such changes.

Look at his appointments. He rolled over Bush's Secretary of Defense. He might as well have rolled over Paulson as Treasury Secretary - Hell Paulson might have done a better job than Geithner. I've seen some argue that these appointments don't matter and that cabinet secretaries are "number crunchers" who don't make policy. Yeah, right.

Cenk is over the top. He's a little hysterical.

But a moron he is not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #55)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:27 AM

62. Really?

View profile

He's a pundit, so naturally his words are over the top, but ...


Who of us in 2008 thought the Bush tax cuts would have been extended? All Congress had to do was nothing.

It was doubtful the cuts would have been extended even had McCain won the election. Without 51 votes in the Senate, and extension would have been impossible without some Democratic votes.

I'm an investor. I watched in horror as the world economy nearly unraveled in 2008. It was a historic thing, like Pearl Harbor or 9-11 - something I had previously thought was not possible in my lifetime. And I'm so very underwhelmed by the President's response. It has very much been Republican-lite, and literally nothing has been done to prevent another such crisis from taking place within a few short years of now. It's debatable how much more change the President could actually have accomplished in regulating Wall Street, but he certainly could have done more to advocate such changes.

Look at his appointments. He rolled over Bush's Secretary of Defense. He might as well have rolled over Paulson as Treasury Secretary - Hell Paulson might have done a better job than Geithner. I've seen some argue that these appointments don't matter and that cabinet secretaries are "number crunchers" who don't make policy. Yeah, right.

A vote to extend the Bush tax cuts that was the result of negotiating to get Republican support in the Senate to extend unemployment for a year, the ETIC, Medicaid expanded funding, and other aid for poor and middle-class Americans is cause to vote against the President?

In 2008, most of people didn't believe health care reform would pass and DADT would be repealed.

Cent is over the top. He's a little hysterical.

But a moron he is not.

No, he's a moron.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #62)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:44 AM

78. Political brinksmanship is a game the President must be prepared to play.

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:53 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Would the Republicans really have blocked unemployment benefits just to protect tax cuts for the wealthiest? We'll never know for sure since the issue was never pressed.

But it certainly should have been shouted from the rooftops that they were willing to do so.

Personally, I think they would have been forced to cave. It would have been too politically unpopular for them to have done otherwise.

Look at the recent situation with their obstructionism with regard to the payroll tax cuts. When push came to shove, they caved. I think the Democrats handled this one much better.

Is any of this cause to vote against the President? Not in a general election, no. But if I think he needs to move further left on economic issues, it's my duty to express those feelings any way I can. Especially since I think a move leftward would not only be good for the country, it would also be good for the Democratic party's long-term electoral prospects.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #78)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:10 PM

93. Yeah

View profile

"Political brinksmanship is a game the President must be prepared to play.

Would the Republicans really have blocked unemployment benefits just to protect tax cuts for the wealthiest? We'll never know for sure since the issue was never pressed."

...I'm fairly certain everyone, including Cenk. know how to play it better than Obama.

You see, they would have let all the aid expire, and then negotiated with a Republican House majority to expand it.

"Look at the recent situation with their obstructionism with regard to the payroll tax cuts. When push came to shove, they caved. I think the Democrats handled this one much better."

Fascinating! How on earth did that happen? Could it be that the Republicans had nothing left in their arsenal, that the President let them exhaust all their options? They lost the debt ceiling debate to a trigger they didn't want.

Last year the President said it would be a fight he would welcome. His comment was met with: He'll cave.

He didn't, and now it's being used as an example of not caving. Fascinating!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #93)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:23 PM

100. I'm sorry, I must be too much of a red to understand what you just said there.

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:24 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

To be clear, I'm praising Obama for the way he and Congressional Dems handled this recent confrontation with the Republicans over the payroll tax cuts. To me, it proves that the Republicans will respond to pressure.

I'm also criticizing the way the tax-cut extensions were handled. I would have hated it had those benefits been allowed to expire, but that may have been prefrerable to what actually happened. It would, of course, have caused severe pain for lots of people. But the budget cuts that are being debated for deficit reduction purposes will also cause lots of pain.

And in the end, they got two years of tax cut extensions for one year of benefits. And we didn't even get a debt-limit increase as part of that deal. So, no, this was not handled well by the administration.

I actually think the President has been moving in my direction for the last six months or so. I don't know if loudmouths like Cenk or Paul Krugman or Robert Reich had anything to do with that or not. But just in case they did, I hope they continue speaking out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #100)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:29 PM

104. Well,

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:30 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

I actually think the President has been moving in my direction for the last six months or so. I don't know if loudmouths like Cenk or Paul Krugman or Rober Reich had anything to do with that or not. But just in case they did, I hope they continue speaking out.


...I think Krugman and Reich's opinions are valuable, even when I disagree with them. They are not "loudmouths," but Cenk is a moron who should never be mentioned in the same sentence with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #104)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:44 PM

108. Well, then that's our biggest disagreement.

View profile

I think Cenk is a smart guy, and basically well-intentioned. I certainly don't agree with everything he says, but I can ususally at least see where he is coming from.

I think Cenk's experience at MSNBC has radicalized him to some extent. I think he very much feels he was "silenced" because he dared to speak out against mainstream Dems. And whether that is true or not, I can understand the way he feels.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #108)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:10 PM

113. Well,

View profile

I think Cenk is a smart guy, and basically well-intentioned. I certainly don't agree with everything he says, but I can ususally at least see where he is coming from.

I think Cenk's experience at MSNBC has radicalized him to some extent. I think he very much feels he was "silenced" because he dared to speak out against mainstream Dems. And whether that is true or not, I can understand the way he feels.

...I think he's an opportunist who is confused. Anyone trying to compare Reagan favorably to Obama isn't all there. "Radicalized"? Cenk still supports some Republicans, and he certainly isn't a progressive radical.

It's almost certain that this latest anti-Obama rant was an act of desperation and not "smart," especially for someone desperate for an audience. He isn't winning any friends, and in fact is losing many.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #113)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:32 PM

121. I think if he was desperate for an audience, he would have stayed at MSNBC ...

View profile

and done what he was told.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #29)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:27 AM

60. The left never listens either

View profile

The left seems to feel so entitled. Why not listen to your 'opponents' in the middle, then?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to treestar (Reply #60)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:35 AM

69. I can only speak for myself, and I think I do listen.

View profile

I think the ACA was the best change to the U.S. healthcare system since the creation of Medicaid. I would have preferred a public option, and I think the President should have tried harder to make that argument, but the legislation we finally got is historic and will help lots of people. The President deserves lots of praise for this.

Likewise, I think arguments from the left that the payroll tax cut somehow endangers Social Security are spurious. The payroll tax cuts are all about short-term stimulus to the economy and they are funded from the general fund.

This President oversaw the end of don't ask don't tell, and he handled the situation masterfully.

I try to give credit where credit is due. But there needs to be more understanding on both sides, and I hope that eventually happens. Fracturing of the Democratic Party would be a disaster, but it will take understanding on both sides in order to prevent that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #16)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:20 AM

52. What Senate primary was there for Feingold?

View profile

That comment does not make any sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hfojvt (Reply #52)


Response to toddaa (Reply #72)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:41 AM

76. Are you having fun in your fact-free world?

View profile

You seem intent to focus on me. Why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #12)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:11 AM

43. +1 nt

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:35 AM

15. I never cared for him...

View profile

He would go on a rant against something only to completely reverse himself on the same issue very shortly after all the while pretending he never ranted in the first place.

He can't quite decide which he dislikes more, Republicans or Democrats, imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #15)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:08 AM

35. Apparently, you know nothing about Cenk.

View profile

He never pretends he didn't rant about something in the aftermath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #35)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:28 AM

65. Ummm, yeah, I do, I watched him do the rant one day....

View profile

and completely reverse his opinion the next without any acknowledgment he had ranted on the other side the day before. After that, I stopped watching him.

He is a talking head who, not unlike those on CNN, go for the ratings instead of discussing issues using facts and reason.

You may well like that, I do not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #65)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:33 AM

68. I'd love to follow this up.

View profile

He's not a monday-morning quarterback. You said you watched two shows and that was enough, yes? Perhaps a larger sample size would help with your understanding. Cheers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #68)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:41 AM

75. LOL, thanks but no thanks,

View profile

I have watched the odd clip on DU and, gosh, same Cenk, nothing different from when I watched those two shows originally.

You and I have a different take on him, both of us entitled to our opinion.

Cheers to you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #75)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:47 AM

79. No worries.

View profile

However, you can't say he doesn't correct himself without actually watching/reading his work. At least, you can't do so honestly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #79)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:50 AM

84. LOL, calling me dishonest...

View profile

doesn't make me so. Keep trying, tho, it is amusing in a Cenk kind of way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spazito (Reply #84)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:56 AM

88. LOL, you're right, I am apparently rubber and you're glue.

View profile

What rot. Your evidence for your opinion of Cenk is sorely lacking, but you're still willing to forge your opinion anyway. However, that's a bridge too far. Your mind is made up. How myopic.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:39 AM

18. So? It's a primary and he's "working within the system" as the moderates advise us to do.

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:43 AM

22. Cenk is an Asshat. nt

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MineralMan (Reply #22)


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:46 AM

23. I voted "against Obama" in the last primary.

View profile

(I actually voted "for" someone else, but let's use the language of the headline.)

And if the same guy was running again, I'd vote "against Obama" in the coming primary.

What's the big deal? How did it hurt the Democratic nominee in the general election then, and how would it hurt him now?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:00 AM

27. Hey, don't muddy the water with Facts.

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:04 AM

31. Yeah,

View profile

I voted "against Obama" in the last primary.

And if the same guy was running again, I'd vote "against Obama" in the coming primary.

What's the big deal? How did it hurt the Democratic nominee in the general election then, and how would it hurt him now?

...look at all the prominent Democrats lining up to primary Obama. There's still hope for Hillary.

I mean, Cenk is only doing this in the best interest of Democrats and democracy.

How about a vote of no confidence against Obama based on his bullshit assertions?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #31)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM

40. This appears to be a vote of no confidence.

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

I recommend clapping louder. You might be heard.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Iggo (Reply #23)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:38 PM

107. "how would it hurt him now?"

View profile

Another question you have to ask, how would it "move him left"?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 10:57 AM

26. No calling out

View profile

Of Senators in Washington that stand with a D next to their name. . .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JustAnotherGen (Reply #26)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:28 AM

64. Or Republicans

View profile

IMO the PL just wishes they had no power, and treats President Obama as if the Republicans had no power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:04 AM

30. this is when the opposition becomes a threat

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:10 AM USA/ET - Edit history (2)

. . .to the very goals they claim to support. Undermining the Democratic nominee is just foolishness, given that the only viable alternative is the republican candidate.

I'll strongly oppose ANYONE who advocates defeating our Democratic nominee. There's no high principle in undermining President Obama's campaign for re-election. There's nothing to be gained and much to lose, in that endeavor.

But, it's a primary and he can do any futile thing he wants.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:06 AM

33. Poor Cenk ... "ReformedRepublican" ... now "Born Again Liberal"

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:12 AM

45. The spectrum of what defined a Republican has shifted.

View profile

Not Cenk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #33)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:13 AM

46. read #12.

View profile

it's glaringly apparent you didn't read the article.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Javaman (Reply #46)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:14 PM

189. I read it.

View profile

And I've listened to Cenk plenty.

His goal is EYEBALLS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JoePhilly (Reply #33)

Sun Jan 1, 2012, 09:43 PM

315. and Democrats used to be to the left

View profile

but now they are just like the republicans 20 years ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:07 AM

34. I hope this doesn't get a lot of traction.

View profile

While we can argue that trying to send a message to Obama (not good enough) has merit, I think of the perception this would create in the minds of the greater voting public. In the General, perception is everything. It seems akin to painting a target on Obama's chest and inviting the other party to take aim.

I am glad that Cenk is saying aloud what many are thinking, but the possible ramifications of this action are frightening.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LiberalAndProud (Reply #34)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:36 AM

71. Well,

View profile

"I hope this doesn't get a lot of traction...am glad that Cenk is saying aloud what many are thinking, but the possible ramifications of this action are frightening."

...he posted it at HuffPo:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cenk-uygur/vote-against-obama-in-iow_b_1174314.html

Maximum effect!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #71)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 01:24 PM

118. And you posted it here.

View profile

I wonder how many in the Iowa caucus will read it, and if they read it if they will be swayed. I doubt that Cenk has all that much power yet. Sadly, he just doesn't carry the kind of clout that Limbaugh wields.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:08 AM

36. I like Cenk but think he and others are offbase

View profile

Focusing their anger on Obama vs congress. Jesus could have been elected last time and he would have done no better dealing with conservadems that vote with republicans and republicans that have been he'll bent on obstruction to the point that they rail and vot against policies they once endorsed. Republicans willingness to throw the entire world economy into turmoil and punish the working class in order to discredit and thwart a democratic administration is disgusting. But what do we do? Focus our anger on Obama instead of concentrating on winning back congress and getting rid of conservadems.

Not that I'm not disappointed with Obamas appointments and centrism just think it's easier to push him to the left with a more liberal congress than it would be to push say any of the ignorant lunatics the right is running for office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to abelenkpe (Reply #36)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 06:45 PM

184. Please reread what you wrote.

View profile

"Jesus could have been elected last time and he would have done no better dealing with conservadems that vote with republicans and republicans that have been he'll bent on obstruction to the point that they rail and vot against policies they once endorsed."

I doubt Jesus would have advocated for an old Republican health plan. I'm sure he would have kept single payer on the table for at least the first day.

And why are so many on this board happy that our Democratic President got a Republican health plan passed?

At least we don't have to hear about the multi-dimensional chess anymore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to A Simple Game (Reply #184)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:05 PM

186. You're right he would have pushed to keep

View profile

Last edited Thu Dec 29, 2011, 07:07 PM USA/ET - Edit history (1)

Single payer in play. I am not OK with HCR. It was a fucking joke. Today families are still vulnerable to going bankrupt simply because they were unlucky enough to have one member develop a serious illness even if they do have healthcare. Healthcare costs are still outrageous. But no one would have been able to get that through this congress. Am I OK with that? No I'm pissed off and disappointed. At congress. We need to elect more progressive and liberal people to congress. That is the entire point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:20 AM

53. Cenk is over at Daily Kos

View profile

Trolling for relevance and looking for his next gig.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Original post)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:21 AM

54. Cenk's a loser. I mean, he's on a network that reaches 10's of homes, nationwide.

View profile

This is his attempt at PR. He's hoping to use Obama bashing to raise his own insignifcant profile. I'll bet we'd all be pretty surprised at who the professional left takes monies from. Afterall, these are tough times for some, and they have to make a living too, and thanks to our wonderful USSC & Citizens United, there's lots of untraceable cash flowing to anyone willing to help take down this president, and indeed, the Democratic Party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #54)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:25 AM

56. As long as we're speculating,

View profile

T_D, when did you stop beating your loved ones?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #56)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:31 AM

66. I'll stop beating them when Cenk gives back his Koch Bros. check.

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #66)


Response to theaocp (Reply #70)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:52 AM

85. Yours is a "personal attack", which will likely be hidden. Mine was an attack on a public figure.

View profile

See the difference? You've attacked me (personally) twice now. Two hidden posts in one thread might not be good for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #85)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 11:59 AM

91. Alert away. n/t

View profile

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #91)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:03 PM

92. Nope, I won't do it because I like folks to see how thin skinned Cenk loyalists are.

View profile

In the face of criticism, they go personal, cuz they got nothing else.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tarheel_Dem (Reply #92)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:10 PM

94. Right.

View profile

The usual suspects really need to have their minds changed. You guys are hilarious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to theaocp (Reply #94)

Thu Dec 29, 2011, 12:25 PM

101. "usual suspects". "You guys". You just can't stop, can you?

View profile