NYT: Disappointed Supporters Question Obama

[seafan]

(edited for copyright purposes proud patriot Moderator Democratic Undeground)

Disappointed Supporters Question Obama



(Doug Mills/The New York Times)
President Obama discussed jobs and the economy during a CNBC town-hall-style meeting at the Newseum in Washington on Monday.

By SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
September 20, 2010

WASHINGTON — It was billed as “Investing In America,” a live televised conversation between President Obama and American workers, students, business people and retirees on the state of the economy, a kind of Wall Street to Main Street reality check.

But it sounded like a therapy session for disillusioned Obama supporters.

In question after question in Monday’s one-hour session, which took place at the Newseum here and was televised on CNBC, Mr. Obama was confronted by people who said, in short, that they had expected more from him. People from Main Street wanted to know if the American dream still lived for them. People from Wall Street complained that he was treating them like a piñata, “whacking us with the stick,” in the words of a former law school classmate of Mr. Obama’s who now runs a hedge fund.

“I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for,” said the first questioner, an African-American woman who identified herself as a chief financial officer, a mother and a military veteran. “I’ve been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class, and I’m waiting, sir, I’m waiting. I still don’t feel it yet.”

A 30-year-old law school graduate, Ted Brassfield, told Mr. Obama he had hoped to pursue a career in public service — like the president — but could barely pay the interest on his student loans, let alone think of getting married or starting a family.

“I was really inspired by you and your campaign and the message you brought, and that inspiration is dying away,” Mr. Brassfield said, adding, “What I really want to know is: Is the American dream dead for me?”

And a third-generation business owner from Pennsylvania, Walter Allen, told Mr. Obama that his biggest challenge as an entrepreneur was a fearful, negative public. “How can you regain the political center?” Mr. Allen asked plaintively. “You’re losing the war of sound bites. You’re losing the media cycles.”

(snip)
.....

If Monday’s session seemed an extraordinary display of disaffection with the president, he did not seem ruffled by it. Rather, he seemed resigned to the frustration of his questioners.

That abyss is racing upward toward us.

[MadHound]

1. Lot's of people, including myself, voted for change

Yet in many ways all we got was more of the same, piled higher and deeper.

What's truly sad is that we gave Obama and Democrats all the tools and political capital to bring about major changes, yet it has all been squandered.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

16. Truly, that "supporter" that felt Obama has been too cruel to Wall Street has suffered.

:eyes:

[MadHound]

22. And that has exactly nothing to do with my post

But that's OK, you got to play with the rolly eyes smiley and that's all that really mattered, right?

[SemiCharmedQuark]

34. The article cites some hedgefund manager who thinks Obama has bullied Wall Street

You decide this is where to stick your "Obama has disappointed us all" post.

I am pointing out that you really don't belong including yourself in that group since there is no way for your goals to be satisfied concurrently.

[alcibiades_mystery]

48. ROFL

Oh Lawd, we have no memory now.

:rofl:

[prolesunited]

65. And he didn't fix everything in less than two years?

Seriously, how long has it taken to get into this mess? Shouldn't he be given at least the same amount of time to fix it? At least let him finish his term before turning your back.

Has he started a new war? Given tax breaks for the rich? Privatized Social Security? Cut federal regulations? I could go on.

[ClassWarrior]

2. Why would anyone unrec an article about folks who are pulling for O to do better?

NGU.

[Caliman73]

72. The problem with the article...

It paints the situation in the worst possible light for the President. I am one of those disappointed Obama supporters but that article is crap. The president was not ruffled but resigned? He took the time to answer difficult situations the best way he could. He had a decent town hall meeting where he listened to and responded to serious issues. The article made it seem like he was a deer in headlights. Did you watch the show? If not take a look then read the article again and see if you agree with it.

We should push our leaders to do better all the time. What we shouldn't do is allow hit pieces to go unchallenged.

[laughingliberal]

93. Those people are happy with things the way they are. nt

[AlinPA]

3. That was CNBC program. It's what I would expect. The introduction to that "town hall"

was a real hatchet job.

[ClarkUSA]

4. How do we know these people weren't GOP plants? I mean, it was CBNC who picked the questioners.

Nevertheless, President Obama got plenty of applause after each major point he made.

[ClassWarrior]

6. How does one know if one's not in denial?

It can't be easy going through one's life with one's fingers in one's ears, singing "Lalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalalala..."

NGU.

[ClarkUSA]

11. Look in the mirror and then tell me the answer.

:rofl:

[ClassWarrior]

53. Not here. I think my President is better served by knowing what people think.

I don't know about the CNBC forum. I didn't watch it. But it makes me wonder why so many people around here go to such great lengths to deny that President Obama can do better. I mean, for goodness sake, he invited us to challenge him! That sounds to me like an opportunity. Let's work with the man to do good. Not deify him.

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

58. Isn't this why the President holds events like this? Shouldn't he want to know...

...people's concerns? Or do you want it to be bread and circuses? Should there only be cheerleading supporters in the audiences? Wasn't that one of the key problems with the last administration? No diversity of opinion?

:shrug:

NGU.

[ClarkUSA]

98. Actually, President Obama did great at the forum. What's bullshit is the corporate narrative. nt

[ClassWarrior]

118. The corporate narrative is always bullshit. But you're avoiding my point.

Why the knee-jerk reaction against anyone who wants him to do a better job of governing?

NGU.

[ClarkUSA]

134. Quote where I said that. Your "point" = strawman argument. nt

[ClassWarrior]

150. What do you call, "How do we know these people weren't GOP plants?"

Why the assumption that they're plants, rather than citizens with legitimate concerns? I won't bother to look up all the other times I've seen you have a knee-jerk reaction to criticism of the President, but if I recall correctly, there are plenty.

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

154. Didn't think I'd get an answer.

:eyes:

NGU.

[Tarheel_Dem]

8. It only took the title to draw them in. Witness the first two posts.

This townhall was a bunch of rich guys, whining about their taxes going up. The president told the questioner, point blank, Yes, your taxes are going up. That's Change I Can Believe In.

[ClarkUSA]

12. Exactly. Yeah, it's funny how some "Democrats" trust CNBC all of a sudden.

:eyes:

[sad sally]

94. He also said his own taxes on what he makes over $250,000 would be going up.

And that was the way it should be. Believe back in 2008 during the campaign even President Clinton said he should be taxed at a higher rate.
Could very well be that those of us making under that amount will be asked to help out more in coming years also, as the two unpaid for still on-going wars need to be paid for, plus the 8 years of unfunded tax cuts, and I'm not sure our grands or great-grandkids will want us around if we don't step up and pay what's due.

[Skittles]

38. how do we know they are not plants?

BECAUSE MANY MANY DUers FEEL EXACTLY THE SAME WAY

[DirkGently]

66. Guess we're all plants, eh? 'Cause if we're not, the criticism is real, and that CAN'T BEEEEE!

[Skittles]

76. CORRECT

[DirkGently]

133. I say we're geraniums. Attractive, sturdy, and fun to say.

[ClarkUSA]

99. lol! Yeah, sure. You obviously didn't watch the show twice like I did. nt

[Mefistofeles]

5. African American woman, "“I’m exhausted of defending you"

From the article: "“I’m exhausted of defending you, defending your administration, defending the mantle of change that I voted for,� said the first questioner, an African-American woman who identified herself as a chief financial officer, a mother and a military veteran. “I’ve been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class, and I’m waiting, sir, I’m waiting. I still don’t feel it yet.�

[FrenchieCat]

10. "Chief Financial Officer" tired to have to "Defend" Obama,

Considering how he has been attacked every which way,
every day including Sunday, my ass would be tired too!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

13. I know that's right. I'm exhausted, too. But they attacked him as soon as he had the NERVE to

announce his campaign.

[lamp_shade]

7. I watched the whole thing and did not see the "extraordinary display of disaffection" that the

author saw. WTF?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

14. Huffington Post is amazing, too! Makes it seem as though Obama has very little support

left.

Amazing. Just amazing!! :(

[rucky]

70. +1

[Hansel]

145. +1 also. nt

[USArmyParatrooper]

9. Is there a video link? I would like to watch the whole thing.

[girl gone mad]

15. The level of denial in this thread is off the charts.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

17. Yup. Progressives trying to hitch their wagons to disillusioned Wall Street people who feel Obama

was too hard on them and make it seem like a cumulative "disappointment". I don't know if I'd call it denial, but it surely isn't healthy.

[foxfeet]

18. Yes, there are those who would defend Obama if he axe-murdered Michelle and their daughters.

Yeah, I know that's hyperbole, but seriously, what does it take for some folks to acknowledge that the change we all voted for survives only in a pale, anemic form? I voted for Obama and will do so again. I know he inherited a mess and that it takes time to effect change, especially after eight years of Republican douchebaggery. Nonetheless, some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts. It's as if the admission that there might be even a hint of a problem will cause the entire edifice to come crashing down. This level of denial inhibits learning; if we don't learn from our own errors, we are likely to repeat them. And that, my friends, will lead to true disaster.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[SemiCharmedQuark]

20. What does it take to acknowledge that we are not all pulling in the same direction?

Some of those people wanted him to be nicer to Wall Street! WTF on DU wants that!? If someone is complaining about him being too nice to Wall Street, I couldn't give a damn and I certainly wouldn't use it as evidence to bolster my claim that LIBERALS are upset.

Now, the other two examples are different. But no, they should not be all under the same general umbrella of "dissatisfaction".

[ampad]

137. You know what this tells you?

That they did not read the article or watch the video. Because a true pure liberal ( as many of them like to think of themselves as) would never fall over such utter bs. CNBC should be your first clue. The folks in the audience 9many who make good money) complaining over the president going hard at wall street. I watched the video and this is what it is. Some of them have gone so far with their dislike for this president that they have come over on the other side. Like another poster said "it only took the title of the post to draw them in" Unbelievable, but not really.

[USArmyParatrooper]

24. I have criticisms as well....

But it makes it difficult to have a real conversation about real criticisms when the anti-Obama crowd goes beyond the pale with their rhetoric. What's more anything positive that happens under his watch gets crickets when posted on DU.

There's a huge and extremely important fight that is just around the corner. The repeal of DADT is being tackled in the Senate. It was attached to the defense budget bill and I've been posting about it for months. How many posts involving that have made the rec list? None (that I saw).

But as that was hitting the news another, "Obama refuses to tackle DADT" thread was getting lots of action.

[foxfeet]

27. Thank you. I think the "anti-Obama crowd" on DU,

who think Obama can do nothing right, is a relatively small number of posters as is the "Obama can do no wrong" crowd. It seems that most of us want him to succeed in a way that is meaningful to us, but the vitriol gets in the way of reasoned discussion of the administration's successes and failures.

[Cha]

36. Well, you think wrong..and your hyperbole is vicious and ugly

and says everything about you and nothing about the President.

[foxfeet]

43. Oh, unbunch your drawers.

I acknowleged right up front that it was hyperbole. And you know nothing about me.

[ClarkUSA]

46. Classy.

In fact, you're as classy as your "hyperbole":

Yes, there are those who would defend Obama if he axe-murdered Michelle and their daughters...what does it take for some folks to acknowledge that the change we all voted for survives only in a pale, anemic form? ... some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9170176

<< And you know nothing about me. >>

Ah, but we do.

[foxfeet]

52. You had your opportunity to engage me in productive discussion in this thread.

That opportunity has passed for now. And what you "know" about me apparently is based on not-so-subtle paranoia, judging from your posts.

[ClarkUSA]

78. Nope, there was never a chance of that. You made sure of that, didn't you?

Yes, there are those who would defend Obama if he axe-murdered Michelle and their daughters...what does it take for some folks to acknowledge that the change we all voted for survives only in a pale, anemic form? ... some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9170176

But then I'D be accused of worshipping him insufficiently, I'm sure.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9170770

[suzie]

114. +1,000

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[foxfeet]

49. I'm sure you're capable of making up the rest of your narrative about me.

Bye now.

[Cha]

56. Don't flatter yourself.

[foxfeet]

57. See? I knew you could do it.

Sweet Lurleen, this is like getting chewing gum caught in my hair. The only remedy is ice and cutting it off. The last word is yours.

[Cha]

87. You said 'bye" so why are you still hangin' around.

[DirkGently]

69. Well said. No one can talk anymore over the "Shut up!" brigade.

[DirkGently]

71. Olbermann showed this. I assume he's now on the Enemies List too?

Probably a "GOP plant.". They're everywhere you know.

[uponit7771]

121. +1

[ClarkUSA]

26. And then there are those who would find fault and lay blame on Obama if he found a cure for cancer.

<< Nonetheless, some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts. >>

Really? Are you saying that Obama supporters worship President Obama? Hmmm?

[foxfeet]

29. Not in the least.

Are you suggesting that you are congenitally incapable of acknowledging that there are SOME things the administration could have approached and handled in a better way? I'm not asking you to castigate the President, but it would be a pleasant surprise if just once you could acknowledge that all is not perfect.

[ClarkUSA]

31. Uh huh. It sure sounded like you were accusing Obama supporters of worshipping Pres. Obama.

Yes, there are those who would defend Obama if he axe-murdered Michelle and their daughters...what does it take for some folks to acknowledge that the change we all voted for survives only in a pale, anemic form? ... some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9170176

Your denial is dubious given your crass and ugly hyperbole, all aimed at deriding Obama supporters.

<< Are you suggesting that you are congenitally incapable of acknowledging that there are SOME things the administration could have approached and handled in a better way? >>

What does "congenitally incapable" mean? Is that another insult directed at someone you know is an Obama supporter?

<< I'm not asking you to castigate the President, but it would be a pleasant surprise if just once you could acknowledge that all is not perfect. >>

Ah, you're clever with that "pleasant surprise" snark, eh? Check the archives if you're so interested in conducting your litmus test.

It'll be a "pleasant surprise" if you ever attack/sneer at/deride the "anti-Obama crowd" the way you just attacked/sneered at/derided Obama supporters on this thread. "I'm not asking you to castigate" them, mind you. :eyes:

[foxfeet]

35. Actually, I have remained relatively silent on this issue until now.

I do believe this thread is the most I have written about my opinions since Obama took office. Clearly, you are free to disagree with my opinions, but I said nothing about "Obama supporters" in general as you imply. Many folks here (myself among them) are "Obama supporters;" but I doubt that most of DU would support him or any other President without question or criticism. What on Earth are you so afraid of? Serious question. I could tell you what I think to be true, but I don't want to be accused of putting words in your mouth. I'd honestly like to hear your answer.

[ClarkUSA]

37. Uh huh. It's obvious you were referring to and singling out Obama and his supporters.

<< I doubt that most of DU would support him or any other President without question or criticism. >>

:rofl: That's probably because "most of DU" attacks President Obama "without question" with their criticism.

<< What on Earth are you so afraid of? >>

I'm afraid of being bored to tears by psycho-babble from someone who has no respect for either the President or his supporters.

Yes, there are those who would defend Obama if he axe-murdered Michelle and their daughters...what does it take for some folks to acknowledge that the change we all voted for survives only in a pale, anemic form? ... some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9170176

[foxfeet]

39. OK. You've had your say and I've had mine.

Bye now.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

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

[Skittles]

40. give it up, foxfeet

admit the man has a halo and be DONE with it

[foxfeet]

45. But then I'D be accused of worshipping him insufficiently, I'm sure.

You just can't have a decent conversation with some folks.

[ClarkUSA]

80. Mocking Obama and his supporters again? Well, at least you're predictable. nt

[ClarkUSA]

79. "admit the man has a halo" Who are you referring to? Hmm?

We know it isn't Bill Clinton. Just ask Hillary.

:rofl:

[ampad]

139. LOL

Oh that was a good one. :rofl:

[SoxFan]

95. May I quote Skinner?

"insults, name-calling, or other expressions of contempt toward Barack Obama or his supporters are not welcome."

[Skittles]

100. I'm not trashing Obama OR his supporters

I voted for Obama and I'll be voting for him again - I am trashing IDIOTS who cannot handle ANY kind of criticism, no matter HOW LEGITIMATE IT IS

[ClarkUSA]

135. Oh yeah, sure. "admit the man has a halo" huh? You can't admit your obvious target, Skittles, eh?

Oh, the games some "IDIOTS" will play when they "cannot handle ANY kind of criticism" directed at a false corporate narrative "no matter HOW LEGITIMATE IT IS."

:smoke:

[Jamastiene]

113. Don't forget wings too...

:P

[ClarkUSA]

136. Who are you referring to, dear? Why not be more straightforward and tell us who you're mocking?

It amuses me to see all of you beating around the bush. :rofl:

[suzie]

115. Well, a curd for cancer would cause more people to live to older ages and that would

be a financial drain. :sarcasm:

[ClarkUSA]

141. Yes, how dare President Obama cure cancer!

I can hear it now. ;)

[MineralMan]

54. There is no excuse for this over-the-top attack on President

Obama. None.

[foxfeet]

62. Please re-read the post. It was not an attack on President Obama.

Your lightning-like reflexes are getting in the way of your judgment. Seriously, MM, I would have expected better from you. I didn't ask you or anyone else to excuse anything.

[JVS]

68. Well being president is a very demanding and stressful job.

[foxfeet]

73. Yes it is, absolutely.

And I don't envy the conditions Mr. Obama was confronted with when he assumed office.

[JVS]

74. I was answering in a tongue in cheek fashion.

[foxfeet]

75. I know. I just didn't want to leave room for doubt about my position.

[ClarkUSA]

138. lol! Nice try. Plausible deniability is important at times, isn't it, foxfeet?

You're right about one thing. There's really no "doubt" about your position towards Pres. Obama and his supporters. You made yourself quite clear:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9169895&mesg_id=9171266

[Name removed]

142. Deleted message

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

[NanceGreggs]

77. Over-the-top hyberbole works both ways ...

"I know he inherited a mess and that it takes time to effect change, especially after eight years of Republican douchebaggery. Nonetheless, some people defend him with a rigidity seen only in fundamentalists defending a literal reading of their sacred texts."

And the same can be said of those who insist he has "done nothing" since in office, that he is a corporatist sell-out intent on destroying democracy as we know it (read: Orly Taitz, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh et al), and even go so far as to comment on his choice of footwear while on vacation, (i.e. sandals send the WRONG message.)

"It's as if the admission that there might be even a hint of a problem will cause the entire edifice to come crashing down."

Yes, I have seen the wailing and gnashing of teeth of those who believe the edifice of their self-constructed Temple of Doom will come crashing down - when they are faced with the notion that Obama's favourability numbers dispute the doom-and-gloomers' perceptions and predictions.

I am a great fan of irony - and I find it ironic that those who accused Obama supporters of thinking he had a magic wand to "fix" everything that ails us are now the ones asking where the magic wand is, and why it hasn't been used.

The "rigidity" of those who twist themselves into contortions heretofore unknown to man, insisting that every bit of good news emanating as a result of this administration and its efforts, is indeed a never-ending source of entertainment for those of us with our eyes open, and our minds as well.

The RW talking points are as abundant as they are ridiculous. Thanks for proving the point.

[ClarkUSA]

86. +1

:applause:

[SeattleGirl]

88. +1,000!!

[foxfeet]

91. It will, perhaps, surprise you to learn that I agree with much of your post,

especially the part about the "Temple of Doom." I have never, ever accused anyone of believing that Obama possesses some sort of "magic wand" or anything remotely like it. I have, however, been on the receiving end of terms of fellowship such as "poutrage" and have been lumped in with those who "didn't get their pony." In this series of posts I have freely acknowledged that there are those who will never be pleased with Obama no matter what his accomplishments. I am not among them. Had I been attacked by that group as I have been by the "Obama can do no wrong crowd" in this thread, you might have been afforded more of a opportunity to understand that for yourself.

Do I understand correctly that, in your final paragraph, you are accusing me of being a RW troll?

[NanceGreggs]

96. If I wanted to accuse you ...

... of being a RW troll, I would have said so - up front and without regard to the consequences of doing so. (Just as a side note, there is a certain freedom in there being "nothing left to lose", and I am enjoying that freedom here on DU immensely.)

My bringing up the matter of seeing RW talking points here of late is simply a matter of fact. There are, IMHO, far too many alleged Democrats who feel it appropriate to adopt RW talking points if and when they serve their purposes.

And you can take "alleged" to mean whatever you like. It is no longer of any consequence to me - or, for that matter, of consequence to the vast majority of Democratic voters.

[foxfeet]

102. I don't believe you (or I, for that matter) speak for the "vast majority of Democratic voters."

But the topic has come full circle. Why is any criticism of the Obama administration necessarily rooted in RW talking points? I am surprised that you, of all people, apparently believe that one's support for the President allows for no disagreement or criticism whatsoever.

[NanceGreggs]

105. On the contrary ...

... criticism of any president, theirs or ours, is the very foundation of the (small "d") democratic process.

When you say "why is ANY criticism necessarily rooted in RW talking points", you do a great disservice to those whose very valid criticism is rooted in adherence to (big "D") Democratic ideals, and have articulated deviance from those goals most eloquently and persuasively, without parroting RW talking points as part of the argument.

You, on the other hand, have not.

[foxfeet]

119. What specific RW talking points did I "parrot?"

Please tell me. I am not snarking at you here; I'm trying to understand your thinking about this.

[foxfeet]

153. *crickets*

[EFerrari]

149. That sentence doesn't even make sense and you are criticizing

another poster's "eloquence"?

Embarrassing.

[HughMoran]

104. Perfectly stated Nance

Couldn't have said it any better!

:thumbsup:

[NanceGreggs]

106. Thank you, sir.

[CTLawGuy]

111. what are you talking about Nance?

"corporatist sell out", "done nothing in office"...

those are "legitimate", "constructive" criticisms!!! :crazy:

[Arkana]

148. We reflexively defend him because unlike the others we don't instinctively distrust him.

I'd prefer to have faith in the guy I voted for, thanks.

[foxfeet]

151. Any distrust among us ( those who voted for him) is a matter of performance, not instinct.

I voted for him and will again. I would be delighted if your trust is rewarded.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

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

[USArmyParatrooper]

59. All you have to do is watch the full interview

Their characterization of the meeting isn't even close to reality. Obama answered both, critics and supporters brilliantly. And yes, many were supporters.

[ClarkUSA]

97. I did. Twice. Once when it was live, and the second when MSNBC replayed it.

I am playing devil's advocate against the false corporate narrative. And of course, replying to the usual bullshit from the usual bullshitters.

[BzaDem]

30. Indeed, though the denial is at the capabilities of our political system, and you are part of it. nt

[Dappleganger]

33. +10000

[alcibiades_mystery]

50. As is the level of bitterness

:rofl:

[HughMoran]

103. +1200

[uponit7771]

122. +1

[ClarkUSA]

143. Yes, all of a sudden, CNBC's handpicked "disappointed" Wall St. CFO is the object of sympathy here.

Usually, President Obama is being bashed for being a Wall Street tool, but the only exception to this rule is when a Wall Street tool is bashing him. Then and only then can a Wall Street tool be totally credible to some people who believe her "disappointed" tale of economic woe under President Obama!

:eyes:

[WillyT]

152. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said...

:kick:

:hi:

[PufPuf23]

21. Does the Democratic Party want to be FDR Liberal or Neo-Liberal?

Neo-liberals have more in common with Neo-conservatives than FDR Democrats.

FDR Democrats are akin to the Social Democrats of other western democracies or democratic republics.

Our economy as most economies is a mixture of capitalism, socialism, state-control, black market, and monopoly (and cousins) in varying degree.

You feed the bottom not the top in a serious attempt to fix an economy.

To fix health care, you take a different route than the HCR bill or veto (as said in the campaign).

To end wars, one does not follow the neo-con/Bush/Cheney/PNAC plan in a long war of the Middle East and Caspian and increase military presence in Africa and South / Latin America under the radar.

To fix financial reform, you have some form of re-in-statement of Glass-Steagall or veto.

Bad policy not bad new cycles or time for kabuki is the abyss.

[SoxFan]

42. Three cheers for hagiography

FDR wasn't god. He imprisoned innocent Japanese-Americans, came up with a cockamamie court-packing scheme, and was frozen solid by the isolationists in Congress for too long.

Still a great President, but not a demigod.

[Radical Activist]

25. After two years of the left, right and center all attacking Obama non-stop

is it any wonder that people feel he hasn't done much for them? Is it any surprise that no one realizes the Senate blocked his most ambitious proposals? Where would the average person hear about anything good Obama does? Not in the corporate press, right-wing talk radio, or liberal blogs. What's left?

[w4rma]

32. DLCers are right in the middle of the road, where they get to become roadkill. (nt)

[SoxFan]

44. Question

What "DLC" policies are you referring to?

Please state with specificity and provide a link showing that it is in fact a Democratic Leadership Council position.

[w4rma]

83. The list is long.

I don't feel like putting up links, but you can google the information easily.

Health Insurance Reform: No public option because the DLCers didn't want it even though ~70% of the nation does. It was the only part of the bill that progressives were really behind from the beginning.

Charter Schools and busting Teachers' Unions: The DLC hates unions. Progressives support unions. The DLC wants to privatize everything. Progressives want to keep our public schools public.

Obama's entire Cabinet: Name a single progressive. Now name a member who isn't a DLC corporatist.

Escalating the war in Afghanistan: DLC neo-liberals/neo-cons love this. Progressives believe it's a tar baby that will destroy us economically like it did the U.S.S.R.

The simple re-enstatement of the Glass-Steagall Act: The DLC helped get rid of this protection from a second Great Depression. Progressives put it into place during FDR to protect against another Great Depression. The Limousine Liberal DLCers refused to bring it back and Main Street will under-perform until it is brought back.

Catfood/'Deficit' Commission to cut Social Security: The DLC wants to hand over Social Security to Wall Street sharks or at least damage it a little bit. Progressives want to expand it and protect it.

etc.

[SoxFan]

92. Let's look at the facts

The DLC did not oppose the public option:

http://www.dlc.org/documents/DLC_Bianchi_Health-Reform.pdf
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=111&subid=137&contentid=254914
http://www.dlc.org/documents/StateHealthCoverage101607.pdf

On financial reform:

"The old model of regulatory minimalism has failed our country in two principal ways. First, it is not sufficiently comprehensive; it allows a large portion of the financial services world to be either unregulated or underregulated. Second, the current "alphabet soup" of financial services, regulators, and enforcers is almost unintelligible to the public; encourages regulatory arbitrage; has led to less rigorous consumer standards than is desirable; and has trouble attracting a sufficient number of talented people to supervise larger and more complex financial companies, instruments, and markets."

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=254854&knlgAreaID=450020&subsecid=900200

But it's much easier to bleat about a mythical bogeyman and call everyone to the right of Michael Moore a "corporatist", whatever the hell that means.

[Hekate]

108. Good gravy, SoxFan, you're perpetrating an outbreak of facts and links!

Thank you -- very much.

Hekate

[EFerrari]

110. No, he didn't. He put up position papers.

It was also Barack Obama's position that we must have a public option.

Positions don't mean very much if you hold one in public and another in closed meetings.

[SoxFan]

124. Fine. Go write in Kucinich

being politically irrelevant is your Constitutional right as an American.

[w4rma]

128. How about we just purge all these DLCers who say that lowering taxes on the very wealthy is what we

all should do. Unsaid is that they want the other 99% of us to pay for them.

[SoxFan]

129. What DLCer said that?

Please provide a specific example, including a link or verifiable citation.

[w4rma]

130. Here you go.

Lieberman Organizing Against Obama On Bush Tax Cuts
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9169609

More House Democrats call for tax cuts for all
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9143521

[SoxFan]

131. You said DLC; neither of those articles had to do with the DLC

Joe Lieberman hasn't been involved with the DLC since 2005.

This, on the other hand...

"The administration proposes to phase out the Bush tax cuts for wealthy people, raise taxes on businesses and cut spending on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

That's a start, but will it be enough to get spiraling deficits under control?"

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=254958&knlgAreaID=85&subsecid=65

[SoxFan]

132. Oh, look...

"If the American people are going to be convinced that the Democratic nominee will be the more responsible fiscal steward, he or she will need to offer real details not only on how to increase revenue, but how to restrain spending. Excessive subsidies for mega-agribusinesses, a burgeoning federal travel budget, subsidies to the healthcare industry from the 2003 Medicare drug bill, and breaks for the oil and gas industry are all spending-cut ideas that would help the Democratic candidate earn credibility on fiscal policy."

http://www.ppionline.org/ppi_ci.cfm?contentid=254603&knlgAreaID=85&subsecid=65

[EFerrari]

146. LOL. Oh, no! Not KUCINICH!

If you want to post DLC faxes here, that's fine. But when people actually read them, don't be surprised.

[w4rma]

123. One set of positions for the public and another for the backroom.

It's like policy laundering.

[SoxFan]

125. Heavens to betsy!

Did I go beyond the usual fearmongering and explain what the DLC actually said? What was I thinking?!?!

[EFerrari]

147. You "explained" what they said but ignored what they did.

Good Sox Fan.

[EFerrari]

109. Someone forgot to inform Max Baucus. n/t

[suzie]

117. Trying to insert historical fact into the usual hysterical "Under FDR"/"In the Depression liberals

did..." narrative is always difficult. But in this case, the person who drafted the legislation, held the hearings on Glass-Steagall, and got the legislation out of committee was a congressman from Texas, one Sam Rayburn.

I'm doubting that those who like to call themselves "progressives" today would ever claim Congressman Samuel Taliaferro Rayburn as one of their own.

[SoxFan]

126. "RAYBURN IS A BLUE DOG! YAARRRGLEBRRGLEGRBLE!"

Harry Truman wouldn't be accepted, either. That wonderful Mr. Wallace is much more progressive.

What about the man who signed the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, Medicaid? Pffft. A blustery Texas cowboy.

JFK? A warmongering neosomething who wants to cut taxes for the rich.

[whistler162]

127. The ________ policy that I don't agree with.....

If you support _______ policy then you are a DLC'r!

[Greyhound]

107. ..

[Arkana]

28. A CFO? Yeah, I'm sure she and hers are SO hard up in this economy.

:eyes:

[Fire1]

51. That's why this whole OP is such a crock. n/t

[girl gone mad]

67. I think she's the CFO of a charitable organization for vets.

I doubt she's raking in the same amount as a for-profit CFO.

[ClarkUSA]

144. I don't recall her saying that. She sends her kids to private school but doesn't have a credit card?

Yeah, sure. Cry me a river.

More people should be this "disappointed".

:sarcasm:

[Taverner]

55. This may make a mark....?

?






?






who?






'meet the new boss...




...same as the old boss'




.?

[DireStrike]

60. This sounds like bullshit

CNBC, CFO, Law school grad, people from wall street...

These people SHOULD all be complaining if we are getting the correct change.

As much as I believe Obama is worthy of criticism, this is a hit piece designed to move the center rightward.

[ProSense]

61. Here is the exchange

between the President and the questioner.

[DirkGently]

63. Just embarrassing seeing the denial here. "GOP plants?" Really?

Pathetic, pathetic. pathetic.

[ClarkUSA]

85. Yeah, you're right. CNBC would never ever skew their shows to favor the GOP.

Bet you still believe in the Tooth Fairy.

:rofl:

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[devilgrrl]

81. WTF kind of question is “What I really want to know is: Is the American dream dead for me?”

:wtf:


Sounds like disappointed concern trolls.

[jillan]

82. I watched this and the audience responded really well to Obama. This was a positive forum.

[TomCADem]

84. Once Again, Even Liberals Buy Into The Corporate Narrative, Did Bush...

...ever host such town halls and take unscripted questions fron an audience? Yet, many folks ignore the fact that the President did not duck the public, and took such questions and answered them.

[jillan]

89. Obama was amazing today - he even held his own with the Wall Street questions - I loved it when he

told them that many on Main Street thought he was way too soft on Wall Street and then got a huge applause from the audience.

I'll criticize Obama when he deserves it, but today he made me proud to have him as our President.

[TomCADem]

90. Exactly, He Took Unscripted Critical Questions From The Public. Isn't That Good?

Yet, immediately people seize upon the narrative that this was some sort of failure. You would think that folks would want President obama to pull a Bush and either duck these events or have the questions and answers entirely scripted?

If President Obama does not face critics some folks will criticize him, and when he does some folks buy into the narrative that this is a bad thing.

[unkachuck]

101. "...Is the American dream dead for me?"

....of course it is....because there never was an 'American dream' for schmucks like us....

....America is only about the rich, their wealth and the power it brings them....everything we see in our lives that might look like a power-lever that we could pull, yields nothing and leads nowhere....

....for us, America is all about props, illusion, blue smoke and mirrors....once you realize that America never is, what it appears to be, things will become much clearer....

[opihimoimoi]

112. They were acting selfishly...change is slow and they should wait their turn

Obama CANNOT MAKE THINGS BETTER INSTANTLY

[HughBeaumont]

116. Aaaaaaaand you ain't GONNA feel it, either.

This is what America (great swaths of whom are undeserved of this) gets for the selfish "me-first" actions of their uninformed voter contingent. "Wheee, let's vote for Reagan and party with our tax money, YEAH!" "Let's ride the Reagan wave by voting Bush! YEAH!!" While Clinton wasn't exactly an economic progressive, at least jobs were created on his watch. Then America went stupid by voting (stolen twice, yes, but close enough to steal was bad also) a failed Frat boy fuck-up for two terms. I know these people would rather die than admit the previous president sucked, but guess what: most of the problems we're experiencing now were ramped up under his employ.

Gotta be a little bit wiser for the ware yourselves, America, before you can accuse a president of "doing nothing". Yes I feel he can do more, but I also feel Republicans and corporate America are obstructing him, just as they do EVERY Democratic president.

[kentuck]

120. Ahh-h-h...the American Dream....

..working on Wall Street and getting a million dollar bonus. So in touch with reality.

[ClarkUSA]

140. Wow, CNBC must have looked hard for a "disappointed" Wall Street CFO! I'm totally impressed.

Thanks for bringing her touching, poignant tale of woe here. It really made me weep to think of how poverty-stricken and desperate a Wall Street CFO must be in this economy. I could hear the unbearable strain in her voice as she sat well-fed and perfectly-coiffed in her exquisitely tailored suit. :cry:

It's really amazing how many here are on her side when normally all we hear is how President Obama is a Wall Street tool! So much sympathy for a Wall Street CFO on CNBC must be a first here at DU, but hey, as long as someone is down on Obama, they are totally credible, right?

:rofl:

[Nikki Stone1]

155. Obama is a Reagan Democrat. We thought we were getting a real one.

That's the real problem.