Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Nation: "Obama... to the right of not only populist Edwards but Clinton as well"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:05 AM
Original message
The Nation: "Obama... to the right of not only populist Edwards but Clinton as well"
"As he has done on domestic issues like healthcare, job creation and energy policy, Obama is staking out a position to the right of not only populist Edwards but Clinton as well."
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080211/fraser

More about Obama's rejection of the progressive reality here:
http://www.correntewire.com/tags/barack_obama

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
1. Finally, some coverage of this inconvenient truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asthmaticeog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Um, this *still* doesn't make Hillary any great prize, you know.
But I guess you're satisfied with "sucks slightly less," eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. I am proud of Hillary and I agree with her on almost everything. The point is
that she is seen as right wing and Obama as some progressive angel. The facts speak otherwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asthmaticeog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #6
23. You're right. They're BOTH right-wing. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #23
26. I've been saying this all along. Hillary is a DINO.
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 01:34 PM by RC
Obama is their backup. One or the other will be the place holder till 2012 when the crimes start again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #26
115. Ha Ha--looks like OBoma wants that label of DINO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
7 of 11 Donating Member (174 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #23
52. The why do the reopukes hate her so bad?
They are terrified of her! Why?

If it wasnt for Obama I would be a Hillary supporter but she does come in a close second in my book and I would fully support her as a running mate.

So tell, me is she is so right wing why do the repukes hate her so much?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
New Dawn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #52
61. Because right-wing voters are idiots
However, look at all of the millionaires and billionaires who are dumping money into both Hillary and Obama's campaigns. That is the real evidence that they are both right of center (economically).

http://www.opensecrets.org/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asthmaticeog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:24 PM
Response to Reply #52
62. She's not as far to the right as a dispensationalist Christian maniac.
Which in their book makes her a liberal - the only book she could POSSIBLY count as a liberal in. But in fiscal policy, she and her little man are far right enough to fuck the working class just fine. He already did it, now she wants her turn, clearly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:43 PM
Response to Reply #52
65. Just because they SAY they're terrified of her doesn't mean they ARE.
The strategists see Hillary as the easy one to beat. Obama, slightly less so.

Edwards, the one they refuse to even acknowledge, is the one they fear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #52
75. Because she's one of them wimmenfolks who ain't barefoot 'n pregnant.
And they can't handle it that she's had a career on her own.

Secretly, they hate Condi just as much.

If they don't hate Ann Coulter, it's because they have as much trouble believing she's a woman as the rest of us.

Next question
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:38 AM
Response to Reply #52
91. The same reason they hate the "LEFT WING" media.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
beezlebum Donating Member (927 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #52
121. because right-ingers
think women should be barefoot & preggers in the kitchen. wink wink nudge nudge

and actually, come to think of it, in my own personal experience i have had republican friends and neighbors tell me they would support hillary if certain republicans got the gop nom., which reinforced my unwillingness to support her. but i'll not take the "some say" route, only sayin.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thesquanderer Donating Member (647 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #52
137. Two reasons, I think


For one thing, I think the right has this reflexive hate of all things Clinton, dating back to the days of Bill.

But also, they think she's liberal, and that her less liberal positions (Iraq war, patriot act, kyl-lieberman, flag burning, etc.) are political posturing, and that if she becomes president, we'll see the "real" liberal Hillary.

I think it's a reason she has such high negatives and is not the strongest candidate for November. The right doesn't like her because they feel her less liberal positions aren't sincere... many on the left don't like her because they feel those less liberal positions *are* sincere.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:46 AM
Response to Reply #23
97. Let's be fair
the right-wing of the left. Dick Cheney is right wing. Let's put things in perspective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
asthmaticeog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 03:02 AM
Response to Reply #97
98. He's much farther right than she is, it's true.
Nevertheless, that doesn't make her *not* right wing. Because she categorically is. There is not one position she advances that even approaches liberal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:04 PM
Response to Reply #97
140. There's nothing left about wanting to destroy public housing after Katrina and end the New Deal
As her husband did with deregulation of banking, electricity, telecoms, elimination of people from the welfare rolls and invention of HOPE VI and "retraining" away from a multitier manufacturing economy with good wages across the board, to a low-paid two-tier FIRE and service retail economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
earth mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:39 AM
Response to Reply #23
100. Bingo! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #23
130. Vote Edwards

At least he is proposing some sane policies....

But, the American media has turned this into a two person race with the historic running of a woman & black man who could actually win. Policy be damned.

Lemmings.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #6
33. I'm not a Hillary supporter, but I strongly agree with you...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #6
39. Yup
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
64. Yeah. Fact is they are BOTH to the right of Edwards. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thunder rising Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 11:17 AM
Response to Reply #6
133. This posting is a shallow hack only believed by those that will not be convinced otheriwise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #3
12. You're halfway right
Edwards sucks a lot less.

They're all relatively similar on the issues, but Obama keeps embracing rightwing talking points, which seriously disempowers progressives, and he's leaning increasingly rightward.

Edwards is moving assuredly more and more leftward.

Hillary is pretty much where she's been since she got to the Senate. A so-called centrist (as adjusted by the Overton Window) to be where yesterday's conservative was, with her maybe starting to nudge back to the left a little.

With all three relatively similar on platforms, I'm voting for Edwards -- the one who is most prepared to reshape the national debate to the modern reality:

http://www.correntewire.com/when_is_it_our_turn
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dchill Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #12
44. "moving assuredly more and more leftward."
toward the rest of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bjobotts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:42 AM
Response to Reply #3
96. No, I'm satisfied with not as progressive as I'd like. 1000X better than any repuke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thunder rising Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #3
134. Bush still has 29% of people believing in him. Hillary will fire Howard Dean to consolidate power
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jamastiene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
108. Great post. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ecstatic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:06 AM
Response to Original message
2. Obama's record is way more progressive than Edwards.I smell BS nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:12 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. the article is talking about campaign proposals, not voting
records. Obama's proposals aren't as progressive as Edward's or even Hillary's, but you could make the case that his voting record is to the left of Edward's. It's virtually the same as Clinton's.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #11
18. .. LINK>> what were the more than 100 "Present" votes hide about his character
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 11:36 AM by sam sarrha
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #18
66. You are still hawking those wares?
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 09:56 PM by NCevilDUer
Sorry, nobody's buying.

EDIT: I just read the article you linked, and there is PLENTY of good reasons in it for not supporting Obama - why dredge up the bogus "100 'present' votes", which is easily debunked by anyone who knows how that works in the Illinois senate?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #66
124. on the contrary - WE welcome the TRUTH, unlike you cultists...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kurth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
4. Obama is the Neville Chamberlain of the Democratic Party
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 11:09 AM by kurth
Fuck unity with the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #4
16. Obama is repugnant-lite.
PU...just because he's Afro-American, doesn't make him progressive or even a Democrat. All I see is a nice smile...that does NOT make a leader who truly cares about We, the People.

I swear he has found his long lost Poppa in The Corporation. I don't trust him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FiveGoodMen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 07:19 PM
Response to Reply #4
47. "Fuck unity with the GOP" -- Couldn't agree more!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. I just heard Republican frontrunner John McCain...
... getting Gov. Charlie Crist's (D-FL) endorsement. McCain just used the term "Democrat Party."

These fine folks won't even say the correct name of our party -- it's a well-known dig, perhaps to deny the association between the party name and the adjective "Democratic." But they're really going to change their stripes when it comes to Congressional votes. Right.

You might like this:

http://correntewire.com/the_sorry_news_sorry_about_bipartisanship
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yorkiemommie1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:14 PM
Response to Reply #48
76. I heard that too and emailed McCain about his 'error'
which I don't believe was an error at all!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #47
129. Unity with the GOP is a GROSS concept.

Let's hold hands & play nice & pretend they haven't been actively destroying this nation for the past eight years....and longer....

Kumbayfuckingyah.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #47
144. Bipartisanship = Date Rape.
Nuff said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #4
60. From what I've heard, he isn't looking to UNITE with the Rethug. Party ...
... only that we're going to need to attract Independents and *some* historically Republican voters, in order to create a working majority that can actually get something done. I doubt he has any expectation that he can win over any of the 25%ers, nor does he need to. (Hell, even FDR had 30% of the country against him.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #4
86. True.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jim Sagle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:09 AM
Response to Original message
5. He's a Republican agent, plain and simple.
He's so much worse than Clinton. Clinton is a corporatist Democrat whose compromises have weakened us. Obama intends to put the Democratic Party out of its misery once and for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #5
51. Agreed.
Neo-con support for Obama via the likes of Kristol and Kagan have made me utterly suspicious. They see a silver lining in him. This election will be Obama/McCain vs McCain/Obama far as I can see...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #51
84. Strange the support he gets from the extreme right makes one wonder. nt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:10 AM
Response to Original message
7. here's smore ..>>Link>>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:26 AM
Response to Reply #7
14. The press is giving him more scrutiny
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #14
71. They are going to open up wide, and go after him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
msongs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
8. obama has a lock on the proud christian fundie anti gay vote in dem primaries nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
22. That was easy for him, since he's on a mission from Jesus
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #8
125. yep...still waiting for his "outreach" to the WHITE RACISTS...
crickets chirping...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
9. So explain this:
http://www.majorityrules.org/blog/2007/03/senator-barack-obama-more-liberal-than.html

Senator Obama also has a higher liberal rating than any other Senator running for President this year. The National Journal has just released its 2006 annual ratings of Congress based on roll call votes on key economic, social and foreign policy issues.

When the New York Times political blog compared their lifetime scores they came up with the following ranking:

Senator Barack Obama......................84.3
Representative Dennis Kucinich........79.4
Senator Christopher J. Dodd .............79.2
Senator Hiliary Rodham Clinton ......78.8
Senator Joseph R. Biden, Jr...............76.8

more...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #9
17. My concern is not so much that his heart belongs to the right wing...
But that his rhetoric does.

His insistence that the problem in DC is a bickering food fight and not the rape of the country by the runaway conservative movement is exactly what the GOP and MSM want us to be saying. And it's far to the right of what most Americans now believe.

It's a sleazy, disempowering, self-aggrandizing tactic to put himself "above" partisanship, and in so doing, giving a clean slate to today's ruthless, corrupt, incompetent, and valueless Repubican Party.

I'm not saying he has to quote the name of Al Franken's fictitious follow-up to "Lies and the Lying Liars": "I Fucking Hate These Rightwing Motherfuckers."

But he should stop needlessly suggesting that we're living in some Tip O'Neill theme park where there is anything across the aisle other than a shark.

http://www.correntewire.com/tags/barack_obama

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DeepBlueC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:49 PM
Response to Reply #17
56. hear, hear
That's how I see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
anamandujano Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #17
78. Thank you!
"His insistence that the problem in DC is a bickering food fight and not the rape of the country by the runaway conservative movement is exactly what the GOP and MSM want us to be saying. And it's far to the right of what most Americans now believe.

It's a sleazy, disempowering, self-aggrandizing tactic to put himself "above" partisanship, and in so doing, giving a clean slate to today's ruthless, corrupt, incompetent, and valueless Repubican Party."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 01:58 AM
Response to Reply #17
94. ...
...my sig says all that needs to be said regarding this mindset...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hobarticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #17
117. Well said, well spoken...eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #9
20. This is just based on 2006....
He knew he had to vote that way to run for Prez. Look where he is getting his $$$$. And how many times did he 'not' vote?

I just don't trust the man...I don't think he truly cares about We, the People...he worked for social justice because he could, not because he really wanted to. Now that is just my impression, my gut feel about the man, and nothing has changed it.

In fact, his words about Reagan made me trust him even less....he was so cagey with his Reagan statement...so at the debate, he could say....'Well, I didn't say his ideas were good.' Talk about a sleazy tactic....this was planned. He doesn't do a thing unless it is planned. I don't feel he is talking from his heart...he has a great speech writer and he give a good speech but when debating, I see no articulation, no eloquent phrasing...

I will be so sad if he wins the nomination...yet I will have no choice but to vote for him. And to be frank, I get the feeling that he doesn't think his poop stinks. Just my opinion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Amen n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:54 PM
Response to Reply #20
38. And look at who he is surrounding himself as his economic advisers. If you guys hated Bill Clinton..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #38
141. Who are his economic advisers? Free-traders? deregulatiors? Pro-HOPE VI and welfare reform?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
40. Does anyone believe Obama is more progressive than Kucinich?
And that Clinton and Biden are as progressive as Kucinich? That rating is a joke.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:11 AM
Response to Original message
10. Coming from Clinton hating Nation - that's some big hit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:18 AM
Response to Reply #10
13. the nation has indeed been known to criticize both clintons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:30 PM
Response to Reply #13
24. and make up stories like mena, drugs - Hunting of the President gives them
a place in the hunt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AntiFascist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:53 AM
Response to Reply #24
110. What are these "made up stories" about Mena reported in the Nation?

I think the truth about Mena having been a major center for Iran/Contra operations are being widely reported, and not just by conspiracy sites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
avaistheone1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:28 AM
Response to Original message
15. Obama's energy plan for the country is laughable.
Nuclear, coal and E-85. All either bad for the environment or for people.

Obama has taken alot of money from these interests too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:39 AM
Response to Original message
19. Great analysis (but not great spelling) from OpenLeft:
http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3434

Obama Is Abosolutely Right

Obama is abosolutely right that we stand at a time of historic possibility for fundamental change-if anything, he under-estimates howe much this is so.

He is also absolutely right that he is the perfect figure to lead us in a new direction. He doesn't have a lot baggage, he is someone that young people can identify with, he is not deeply embedded in a Washington culture that is far removed from the real pulse of the country. But...

Obama Is Abosolutely Wrong

Obama is absolutely wrong in his fundamental political analysis. The problem in America today is not a polarized political system in which Democrats and liberals are as equally to blame as Republicans and conservatives. The problem is a political system that's dominated by this sort of brain-dead political narrative. And the longer that Obama promulgates such brain-dead political narratives, the more he squanders his enormous potential.

This sort of brain-dead political narrative dominates our political system because it's highly beneficial to the right wing, which has positioned itself to have veto power over such things. It's not the ideal narrative for them. "Democrats are the source of all evil, and should be hunted down like dogs" is the ideal narrative for them.

But they will happily settle for a dominant narrative that says it is equally reasonable-and equally divisive-to say "Democrats are the source of all evil, and should be hunted down like dogs" or to say "no, we're not, we're just sorta stupid, is all."

This is what the right wing will settle for now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stickernation Donating Member (317 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #19
72. why i broke with the anarchist mafia

i hate and despise the memes "the two big parties are both evil", "the two big parties are exactly the same", "the two big parties are two heads of the same beast" etc.

i believe these memes are why Al Gore is not President today. He never rallied the Democratic tradition of the Democratic Party as a candidate. Now, he's doing great. But in 1999, nothing !!!

but the two parties are NOT the same... YET....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:32 PM
Response to Original message
25. That is such bullshit. Based on what?? He's way more progressive than Hillary. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:45 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. They are peas in a pod. Both DINO's
We have 3 front runners. Hillary, Obama and Edwards. And who does our liberal news media cover? Only 2 of the 3. The Liberal is ignored. Guess which one that is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:56 PM
Response to Reply #25
41. Based on a comparision of their platforms
Edited on Sat Jan-26-08 04:58 PM by jackson_dem
Way more progressive than Hillary? He voted with her 90% of the time and has the same voting record. He went further to the right when he started running nationally. This is a pattern with him. As he seeks to win votes over a more diverse ideological spectrum he has moved to the right. Think of his change from his small Chicago district to a state, a liberal state, and now the entire nation. How far right will he be by the general election?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
readmoreoften Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #25
53. Your analysis is astute--even for an Obama supporter. /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hobarticus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #25
118. Because you say so? eom
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
27. oh boy~ thank you guys!!

this forum absolutely kicks ass. in the last few weeks, i have been getting ALL of my news/links here, and it's been truly illuminating.

(in fact, i "discovered" (and became a huge supporter of!) Edwards here, just a few weeks ago.

i never particularly cared about him in 2004 and - thanks to our dear corporate media - i had NO idea that (or why) his platform was vastly more

progressive than that of Clinton AND Obama.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #27
32. Wonderful to hear. Thanks! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stravu9 Donating Member (945 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:49 PM
Response to Original message
29. The Nation is a pretty good mag.
I tend to take their word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #29
74. Welcome to DU
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rodeodance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:58 AM
Response to Reply #29
131. Yes, it is one I read consistantly
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Avalux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:50 PM
Response to Original message
30. Hey, that second link you provided is really good objective journalism.
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
usregimechange Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
31. Who has a better ACLU rating of all canidates save DK.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #31
42. ACLU has 0 to do with economic policy
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Adelante Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 03:05 PM
Response to Original message
34. Ratings

Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) (from 2001-2006)
http://www.adaction.org/votingrecords.htm

Obama 97.5
Clinton 95.8
Dodd 94.1
Biden 91.6
Edwards 82.5

ACLU Congressional Scorecard
http://action.aclu.org/site/VoteCenter?page=voteList

Kucinich Lifetime score: 89%
Obama Lifetime score: 82%
Clinton Lifetime score: 75%
Edwards Lifetime score: 50%

National Journal
http://nationaljournal.com/voteratings/pdf/06democrats.pdf

Obama 84.3
Dodd 79.2
Clinton 78.8
Biden 76.8
Edwards 75.7

Progressive Punch (lifetime)
http://www.progressivepunch.org%20/

Clinton 92%
Obama 90%
Dodd 87%
Biden 84%

VoteSmart
http://www.vote-smart.org/

AFL-CIO
Clinton 93% Edwards 100%
Obama 93% McCain 7%

ALLIANCE FOR RETIRED AMERICANS
Clinton 100% Edwards 100%
Obama 100% McCain 20%

AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
Clinton 83% Edwards 60%
Obama 83% McCain 33%

AMERICAN CONSERVATIVE UNION
Clinton 8% Edwards 13%
Obama 8% McCain 65%

AMERICAN WILDERNESS COALTION
Clinton 100%
Obama 100% McCain 16%

AMERICANS FOR DEMOCRATIC ACTION
Clinton 95% Edwards 65%
Obama 95% McCain 16%

AMERICANS FOR PROSPERITY
Clinton 0%
McCain 100%

AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION
Clinton 100% Edwards 100%
Obama 100% McCain 40%

AMERICAN NURSES ASSOCIATION
Clinton 100%
Obama 100% McCain 20%

AMERICANS FOR THE SEPARATION OF CHURCH & STATE
Clinton 100%
Obama 100% McCain 33%

AM. SOCIETY FOR PREVENTION OF CRUELTY TO ANIMALS
Clinton 100% Edwards 60%
McCain 20%

ANIMAL HUMANE SOCIETY OF U.S.
Clinton 100% Edwards 60%
Obama 60% McCain 40%

BRADY CAMPAIGN TO PREVENT GUN VIOLENCE
Clinton 100% Edwards 77%
McCain 14%

CHILDRENS DEFENSE FUND
Clinton 100% Edwards 91%
Obama 100% McCain 10%

CITIZENS FOR GLOBAL SOLUTIONS
Clinton A+ Edwards 53%
Obama A+ McCain B+

DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
Clinton 100%
Obama 100% McCain 40%

DISABLED AMERICAN VETERANS
Clinton 80% Edwards 66%
Obama 80% McCain 20%

LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS
Clinton 95% Edwards 37%
Obama 100% McCain 29%

NAACP
Clinton 96% Edwards 94%
Obama 100% McCain 7%

NARAL PRO CHOICE:
Clinton 100% Edwards 100%
Obama 100% McCain 0%

NATIONAL ORGANIZATION OF WOMEN
Clinton 96%
Obama 91% McCain 13%

NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION
Clinton 100% Edwards 100%
Obama 100% McCain 0%

NATIONAL FARMERS UNION
Clinton 83% Edwards 80%
Obama 100% McCain 0%

NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE
Clinton 0% Edwards 0%
Obama 0% McCain 75%

NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION
Clinton F
McCain C+

NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR A MORE EFFECTIVE CONGRESS
Clinton 95% Edwards 95%
Obama 95% McCain 20%

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SOCIAL WORKERS
Clinton 100% Edwards 88%
Obama 100% McCain 60%

PLANNED PARENTHOOD:
Clinton 100% Edwards 100%
Obama 100% McCain 0%

UNITED AUTO WORKERS
Clinton 93% Edwards 75%
Obama 85% McCain 9%


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=4044288

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tranche Donating Member (913 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #34
70. Thank you for this!
Cuts the spin a bit...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
35. As an a pround and ardent Obama supporter I read the article
you posted. I appreciate the link and the Nation's perspective. I didn't read anything in there to budge my support for him or anything that seems like news to me. It seemed as if the whole article really boiled down to the approach to the subprime mortgage issue and how to handle it. I'd actually love people on DU to debate that issue and how best to handle it, for sure.

However, the extrapolation from what to do about interest rate freezes in a very narrow scenario to "rightward" on all things as the Nation and you suggest is just not supported in the article with any evidence or persuasive rhetoric. It's more of an assertion than a line of reasoning.

Some of this is just plain "demagoguery" to invoke the bogeyman response. Alas, it does work.

I think when you really read each of their policy statements and campaing promises, they are all qualitatively the same. Sure, Edwards uses a much more pointed tone but the practical nuts and bolts of what they want to do are as different as shades of grey.

Another question you really gotta ask is who is going to be able to create a workable coalition to actually get stuff done.

It's kind of silly to try to paint Obama as a Republican given his voting record, aclu record, women reproductive rights records are excellent and often exceed Clinton and Edwards.

I think the record matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 03:14 PM
Response to Original message
36. As an a pround and ardent Obama supporter I read the article
you posted. I appreciate the link and the Nation's perspective. I didn't read anything in there to budge my support for him or anything that seems like news to me. It seemed as if the whole article really boiled down to the approach to the subprime mortgage issue and how to handle it. I'd actually love people on DU to debate that issue and how best to handle it, for sure.

However, the extrapolation from what to do about interest rate freezes in a very narrow scenario to "rightward" on all things as the Nation and you suggest is just not supported in the article with any evidence or persuasive rhetoric. It's more of an assertion than a line of reasoning.

Some of this is just plain "demagoguery" to invoke the bogeyman response. Alas, it does work.

I think when you really read each of their policy statements and campaing promises, they are all qualitatively the same. Sure, Edwards uses a much more pointed tone but the practical nuts and bolts of what they want to do are as different as shades of grey.

Another question you really gotta ask is who is going to be able to create a workable coalition to actually get stuff done.

It's kind of silly to try to paint Obama as a Republican given his voting record, aclu record, women reproductive rights records are excellent and often exceed Clinton and Edwards.

I think the record matters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dailykoff Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Bingo. It's a molehill.
The records are what count and that's where Obama flattens Hilly and Edwards both.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jackson_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #37
43. Obama's record of moving to the right as his audience becomes more diverse?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Gloria Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
45. The Nation finally informs us.....better late than never!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TriMetFan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 05:12 PM
Response to Original message
46. He is also behind Hillary in the.........
Congressional Quarterly. Hillary was ranked in the top 10 (#6) Senators that had the most anti-votes Bush and Obama was somewhere like #17.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tandem5 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:10 PM
Response to Original message
49. thanks for the post nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:17 PM
Response to Original message
50. Obama likes Republican policies, let's face it
For Obama to have praised rethugs and Reagan....to have said they're the party of ideas, etc...is outrageously unacceptable

he tried to squirm out of his statements in the last debate....unsuccessfully

it's no surprise that the truth is out....the nation's analysis is excellent, shows what a vote for Obama would mean for a progressive agenda

as for Edwards....the guy has changed his positions so many times, hard to know where he'd end up.....and he's thin on experience and record.....just because he's filed suit on behalf of plaintiffs, doesn't translate to any capability of taking on corporations politically


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Danger Mouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #50
54. Obama wasn't praising the Republicans when he called them the party of ideas!
What he said was true...they were the party of ideas, they had a strong and cohesive message which helped them get elected...the strength of the Republicans has always been their unity.
That's not saying that their ideas were GOOD ones...Obama even went on to say that we've seen that the Republicans' ideas didn't work, they had their chance, and it's time for a different direction.
But don't let that get in the way of blatant distortions or anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
onehandle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
55. Amen! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DirtyDawg Donating Member (594 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
57. As I've said before....
...When the David Brooks and the George Wills keep saying good things about him, you know something's fishy. What is it they know that we don't, cause they surely aren't interested in helping a Democrat into the White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:16 PM
Response to Reply #57
59. The other day I heard Rush Limbaugh...
say that he likes Obama, and he gave Barry an earful of advice about how to beat the contemptible Clintons.

Plus both Rupert Murdoch's WSJ and the execrable Maureen Dowd are on the Obamawagon.

Yes, some people I like have endorsed him, but at least as many people I trust as far as I could throw (and whom I'd be happy to test that theory out on) are murmuring their approval, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
libbygurl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #57
112. How and wherefrom did he raise 100 mill dollars in so short a time, btw? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ToughLuck Donating Member (419 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:04 PM
Response to Original message
58. Edwards best of the 3
My choice candidate is Edwards and he would need a miracle for him to win now. With all his faults, I will take Obama, less the hawk than Hillary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
63. Obama is going to vote for the thought crime bill.
That says enough for me, right there. How any progressive can vote for him is way beyond any rationale.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:33 AM
Response to Reply #63
107. Why not post this in an op?
I am curious how Obama supporters defend this. I will do a lil more studying of this in the next couple days.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:51 PM
Response to Original message
67. I've subscribed to The Nation for years. But, screw them.
MSNBC just pointed out that Obama got more votes in this election than were CAST for all candidates four years ago.

Obama is pulling Republicans and Independents and Liberals and Conservatives together like never before.

Maybe that means that some our over-valued ideology will be sacrificed for a new-found sense of community.

I willing to take that risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mistertrickster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:55 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. BTW, who voted to give Commander Cod Piece authority to go to war in Iraq?
Hint: Not Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NMMNG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #68
150. Obama wasn't in the senate at the time of the IWR
So there's no way he could have voted on it.

But he's never voted "no" on any war funding during his tenure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dhalgren Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:23 PM
Response to Reply #67
153. And in an open primary that means exactly zero. Open primaries are
notorious for skewing the support levels during the primary, but come the general, the votes run truer. Anyone can vote in the SC primary - those numbers, in themselves, strike me as suspicious and odd...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tom Joad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 09:59 PM
Response to Original message
69. there is tough competition there for the most extreme rightist, and certainly Hillary is giving
Obama a run for his money in that regard. I think its a tie.
corporate clowns the both of them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 10:33 PM
Response to Original message
73. And that is why I'm not voting for him. He's no Progressive.
I sure as hell am not in the mood to play nice with repukes either. That's Barack's entire agenda...bring the country together. After what they have done to this country and the world? I don't think so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amborin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:15 PM
Response to Reply #73
77. empty rhetoric
"bring the country together"

"change"

who falls for these empty slogans, anyway?

they're meaningless

and, who'd want to be together with anti-roe v wade types, anyway?

or with those who want to ram their religion down the throats of supposedly free citizens?

such campaign b.s.

anyone who forgets or is unaware that fighting for citizens' rights is a harsh struggle is either painfully naive or disingenuous or worse

sounds like the nonsense big corporations try to use to con union leaders into giving up workers' right, this whole notion of "togetherness" and "jointness" a big love fest, all the while they're screwing workers

Obama is such an idiot

otherwise.....Hillary Clinton is more progressive than any other candidate except Kucinich

for starters, let's not forget she's been fighting for universal health insurance for a long time
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
in_cog_ni_to Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #77
80. I'm still trying to figure out why so many people here on DU, PROGRESSIVES, who want Cheney and the
psycho IMPEACHED, are supporting someone who has no intentions of EVER doing such a thing. He won't investigate...that would push us farther apart, you know. :eyes: All the things we have been railing against for 7+ years will go unpunished and his DU supporters seem not to care about that. WTF? It's strange. Really strange. The man is a MODERATE. He's nowhere near to being a Progressive. I always thought we supported the Progressive agenda here. Obviously, many here don't.:(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:59 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. I agree bigtime
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 12:00 AM by lwcon
His record holds up as at least comparable to the other candidates, but he's made keeping the mellow unharshed into the nation's most urgent problem, as opposed to, say, the need for truth and reconciliation. Without the truth part, George Santayana owns our asses.

The focal point of his campaign is to make us *not* smell the smell that's been coming out of DC since Nixon arrived. We're just supposed to admire the emperor's new perfume.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Czolgosz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-26-08 11:17 PM
Response to Original message
79. kick because it is important
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
muyojoe Donating Member (276 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
82. ABOUT TIME
No one talks about how right wing this guys talking points are. He'll get my vote if he gets the nom, but he's my least favorite of the three. He won't get my vote for nom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Seabiscuit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:10 AM
Response to Original message
83. Finally someone in the media is taking notice of the Obama fluff. He's not a friend to progressives.
Good articles. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #83
93. Neither is Hillary. Neither was Kerry. Neither was Gore. Neither was Clinton.
....so what else is new. You're still going to advocate holding your nose and voting for the nominee, I'm sure. And that's probably what I will do.

So acting all hysterical about the fact that our two front-runners are moderates is not exactly necessary.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AX10 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:13 AM
Response to Original message
85. "Subprime Obama" is right.
He talks the talk but does not even attempt to walk the walk.
If 90% of the Obamites at DU had integrity, they would be rallying with Edwards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tatiana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
87. Obama is a centrist, like Clinton. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:00 AM
Response to Reply #87
95. and a continuation...
...of the centrist push that won us the house. I have no problem with this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:02 AM
Response to Reply #95
99. Winning Congress with Bush Dog accommodationist Democrats
Has meant that we've lost every major battle in the 110th Congress.

Darcy Burner is right. We need more and better Democrats.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #95
142. "Centrist"? You mean center-right
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #142
155. Make no mistake...
..."our side" utilizes the same methodology for propagating the acceptance of "our" issues into government and society (what their "R2" is can be balanced with our "L2").

If I accept your scale above, a little L1-R1 is acceptable to me.

The candidates in the last House election that brought us into power were L1-0. But then again, it's convenient to ignore this.

Duke


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mzmolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:32 AM
Response to Original message
88. Obama's message is to "unite" the country. This message obviously appeals to many.
I think he's a phenomenal candidate/person/man and I'll gladly support him if he gets the nomination. After all, he's "left" of the Republican candidates. ;)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:34 AM
Response to Original message
89. Perhaps since Obama respects the constitutionality problems with mandatory rate freezes...
Yeah, yeah, yeah...

Edwards and Clinton want to feel good and assume people are stupid by saying there should be a mandatory moratorium and rate freezes on mortgages and loans and force lenders to hold loan interest rates below market levels, which would delay the return of liquidity.

It would also delay and make people who took out bad subprime loans dig even deeper in debt.

There are also immense constitutional issues when you have the government changing the terms of mortgage contracts by the millions after the contracts have been set.

At what rate will the government enforce for five years? What about consumers that would like competition on loan rates that have to wait for five years before getting competitive choices?

Does being "progressive" these days mean making the government control the very nature and competitiveness for consumers to be able to choose loans without Big Mother looking over their shoulder?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Political Heretic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:41 AM
Response to Reply #89
92. What constitutionality problems?
There are also immense constitutional issues when you have the government changing the terms of mortgage contracts by the millions after the contracts have been set.

Um... those may be issues, but how are those constitutional issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:17 AM
Response to Reply #92
105. Perhaps you don't understand the issue
Having the government enforce mandatory freezes on credit loan and mortgage rates that have already been contracted is a huge mess legally. It is the very antithesis of free and fair business practices. It would be fought in courts for years and guess who gets richer on that scheme...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:46 AM
Response to Reply #105
126. so were all those wage and price freezes of the 70's illegal, too? NO!
a strong president - not obama - WILL and CAN do such things when they're in the best interests of the country...

and "free and fair business practices" means CRAP when those practices are CHEATING, LYING AND STEALING like they have been for years...but we expect as much from an inicted slumlord's main lawyer and buddy and working partner...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #105
152. No, because contract law depends on two sources: common law (civil law) and statute.
Edited on Mon Jan-28-08 03:15 PM by Leopolds Ghost
Contract law is a form of common law that precedes government involvement
in anything and so does not depend on state recognition (only court recognition).

But this depends on an elaborate system of state PROTECTION designed
mainly to benefit the BANKS and keep them from going under in such a
way that customers would have to get their money back.

A bank only has standing to protest a rate freeze in civil courts, as a
matter of damages, and only if they are stupid enough not to put a clause
in their civil contract saying "and/or prsuant to US statute", such as
anti-usury law.

Of course, they could claim it violated an implied right to
freedom of private property and freedom of contract, which is like
freedom from usury an implied right that predates the constitution.

While it is true that common law (contracts) predate and often supervene
on government (statute),

One can't take government out of the picture without removing the
other statutes that BENEFIT corporations to the exclusion of individuals.

Corporate personhood, for example, or allowing banks to become multinational
FIRE conglomerates and using the power of the state to enforce said (usurious) contracts.

Does being "progressive" these days mean making the government
control the very nature and competitiveness for consumers to be able
to choose loans without Big Mother looking over their shoulder?


You make it sound like a level playing field with a diversity of
positive outcomes, wherein some "consumers" will want to pay more
and some "consumers" (you must mean citizens) will want to avoid
usury of the sort I am dealing with since a giant conglomerate took
over my local bank (and had the gov't-granted freedom to do so
WITHOUT asking me, and yet you'd claim I can't litigate for my
funds and customer info, or the prescription info at your family
pharmacy being transferred to a national chain
because the "constitutional problems" in your Overton window
only work to the advantage of lenders and the propertied class.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:55 PM
Response to Reply #89
145. "force lenders to hold loan interest rates below market levels" you mean reinstitute USURY laws?
3000 year tradition of anti-usury laws in Western society

That Nixon suspended?

Fuck that "market supremacy" bullshit:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:00 PM
Response to Reply #145
149. Wow. I can't believe this has to be pointed out... how unbelievably frickin sad.
*sigh*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
emilyg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
90. Kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 04:48 AM
Response to Original message
101. That article lacks substance.
It has no more than two or three sentences telling us what Obama's plan is, and I don't even trust those few words considering the slant of the writer. It mostly plays the same guilt by association games and puts a spin on Obama's speeches to paint him as a conservative, instead of discussing his actual policy positions.

Here's a hint: you can get a lot more progressive policies passed if you use language that appeals to moderates and conservatives. That doesn't mean you've become a conservative yourself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dschmott Donating Member (33 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:16 AM
Response to Reply #101
104. You see things very clearly here Radical Activist - good observation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mithreal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #101
109. I enthusiastically agree, you can sell Progressive ideas to Conservatives
Michael Moore in Dude, Where's My Country talks about how to talk to Republicans, some good ideas in that book. If that is what Obama is doing then good for him and us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peacock Donating Member (189 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:12 AM
Response to Original message
102. Edwards is the ONLY progressive
still in the race. Im standing with JRE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:16 AM
Response to Original message
103. Obama and Hillary are both DINO's. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zulchzulu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 05:24 AM
Response to Original message
106. As a Nation subscriber, I'd like to see the constitutionality of mandated interest rate freezes
What are the parameters that the government would wage on banking institutions where they have to have a fixed freeze on interest rates on mortgage contracts that have already been agreed to?

People can say Obama is a DINO and name-call like little schoolyard punks, but do they understand the repercussions involved in the government forcing the banking industry to comply to rules basically made up out of what is populist pap that will only make the lawyers richer in courts fighting the mandatory enforcemnts?

I await the Nation to do a fair analysis of just how all this would play out...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #106
127. we USED to have maximum USURY RATES until the repukes threw it all away...
maximum loan rates were set at 12%. For a LONG time. Now we have rates worse than what the mafia used to charge...

the "government" can do anything it sets it's mind to - we already have UNCONSTITUTIONALLY allowed for changing the law after the fact and made it retroactive for bush* and his other WAR Criminals so all their CRIMES are now "not crimes"...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #127
151. What is happening to this country... I thought Dems LIKED usury laws!
:cry:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 07:23 AM
Response to Original message
111. At this moment it looks like Obama could win, "at this
moment". My hope is that since it looks like Edwards doesn't have a chance Obama is our candidate.

My reasoning is that Obama is pandering for the election (all lies and jest) and then will revert to form once elected which will put him to the left of center in todays world which would be just slightly right of center when Hillary was a "Goldwater Girl".

Certainly not a progressive dream but better than the alternative. My fear is Hillary will be our candidate and McCain (the boy hero turned man coward) will be our Preznut.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #111
114. This is known as the "Phonebooth Theory"
http://correntewire.com/obama_stump_speech_strategy_of_conciliation_considered_harmful#comment-68144

I guess that's all that's left to us, when the coin of the realm is "hope."

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pokercat999 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #114
135. Sometimes one must face reality and admit that this is the
world we live in and we are powerless to change it. That's not to say we should stop trying (to change our world) but still we must steel ourselves to the reality that we will fail, accept that and move on. The righteous do not always "win" and as much as I hate to admit it there is likely to be no punishment for any of the Bush criminals or for that matter an international rouge and criminal country, the USA.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yanez Houston Jordan Donating Member (317 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
113. Other than change in racial or gender identity, neither Obama nor Hillary offers any real progress
for Democrats.

They both would give us nothing but Bill Clinton-style bi-partisan mush.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #113
116. Certainly any of the Dems is better than a GOP sociopath
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 09:12 AM by lwcon
But while we're "hoping" for "change," I'd like what's behind door #3. Because Edwards is helping remind people about government for the people, instead of government kowtowing to the Conservative Movement.

Honestly, people, how can you stomach listening to Obama and Hillary acting like you can partner with the bastards who have trashed the country for the last 7 years?

As I've said previously about Obama (and it's not far off describing Hillary's disappointing centrism, as well)...

My concern is not so much that his heart belongs to the right wing, but that his rhetoric does.

His insistence that the problem in DC is a bickering food fight and not the rape of the country by the runaway conservative movement is exactly what the GOP and MSM want us to be saying. And it's far to the right of what most Americans now believe.

It's a sleazy, disempowering, self-aggrandizing tactic to put himself "above" partisanship, and in so doing, giving a clean slate to today's ruthless, corrupt, incompetent, and valueless Repubican Party.

I'm not saying he has to quote the name of Al Franken's fictitious follow-up to "Lies and the Lying Liars": "I Fucking Hate These Rightwing Motherfuckers."

But he should stop needlessly suggesting that we're living in some Tip O'Neill theme park where there is anything across the aisle other than a shark.

http://www.correntewire.com/tags/barack_obama


___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yanez Houston Jordan Donating Member (317 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 11:15 AM
Response to Reply #116
132. I completely agree
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #116
154. One of the reasons I liked Kerry is that the Repubs hated him so much that he could
sound conciliatory and promise a fight at the same time because he could propose anything and the Republicans (and Clinton/Reid "mainstream urban" Democratic machine) would have fought him every step of the way on principle. Under those circumstances Kerry's natural liberal instincts would be primed for a fight, and he could have asked for anything.

Of course, he might have screwed it up by following Obama's approach, which, to listen to Kerry now, he objects to Edwards' "confrontational"
approach and that is why he supports Obama.

Ask for 200% and settle for 80% of what you want. The leading candidates
don't understand this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Duke Newcombe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #113
156. Funny thing about that mush, though...
...it DID win us elections and put our ideas into motion...not a lot of that happening lately...

Duke
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosetta627 Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 09:44 AM
Response to Original message
119. I say this as a Kucinich supporter, so I have no bias towards Obama
But The Nation is not to be trusted.
I think they're a pseudo "progressive" publication, aka right-wing propaganda disguised as a liberal magazine.

In other words, who cares what that rag says.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #119
147. Yeah... um... welcome to DU. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rosetta627 Donating Member (515 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-29-08 12:32 AM
Response to Reply #147
159. Yeah, well, um
No welcome, of that kind, needed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azprogress Donating Member (6 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 09:51 AM
Response to Original message
120. That's one, highly debatable, view...
Another is that Barrack is far more progressive than what Hill or Edwards states. Dont take my word, take the quiz below and see where you land.

http://www.electoralcompass.com/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
La Coliniere Donating Member (581 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:18 AM
Response to Original message
122. Both are great friends of big business
and their MO is "the business of America is business". Neither truly represents "We the people" and neither will put the needs of the commons before the needs of stockholders and the need to prime the engine of the military industrial complex first and foremost . We are foolish if we believe otherwise. Obama is the price we pay for our national obsession with "personality". Hillary is the price we pay for not calling out and detailing where the "triangulation" theory of political gamesmanship has taken us: backwards, from a progressive political perspective.

Obama, Clinton? Clinton, Obama? Neither alone one will win against McCain. Edwards non withstanding, the only chance Democrats have is if it's a Clinton-Obama ticket. I DO see this coming, and it doesn't make me pleased. Yeah, they'll get my vote, but that's not saying much when I knew we could do so much better. Could I be wrong? Perhaps, but I wouldn't bet on it.
Peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TankLV Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:26 AM
Response to Original message
123. WE know as much - too bad the cultists WON'T see it...
sad, isn't it...

from his REPEATED pandering to Homophobic BIGOTS,
to his PRAISING of that senile asshole ray-gun,
and his "bipartisan" crap which will lead to being steam rollered by the ever cheating repukes...
his INTIMATE dealings with SLUMLORDS
his refusal to vote other than "present" lest he have an actual voting record he will have to DEFEND.

it's ALL very troubling...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
debbierlus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 10:53 AM
Response to Original message
128. Voting for Obama is the same as voting Republican (not neoconservative)

It is NOT the same as voting neoconservative, that is what the current 'Republicans' actually are....

But, it is beyond ironic that the 'change' the American people are seeking is more of looks & tone, then that of policy. And, the American people are going to be sadly disappointed, if they make this choice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lwcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #128
136. Not the same, IMHO
But he badly diminishes the party by ratifying right-wing memes.

It's needless, and it's counterproductive. It gets him a little goodwill in the press, but how about earning it by acting like a statesman, instead of doing that Neville Chamberlain impersonation.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 08:51 PM
Response to Reply #136
158. That's the part that gets me the most!
One of my pet peeves - allowing those memes to go unchallenged.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:38 PM
Response to Original message
138. B.S. On the important issues such as "senseless war" Obama is the quintessential POPULIST!
Edited on Sun Jan-27-08 02:40 PM by ShortnFiery
Too funny! Lieberman is rated as "liberal" due to some social issues, but in reality, he's a DEATH MERCHANT, just like his friend and fellow senator who voted for his amendment (Kyle/Lieberman). :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doctor_J Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-27-08 02:40 PM
Response to Original message
139. The Nation will have their collective undies in a bunch because Kucinich & Nader aren't running
Take this with a grain or 5 of salt. I love the magazine, but they need to confront reality with respect to the national electorate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:56 PM
Response to Reply #139
146. That's pretty weird...
why would you say that?

This article seemed very evenhanded...

Election '08
http://mobile.thenation.com/docmobile.mhtml?i=20080107&s=editors

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 05:43 PM
Response to Reply #139
157. True, but they sure aren't fond of Clinton, so the statement has merit
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
redqueen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:54 PM
Response to Original message
143. I like Edwards.
:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robbedvoter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-28-08 02:57 PM
Response to Original message
148. A good reminder!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 19th 2024, 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC