Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Dear President Obama: WE TOLD YOU SO! (rec to make a statement!)

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:35 AM
Original message
Dear President Obama: WE TOLD YOU SO! (rec to make a statement!)
You listened to Rahm who called us "effing retards." You pussyfooted around the Republicans trying to find so sort of "compromise." You maintained and increased the occupation of Afghanistan. We're still in Iraq. You made nice with the banksters of Wall Street and were lavishly rewarded with a stab in the back. Now you have that country club orange skin reptile Boner to deal with. Yep, we told you so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hepburn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:38 AM
Response to Original message
1. A-fucking-men!
Last evening as I was going to bed after watching the nation turn a putrid color of red, I wanted to say to Prez Obama: "Why can't you act like FDR?" He took control and FIXED it. He had a plan and he did it. He did not kiss the butt of the opposition ~~ he took care of business."

JMHO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
obxhead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. He didn't sit back and hope Congress would send him something cool
either.

Hope. Not so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
9. we elected a "kid"...
:wtf:

No, I guess his mother being on food stamps and struggling to get her own education had nothing to do with his desire to see others have hope...:eyes:

Good grief...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lilyeye Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #9
18. -1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:30 AM
Response to Reply #9
34. I think the grand parents raised him mostly and they weren't poor
and remember in the early years before that she married a rich guy. So he didn't do to bad in his early life. I think Obama's problem right from the start was he was a "nice" guy who had been taught to be a "nice" guy and didn't know how to kick ass.

I still think Hillary wouldn't have let the republicans get away with what they did. They hate her also remember.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:36 PM
Response to Reply #34
92. Clinton is responsible for a lot of the economic mess we are in.
He is the person who liked Larry Summers and signed the repeal of Glass-Steagall. Clinton also signed NAFTA. And Hillary is very close to India. No. Hillary would have been worse.

Edwards proved to be a heel, but he was the only candidate who understood what was going on on the economy and who really, really wanted a Medicare opt-in for all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
iamforobama Donating Member (32 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:41 AM
Response to Reply #92
148. The real mess started with Ronald Regan
and his deregulation. We are now officially a 3rd world country.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hannah Bell Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #9
64. that story is bull.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
akbacchus_BC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #9
86. Better to elect Obama than that scum bush dynasty!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:34 PM
Response to Reply #9
91. Look, I'm the same age as that kid's mother.
And if she were alive today, she would be telling him the same thing I'm telling him. Turn left, my son, turn left.

How long do you think it will be before Obama's Republican buddies cut food stamps out of the budget or at least reduce them.

You have to be very, very poor to qualify for food stamps. It is shameful that so many Americans qualify at this time. But in this economy you can't blame those who do qualify.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 02:58 AM
Response to Reply #9
118. Is this the same mother who ended up working for the Ford Foundation?
Or some other mother?

Oh and Timmy Geithner's dad worked a the Ford Foundation, as well.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #3
10. +1.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:04 AM
Response to Reply #3
21. false premise. FDR, Kennedy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RKP5637 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:52 AM
Response to Reply #1
8. I had thought 2 years ago we would see more of an FDR type presidency, but I
was wrong. But after all I've been told I'm a F'en Reta**. Reminds me of the failed corps. I worked in... none could tell the execs we were headed for trouble. And all of them failed. The dems didn't get it when Brown replaced Kennedy either. Hopefully over the next 2 years some wising up will occur. When you try so hard to be like the others (Blue Dogs), eventually the choice at hand will be the others, not you (Blue Dogs).

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:55 AM
Original message
FDR didn't "fix it" overnight...
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
55. He didn't piss away his first two years kissing GOP butt, either. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laughingliberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
71. No, he didn't fix it overnight. But he called out those who were responsible for the mess all the..
time. And he didn't talk about cutting spending until 1937 and, even then, it was a mistake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
breadandwine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:16 AM
Response to Reply #1
122. Because he didn't have the guts to challenge the filibuster rule.




You can't challenge the filibuster rule without the challenge itself being filibustered. It used to be that filibusters were sometimes ridden out. They'd bring in cots and everyone in the Senate would sleep there no matter how long it took to ride out the filibuster. We could do that now but we don't. The GOP also has the "nuclear" option where they can shut everything down or something and we haven't had the guts to end the filibuster given what they threaten to do.

This is the problem. Too much collegiality crap.


And it will probably continue. Already Obama is making statements about working with the GOP.


Triangulation here we come.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jonathan_seer Donating Member (80 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:54 AM
Response to Reply #122
139. That's not true. I think you're conflating different rules and terms.
The senate can bypass filibuster should it decide to end the right to filibuster by invoking the "constitutional clause" that the "will of majority" be effective.

Doing so empowers the majority to pass any rule it wishes with 51 votes.

Being in the constitution, it overrides any rule the Senate makes in this regard - IF invoked.

The filibuster in this context is sort of a "gentleman's agreement." As long as the party that controls the senate feels bound to it. the senate will obey the rule.

Regardless it is subordinate to the constitutional clause IF the Senate decides to invoke that clause.

What's confusing is they can attempt to end the filibuster WITHOUT invoking the overriding constitutional rule.

This made sense in the days when the parties got along, and "writing rules" was not done in a spirit of animosity.

Since doing it that way would never succeed, ending filibusters would require invoking the constitutional clause, and thus pass with 51 votes.

The only reason it does NOT happen is the will is/was lacking because of "tradition."

Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia, In U.S. politics, the nuclear option allows the United States Senate to reinterpret a procedural rule by invoking the constitutional requirement that the will of the majority be effective. This option allows a simple majority to override precedent and end a filibuster or other delaying tactic. In contrast, the cloture rule requires a super majority of 60 votes (out of 100) to end a filibuster. The new interpretation becomes effective, both for the immediate circumstance and as a precedent, if it is upheld by a majority vote. Although it is not provided for in the formal rules of the Senate, the nuclear option is the subject of a 1957 parliamentary opinion by Vice President Richard Nixon and was endorsed by the Senate in a series of votes in 1975, some of which were reconsidered shortly thereafter.<1> Senator Trent Lott (R-Miss.) first called the option "nuclear" in March 2003.<2><3> Proponents since have referred to it as the constitutional option.<4><5><6>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fasttense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:03 AM
Response to Reply #122
164. Don't do away with the filibuster in the Senate
We may need it when we are back in the minority. But if they limited the number of filibusters to one per senator per congressional term.

That way they would have to pick and choose very carefully what they will support with their one and only filibuster.

And secret holds? That is ridiculous.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace frog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:06 AM
Response to Reply #1
152. and a Halle-fricking-leujah!
Geez, I'd settle for Ike right now, or any of the liberal Reps of the past, rather than some of these mofo ConservaDems.
You guys wanna keep on losing? Keep on being un-Dems, you'll keep losing.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:21 AM
Response to Reply #1
170. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Blue_Roses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
4. this loss is not so much of the "we told you so" but more of a
tea party coup. "pussyfooted" around the repubs? What about the repubs who constantly said, "no" and then again, "no" and then after that--"NO"...

your post is bullshit...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Fields Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:05 AM
Response to Reply #4
22. Not so much Obama, but our congress was cowed by the repubs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #22
85. The health care fiasco was set by Obama in "back room" deals ....
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 10:53 PM by defendandprotect
PLEASE, let's wake up here!!


Here you go ............

NY Times 8/05/09 --

WASHINGTON Pressed by industry lobbyists, White House officials on Wednesday assured drug makers that the administration stood by a behind-the-scenes deal to block any Congressional effort to extract cost savings from them beyond an agreed-upon $80 billion.

Drug industry lobbyists reacted with alarm this week to a House health care overhaul measure that would allow the government to negotiate drug prices and demand additional rebates from drug manufacturers.

In response,the industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul. The Obama administration had never spelled out the details of the agreement.




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insure.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:45 AM
Response to Reply #85
126. That was sort of a rude awakening
for many of us. Only the most woefully uninformed isn't aware how the pharmaceutical industry has gouged the American consumer. I guess we were expected to think it was okay, you know, since Bush did it, it was alright for Obama to do it too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grahamhgreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #4
108. BS - we could simply have expanded Medicare in reconcilliation, prosecuted
Bush crimes, and got out of iraqistan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kenfrequed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:52 AM
Response to Reply #4
116. This is true
However they didn't do themselves any favors by putting forth soft, watered down, weak legislation for the party of 'No' to say no to. Had they actually put forth hard hitting loud and proud legislation with Obama's name all over it the party of 'No' would have been the party of 'We broke it and we aren't going to let you fix it.' Progressives warned about getting too bipartisan again and again and again. And what did we learn last summer? The obstruction was all part of their game plan.

Why the hell are we always Charlie Brown?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scruffy1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #116
160. Because Dems are brainwashed into conflict avoidance
Just be nice and agree and treat everyone with respect. After all all the elected Reps are wealthy compared to us scrambling for our existence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Daemonaquila Donating Member (413 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #4
174. There's no such thing as the "Tea Party."
The "tea party" is an astroturf media circus put on by the far right corporate donors. This isn't a "tea party coup" - it's GOP business as usual. The rethugs who said "no" and "no" and "no" could have been steamrolled if Obama, Rahm, and the Dino boys had decided to play half as nasty as the GOP. The left is handed its ass over and over, but never gets the spine to do something about it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:49 AM
Response to Original message
5. You unrecommenders can't handle the truth!
It's going to be torture for the next two years. The Republicans will be spending the majority of their time unreccing the President...and they may succeed in making him a one-termer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:51 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. and you "i told you so'ers" ignore so much of the truth to whine, i told you so. nt
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 08:51 AM by seabeyond
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:55 AM
Response to Reply #6
13. You did it your way and you gained a historical drubbing...
No mas, as Roberto Duran was so famously quoted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #13
15. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:07 AM
Response to Reply #15
23. methinks the lady doth protest too much!
Gratuitous profanity and agitation indicate a less than sure frame of mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:09 AM
Response to Reply #23
25. oh lordy. reality smacks you in the face and you turn away with a protest too much.
what an ignorant statement. so ignore all of reality so you can hold onto your lie.... sound familiar? no different than the ignorant that voted in this congress, or propaganda news fox.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:41 AM
Response to Reply #25
39. You stopped making sense about four posts earlier...
See ya!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:44 AM
Response to Reply #39
40. and you sound par to the uninformed rw nuts that voted the freak congress in. adios. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:44 PM
Response to Reply #15
79. Then please list all these progressive pieces of legisaltion
that got passed
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jester Messiah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:38 PM
Response to Reply #13
72. And the constant demoralizing whining from your end had nothing to do with it?
You're projecting, trying to get the blame placed firmly on somebody else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #5
153. apologists for the corporate dems.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Pab Sungenis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
7. But... but...
...eighteen-dimensional chess....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bullwinkle428 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:54 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. "18-Dimensional Chess" is not very effective in a "Hungry Hungry Hippos" world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:01 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:36 AM
Response to Reply #11
37. Truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whatchamacallit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:38 AM
Response to Reply #11
38. Pretty much sums it up...
:banghead:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:54 PM
Response to Reply #11
87. Here's the "chess" Obama was really playing with "back room" deals on health care!!
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 10:55 PM by defendandprotect




PLEASE ... let's finally wake up here!!


Here you go ............

NY Times 8/05/09 --

WASHINGTON Pressed by industry lobbyists, White House officials on Wednesday assured drug makers that the administration stood by a behind-the-scenes deal to block any Congressional effort to extract cost savings from them beyond an agreed-upon $80 billion.

Drug industry lobbyists reacted with alarm this week to a House health care overhaul measure that would allow the government to negotiate drug prices and demand additional rebates from drug manufacturers.

In response,the industry successfully demanded that the White House explicitly acknowledge for the first time that it had committed to protect drug makers from bearing further costs in the overhaul. The Obama administration had never spelled out the details of the agreement.




http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/06/health/policy/06insure.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scruffy1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #87
161. So sad
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deutsey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:27 AM
Response to Reply #11
154. LOL
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leeroysphitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 11:30 AM
Response to Reply #11
187. damn, that's a good line. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FormerDittoHead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:54 AM
Response to Original message
12. He's got the Republicans just where he wants them!!!
/sarcasm

One thing's for sure - he got 2 years practice compromising with Republicans, now he'll HAVE to...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:02 AM
Response to Reply #12
17. Actually, I am not so sure that maybe he didn't want the GOP to control at least one house
of Congress in time to seek cuts to entitlements. Better that, than for the Dems go it alone on cutting Social Security and Medicare.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SammyWinstonJack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:45 AM
Response to Reply #17
41. BINGO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:37 AM
Response to Reply #41
58. Cuts to Social Security and Medicare would have met a roadblock in a Dem controlled House
The Senate would pass such cuts to entitlements with it's current make-up, so it was the control and makeup of the House that needed to change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Little Star Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:49 AM
Response to Reply #17
42. Double Bingo!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:19 PM
Response to Reply #17
63. The Truth in a nutshell.
Only Nixon could go to China and only a Democrat can "fix" Social Security. :scared:

The enemy may be in the gates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:41 PM
Response to Reply #17
76. Certainly goes along with putting Larry Summers in charge of "restructuring" the American economy
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 11:14 PM by leveymg
That is Summers' area of special expertise, after all. I wouldn't rule out your notion.

P.S. - Summers is leaving! In mid-September he announced he was going back to Harvard, where he can spread his wisdom. He will forever be remembered for this contribution to the Washington dialogue on trade:

Larry Summers, Secretary of the Treasury, testifying before the House Banking Committee on 11 May 2000:

The suggestion of jobs in the U. S. being exported to China is largely, in the judgment of most who studied the issue, I think, a chimera.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #17
89. Public doesn't want cuts to Social Security nor Medicare ... but I have no doubt that Obama does....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #17
131. The President and the Democrats
will take the blame for cutting entitlements. It will damage our brand forever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 08:57 AM
Response to Original message
14. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:11 AM
Response to Reply #14
27. OK, explain it to us.
(This oughtta be good)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tuesday Afternoon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #14
44. hmmm....interesting. Do you have any idea and would you care to share with the rest of us
:popcorn:


hatred is a very strong word.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:03 AM
Response to Original message
19. So you're happy to have a Republican House?
So you could make this post?

Plus there is no real proof you are right. In fact, if you were right, there would be a Dem house and Grayson and Feingold would still be in.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

And if it was your doing, then take responsibility for the puke house.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Wednesdays Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:04 AM
Response to Original message
20. I disagree
If Obama were Jesus Christ and could walk on water, the Dems would have gotten the same treatment.

I blame big money that drives the narrative and buys Repuke politicians, and its child--the bought-and-paid-for corrupt M$M.

The whole system is rotted to the core. It's not the doing of just one man.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:35 AM
Response to Reply #20
36. I agree that the corruption of corporate cash is part of the problem...
but I also think that a less accommodating attitude toward the banksters and the Republicans would have garnered more support for the Dems. Unfortunately, yes, there were many of them who acted just like the Republicans and sold out at every oportunity. A lot of good it them.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
UrbScotty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #20
81. +1000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainlillie Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:48 AM
Response to Reply #20
149. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:08 AM
Response to Original message
24. Rec this thread if...?
This is the EXACT reason we have Unrec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
26. I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ONE WORD ABOUT "COMPROMISE or BIPARTISANSHIP" NO PINK TUTU'S!!!
if I do ....I will quit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:11 AM
Response to Original message
28. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
29. All I want to hear is ...."PUBLIC FUNDED ELECTIONS"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnArmyVeteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:52 AM
Response to Reply #29
43. You will NEVER hear those words from the Ds or Rs!
If people wanted TRUE reform they would gave voted for Reform Party canididates in the 90s and Nader and the Green Party in 2000 if they wanted TOUGH campaign finance laws and public financing of elections. The Rs and Ds would NEVER propose doing anything that is fair and right concerning elections.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ElsewheresDaughter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:07 AM
Response to Reply #43
50. It is the only thing that will save this "Great American Experiment" Democracy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hfojvt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
30. unrec
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:18 AM
Response to Original message
31. This was a referendum on the president and his weak leadership.
We have been telling him ever since last summer, when it became apparent he was caving in to the health care industry on all key elements of the alleged health care reform. But he never listened. He blamed us for mentioning that his new clothes were imaginary.

In my lifetime, only one other Democrat has ever been handed such a mandate - LBJ - and he accomplished something with it. This president accomplished almost nothing in two years except to piss off the very people who put him and his congressional majorities in office.

This is a president who needs to have "I told you so" carved into the top of his desk in the oval office. Maybe when he's knee deep in House investigation subpoenas, he'll finally get it. Maybe then he'll finally understand why trying to snuggle up to his enemies is a lousy idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Autumn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:26 AM
Response to Reply #31
33. I hope he finally gets it, I am afraid he
will take this to mean he has to compromise more.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #33
52. I do not think he's capable of getting it.
In his world, he's right and his detractors are wrong. He's said it over and over. Did he really think all his pot shots at HIS supporters would accomplish anything?

Unless he gets his head on right and starts leading as a Democrat, he's going to have the House GOP leading him around by the nose.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 02:59 AM
Response to Reply #52
119. + 1. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indy legend Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:08 AM
Response to Reply #52
165. They've been leading him around by the nose for two years.
Now the repukes have a majority. He has to really deal with that orange piece of shit, Bohner now and he has NO ONE to blame but HIMSELF. Gutless, pitiful excuse for a leader. But then I'm just a "retarded" progressive who waisted 3 years of my life (that I want back) supporting, campaigning for, and working for him, so what the f**k do I know? Maybe one of these days dems will figure out that when you win an election and actually act like you won, you might actually win again . They should try it. It's just crazy enough that it just might work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chill_wind Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:43 AM
Response to Reply #33
158. I'm pretty certain that will be his direction. That's what pragmatists do.
He's not a fighter or reformer. Now he'll have all the cover and official excuse making in the world (at least here on DU) to just go on doing what what he was going to go on doing anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:55 AM
Response to Reply #31
45. then why did feingold and greyson lose? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #45
46. Because they paid the price for the president's failure to lead.
Perhaps you failed to notice that the president's name was not on the ballot. If it had been, he would have received the spanking elected Democrats got.

It's his fault, but they had to pay for it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seabeyond Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:03 AM
Response to Reply #46
48. you dont get rid of the very most progressive people demanding progressive law. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #48
51. Obama wrote the bad check promising payment.
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 11:02 AM by TexasObserver
When he didn't deliver, his co-signers got called to cover the check he wrote.

Grayson and Feingold lost because they're Democrats, not because they're progressives. This anti Obama tsunami is propelled by the same "independents" who swept him into office.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:49 PM
Response to Reply #51
95. But Independents in California voted for liberals. So, it depends
and much of what it depends on is how articulately the Democratic message is stated. Boxer and Jerry Brown stated the Democratic platform proudly with no hesitation and no apology. And they won by comfortable margins.

Jerry Brown's victory is amazing. His opponent spent $150 million on her campaign and started campaigning long before he did. Yet Jerry Brown won. Jerry Brown, who was teased as being Governor Moonbeam.

It's because Jerry Brown articulated an energetic, positive, liberal message.

And when Obama did that, he also won.

Obama tried too hard to appease Republicans and became discouraged -- understandably.

Now, instead of trying to appease, instead of thinking he has to "get something done," he needs to focus on educating Americans to understand why the Democratic message is the right one. The Republican cooperation will follow as soon as Obama, once again, gets ordinary Americans on his side.

He needs to explain how he is going to make it right for all the Americans who have lost so much in the housing crisis, how he is going to get young families into their own homes, how he is going to stop the outsourcing and bring jobs back to America.

And I predict that his next crises will be high oil prices and environmental problems. Those enormous problems are lurking right near us, hovering over us, and we are ignoring them. Obama needs to go to places that are being affected by the environmental changes we are in and really show Americans what is going on because that is where we need to put people to work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:19 AM
Response to Reply #48
123. How much did the tea party invest
against grayson????? how much did the dnc invest in grayson?

when grayson was telling the truth instead of using dc doublespeak was he once complimented by obama? no we were told we were fucking retards.... had obama come out swinging like grayson (and dont forget kucinich who always comes out swinging and won AGAIN this year) democrats may well have gotten their 60 seats
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #46
186. That makes them sound awfully weak
What about the progressives who won?

Why were they able to pull it off?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:42 PM
Response to Reply #45
93. Why did Boxer and many other liberals win?
De Fazio won, last I saw. Many of the strongest liberals won.

When liberals educate their voters, they are loved and win big time.

Obama talked a lot, but didn't really explain to people why he was doing what he was doing. Frankly, when it comes to economics, I don't think Obama understands why he is doing what he is doing, and that may explain why a lot of what he is doing is perceived as not working. He does not really understand economics himself. He therefore can't explain it and can't sell his economic policies. Too bad for the U.S. Too bad for the world.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:36 AM
Response to Reply #45
113. Why did so many progressives win and so many DLCers lose?
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 01:37 AM by sabrina 1
Everywhere progressives were winning while Rahm favorites, the ones he told us we should leave alone and stop complaining about, lost BIG. No wonder he left town.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:36 AM
Response to Reply #45
172. If appeasement is the correct approach, why did Suzanne Kosmas lose?
I can hear you saying "Who?"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9450923

http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2010/11/reflexive-hippie-bashing-for-thousand.html

Regarding Grayson,well we have a little controlled experiment. His neighboring first term Democratic congresswoman Suzanne Kosmas, in a very similar district, took the opposite approach to Grayson. She ran as hard to the right as she could get away with, never had a controversial thought much less uttered one, was rewarded with big money and support from the DCCC --- and she lost too. This race was bigger than both of them. Florida is turning hard right.


And the Citizens' United case allows the RW to spend millions anonymously to ensure it does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
great white snark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
32. Unrec
Rahm didn't call us anything. He ran on continuing Afghanistan. He didn't make nice....oh forget it.

I wish ignorant was painful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:34 AM
Response to Original message
35. Obama needs to start fighting and stop apologizing to Republicans!
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 09:34 AM by Democat
Hopefully he won't become even more of a coward after tonight.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:49 PM
Response to Reply #35
83. +1000
I do not think he is a fighter
he talks a good game but does not push back
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AnArmyVeteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:02 AM
Response to Original message
47. HOPE + COWARDICE = FAILURE
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indy legend Donating Member (484 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #47
166. A fuckin + 1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cliffordu Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:03 AM
Response to Original message
49. Yawn....
Ho hum, ho hum.....

what to do, what to do.......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shellgame26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
53. Okaaay
So how do you explain Feingold and Grayson losing? Is your little "I told you so" for them too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reggie the dog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:22 AM
Response to Reply #53
124. outspent by the tea party
the tea party moblilzed their base, the democrats in dc demobilized their base. when obama's aid called people like grayson fucking retards it did not help matters, had he been defended he probably would have won re election. if you notice, kucinich won AGAIN!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shellgame26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:05 AM
Response to Reply #124
129. but we lost the house
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 05:09 AM by shellgame26
And kept the senate even though it was the house that passed the public option and the senate that rejected it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:15 AM
Response to Reply #129
134. A majority of Americans, including even some Republicans,
wanted a public option. So your RW talking points won't get much traction here.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shellgame26 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:31 AM
Response to Reply #134
145. excuse yourself
I have never had any interest in "rightwing talking points". Your accusations are baseless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:16 AM
Response to Original message
54. Rec'd n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TBF Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:25 AM
Response to Original message
56. K&R nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Matariki Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:36 AM
Response to Original message
57. If WE didn't keep ignoring Obama's accomplishments, things might have gone better.
Rachael Maddow did a great segment on her show on Monday covering THE LONG LIST of (some historic) accomplishments this congress and president have done the past two years.

But for whatever reason, and the media is certainly to blame in part, WE keep ignoring that fact and stick with the narrative that nothing got done.

http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
59. As usual, the left was right. We told you so. n/t
-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
60. rec
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:14 PM
Response to Original message
61. Rahm didn't call anyone "fucking retarded"; that is Fire Dog Lake spin.
It was his reaction to the idea of running attack ads against Democrats, an idea brought to him to antagonize him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #61
96. If Rahm did not call us bad names, he should have denied
the accusations that he did loud and clear. I am inclined to believe that he did call us bad names. Obama's press secretary was also pretty snooty to us. Shame on him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LoZoccolo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #96
107. That would have led to more butthurt and BAAAAAAAAW.
People interpreted it however they wanted to interpret it, and there's a whole squad of people who'd like to see how much they can get by whining on the Internet and doing nothing else. Opportunities to play the victim to try to guilt the White House out of a favor don't go unnoticed by these people.

And Gibbs didn't insult anyone who wasn't first egregiously insulting the president by comparing him to Bush*; they ran up on the administration, got knocked on their asses and then expected something for it. P.S. It is against the rules to compare Obama to Bush*; Gibbs wasn't calling out any notion that belongs at this place.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sabrina 1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 02:11 AM
Response to Reply #61
182. He was protecting BLUE DOGS. You left that out. . And he was wrong as usual.
His favorite, right-leaning candidates lost. Not a first for him, he doesn't have a good track record for getting people elected. Because he tries to elect candidates the people do not want. Additionally he has tried to take credit for Dean's work.

What he said was worse than just calling the liberal bloggers retards. That would have been personal and would have no effect on policy. What he did was to try to influence the outcome of Congressional races by attacking the strategy of liberals to try to get some real Democrats elected and get rid of the rightwing 'democrats' by primarying them. He called trying to get real Democrats elected 'fucking retarded'.

He left town before his abject failure as a strategist became apparent again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 12:16 PM
Response to Original message
62. Amen.
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KossackRealityCheck Donating Member (153 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 03:32 PM
Response to Original message
65. unrec'ing on a message board sends a message?
oh brother.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
66. Honestly, when I first heard of Obama's "crossover" and so-called "Independent" support, my first
thought was and what do we do when they cross back over.

A 73 year old woman, a self-proclaimed "lifelong Democrats", whom I talked to on some phone bank last week told me, "They put Obama in place to do their dirty work and now they're done with him, so first he's hog-tied and then in 2012 he'll be out of there."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Greyhound Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:16 AM
Response to Reply #66
111. That's true the Republiks could never have got what he did to us through.
Very Clintonesque.

Imagine a Republik proposal to pay the robbers the full value of what they stole, oh and their usual fees of course. Could the Republiks have placed the insurance companies in charge of national health denial?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
patrice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #111
179. They NEEDED the dirt to be on someone else's hands, so that they could have their CAKE and eat ittoo
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
67. Yes, we told him so. But he didn't listen, and look what happened.
Maybe he'll listen this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
femrap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
68. sometimes I think he is doing
just as TPTB tell him. If not, he'll be another Kennedy. :tinfoilhat:

I knew he'd get all 'feisty' during the campaign and then become docile after the election of Dem losses. It's totally scripted and totally Kabuki Theater.

I am insulted and frankly, BORED by this crap by the Dems. Next, they'll impeach him.....for what? Who cares? it's fucking absurd.

Isn't he going to be out of the country for 10 days....???? And has anyone heard that he is taking his entire family?

WTF is gonna happen next week? :nuke: of a financial nature????
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
69. One Hundreth Rec
I wish I felt some other way.

And I don't care who beat Rahm on his way to becoming Mayor of Chicago. The worst of luck to that bastard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ScreamingMeemie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 09:48 PM
Response to Original message
70. +101!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tpsbmam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
73. Unrec only because I frigging HATE "rec this" threads & this has been said many
times today and said much better. (Sorry)

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:40 PM
Response to Original message
74. Kay and rrrrrrrrrrrrrr!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:41 PM
Response to Original message
75. I think later this year, Obama will be saying "I told you so!" to the apathetic "liberals" who
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 10:43 PM by BzaDem
stayed home. The "liberals" who thought that allowing 60 seats to switch to Republicans would somehow move the government to the left.

These people are going to learn a hard and painful lesson, just as Nader voters did in 2000. But I guess it's better to get it over with sooner than later.

Obama having to deal with Boehner probably ensures his re-election, just as Clinton dealing with Newt secured his. The only people that are going to be punished by these results are the people that sat at home and allowed them to happen. Boy are they in for a shock.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JDPriestly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #75
99. Do you know any apathetic liberals who stayed home?
California liberals did not stay home. That's because we had good, liberal candidates to vote for. Put up somebody like Blanche Lincoln who never inspired much of anybody but herself, and you get a loss.

And don't talk about Grayson. The Grayson was defeated thing has been defeated in its turn. The near-Republican Democratic first-termer in a neighboring district was also defeated.

Grayson fell to the Republican tide. Had Democrats really accomplished dramatic stuff in the past two years, Grayson would still be in the House and so would the moderate Democrats who lost.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ChiciB1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #99
178. I'm A Liberal And I Didn't Stay Home, Not Did My Liberal Friends...
Does that mean because I live in Florida that there are NO LIBERALS?? Not on you life, we just have to live with a state that's gone bat shit crazy and now has a veto proof state Government. And not only did Obama help them in not looking strong enough, he really DID get rolled by the pseudo BUSH REGIME again. Don't forget that Rubio is Jebby's "boy wonder" and WE liberals have to live with it!

And I don't see any tide turning here in the state. I'm a BOOMER, but there are too many RICH old people here who just don't give a shit about those less fortunate. THEY are the ones making money from the corporatists and wall street. Goldman Sachs was very much behind the Obama Administration, despite what so many feel as his "grass roots" small donations.

He would have NEVER been elected had he not gotten LOTS of money from the BIG GUYS. Thus, he has supported their views and not so much "we the people."

I'm very confused as to WHERE he's going and what he plans. It's not been clear for quite some time. All his pretty speeches are just that, words without teeth in them.

Perhaps there will be someone "under the radar" that we don't know about who will come forth as a real leader that we can follow. I'm done with following an agenda that supports WAR, still to this day. I KNOW it was said that we have removed our soldiers from Iraq, but I know people who live at Ft. Hood, TX that are still being deployed BACK to Iraq!

THE WARS MUST STOP, it's just that simple. It's robbing this country of so much money and making the "Military Industrial Complex" and all the civilian contractors VERY, VERY RICH! And I'm sure this administration MUST know it, if not then they are TRULY out of touch.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enthusiast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:21 AM
Response to Reply #75
136. I didn't stay home.
I don't know anyone that did stay home. Young voters weren't inspired to vote as they had in 2008. Maybe there is a reason for that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:43 AM
Response to Reply #75
137. Who's whining now?
Nobody gives two shits about what is going to happen now because IT DOESN'T MATTER.

The Republicans can't do anything and the Democrats WON'T do anything so why should anyone care?

Polls show it was NOT LIBERALS who stayed home it was INDEPENDENTS who switched sides. Why would they do that? Probably because they are pissed that in a failing economy the only ones helped are the bankster perpetrators.

Spin till you are blue - I TOLD YOU SO and this drubbing was PREDICTABLE and DESERVED.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BzaDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #137
159. The apathetic liberals who happened to be unemployed for 27 weeks will soon care quite a bit
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 07:46 AM by BzaDem
because their unemployment benefits will be cut off due specifically to this election.

But that is really only the beginning. You act is if "nothing happening" is the worse case scenario. You will learn eventually that this is not even close to the case. It will take some hard and painful lessons, but you will learn (just as the Naderites of 2000 learned in 2001 and 2002). It's just a matter of time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #75
176. Liberals voted. The 'center' stayed home. Indies sat it out.
Here in Oregon, all of our Democrats were re-elected, and we got a brand new, although former, Democratic Governor as well. Why? Because they work as they run, like Democrats. Peter DeFazio stomped a well funded Tea Bagger, yet Obama spent the last two years telling Peter he was 'keeping score' and chiding him for trying to make legislation that the people here wanted. Today, we are reminding Obama of that score he was keeping. Peter won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
77. This 'told 'ya so' is painful and will leave scars.
No wonder GOPukers never have to try and get elected! They have US to thank! :(
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Starry Messenger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:44 PM
Response to Original message
78. k & r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
80. Of course, Obama knew what he was doing .... didn't happen by accident....
either that or one of us is sleeping -- or pretending to be asleep!!


:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
akbacchus_BC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:48 PM
Response to Original message
82. I won't unrec you but I hope you understand that President Obama
wanted to work with people of America to make change. Too bad his idea failed but what would be worst is if he does not wake up and realise that the GOP will not work with him! If he does not change his rhetoric now, then he will be a one-term President!

By the way, you want Jeb Bush, another bush!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
akbacchus_BC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:51 PM
Response to Original message
84. Are you really saying that you voted for a rethug just to tell Obama ...
I told you so? Just asking!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:55 PM
Response to Original message
88. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
akbacchus_BC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #88
90. Thank you, I totally agree with you! I hope the faux news listeners
will read your thread.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:25 AM
Response to Reply #88
101. They will all be home? Oh really? What about the 50,000 "non-combat" troops to protect the oilfields
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #88
105. Wasting your time
There are DU'ers who have been working as hard as any freeper for this result, and who are now actually happy that the Republicans are in the house. They have this delusion that this will make the Democrats move left - because lord knows, it's worked like that in the past, right?

Even Democratic voters apparently can't tolerate a black president - and fuck you anyone who says otherwise, that IS what it's been about. The gigantic double standards, the misplaced blame, the hugely unrealistic expectations; apparently we even had a poster in here calling him "boy."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #88
115. Wow.
For a soldier, you're a douche.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #115
180. .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
still_one Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
94. What is worse is that we lost the House, even though it was the Senate that screwed up HCR
not the House. Feingold was against the current HCR, but under pressure did sacrifice and vote for it, and he paid the consequences

There is no question in my mind that the loss of the House, and Pelosi, along with Feingold's loss is directly attributable to this

and what will the lessons be learned?

They will continue to compromise, which really means giving the repukes everything they want

Maybe it is time for the Democrats to stand for something for once, instead of empty words




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #94
102. If Feingold had stuck to his guns and vetoed FrankenHCR (no relation to the Sen.) he'd have won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phlem Donating Member (580 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
97. plus
INFINITY !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

But the more disturbing thing is, as a Dem, is that other Dems will think your completely of your rocker. I on the other hand think your spot on.

What did I get the other day, blah blah blah while I fight for my country. WTF, this guy has somehow cornered the market on fighting for America?!

The truth can be hard to see for others. But easy to see for the other half.

I hear ya Bro.

-p

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:54 PM
Response to Original message
98. I've got news for you.
Edited on Wed Nov-03-10 11:55 PM by Marr
Obama's "compromising" with the Republicans wasn't done in the hopes of bringing them towards the left. It was to bring your expectations to the right, and that's all. They got what they wanted, legislatively. The "chess game" was just about making Democratic voters to swallow it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Leopolds Ghost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:28 AM
Response to Reply #98
103. Yes, the objective was to enact a Bourbon Restoration in the Dem party, as a "hedge" for corp donors
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 03:00 AM
Response to Reply #103
120. While most of us are starting to finally figure this all out.
After the money has all been taken away and given tot he Gallant And Fancy Pants crowd ion Wall Street.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lugnut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-03-10 11:59 PM
Response to Original message
100. K&R, K&R, K&R n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:30 AM
Response to Original message
104. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:35 AM
Response to Reply #104
146. Exactly how did I elect Republicans...
I have always voted the Democratic ticket for the past 40 years. My point, which you seem to wilfully ignore, is that President Obama did not heed the pleas of the less "moderate" who prayed for dramatic and powerful changes in course that would have, in our view, created much greate support for Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
upi402 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:35 AM
Response to Original message
106. ^+10000000000000000
Ami I furious?
Rahm would have to be a fucking retard to not see it. Obama wants bipartisan cooperation STILL!!!!!!

Obama wants a pony, I say he can ride out on it.


effemall
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Born_A_Truman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
109. Un Rec
This is bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:06 AM
Response to Reply #109
133. 'Un Rec This is bullshit.' - that's your whole critique?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rainlillie Donating Member (654 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:50 AM
Response to Reply #109
150. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Veracious Donating Member (196 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
110. OH SNAP!
mmhmm progressives held their seats. how can I canvass my sphere if you dont fight!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:02 AM
Response to Reply #110
128. Like Grayson and Feingold? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
inna Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:28 AM
Response to Original message
112. i rec'd, but really, it's ridiculous to think that the White House Team (wetted by the PTB)

didn't know exactly what they were doing.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:38 AM
Response to Original message
114. Agreed.
A big fucking K & R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truedelphi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 02:57 AM
Response to Original message
117. I really don't think he cares at all.
The losses of the seats in the House will help him maintain his pledge to his controllers. He will continue to be the best President that Industry has ever bought and paid for, And as a result, he will probably face Palin in 2012 and beat her as badly as the Dems beat McConnell.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:10 AM
Response to Original message
121. Good talkers seem to be bad listeners.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsmandrake Donating Member (32 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 04:28 AM
Response to Original message
125. A PLANNED FAILURE
What seems like the more obvious conclusion, to all that he was warned about--and did anyway, was that it was all part of a premeditated plan for the very ends conceived. At the worst he would only be perceived by most as a VICTIM. (Which is what all this talk continues to be about!) When at the very end they have all gotten just what they'd planned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:19 AM
Response to Reply #125
135. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:20 AM
Response to Reply #125
169. You wouldn't have wanted the Dems to cut SS and Medicare on their own would you?
Losing at least one branch to control by the GOP helps to mitigate the blame, as opposed to one party suffering the sum total of consequences for these actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JTFrog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:00 AM
Response to Original message
127. Awesome, now reap what you sow.
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 05:01 AM by JTFrog
Unrec.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tanelorn Donating Member (162 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:05 AM
Response to Original message
130. Ok everyone vent now, but the real work for 2012 begins now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrank Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:05 AM
Response to Original message
132. A pitifully squandered opportunity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:38 AM
Response to Reply #132
147. That's the sad part...
And it probably was the country's last best chance to survive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bonnieS Donating Member (215 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:53 AM
Response to Original message
138. Yup!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TxVietVet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 05:55 AM
Response to Original message
140. It started when Pelosi said impeachment was off the table.
Now, you will face that attack. Pelosi, Reid and yourself are the top Dems to be skewered and demonized by the conservanazis.

How about a little bit of "I TOLD YOU SO".

Now, the fucking conservanazis will be on a full frontal attack on you, your wife and your children.

Oh, BTW, you might call on some Progressives to HELP YOU OUT OF THE TERRIBLE BIND YOUR ASS IS IN NOW.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lost4words Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #140
155. + 1 totally!! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Roland99 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:05 AM
Response to Original message
141. Totally agree. I almost wrote something like this before the election
but decided not to.

I kept reading post after post about polls not using cell phones and they were off and this and that and the other reason why the Dems would retain both houses.

A bunch of overly-optimistic fantasy.

20% of the youth vote came out to vote.

Obama and his admin and the feckless corporate whore Dems in the Congress fucked up the grandest opportunity that was handed to them 2 years ago.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2critical Donating Member (51 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:17 AM
Response to Original message
142. Still glad you didn't change the Senate rules like we told you?
That holds and the filibuster make an anti-democratic body ridiculously anti-democratic?

The Senate, as constructed in the Constitution, needs to exist in order to protect the rights of rural Americans. But, the filibuster and holds are just parliamentary rules, and by nature anti-democratic. We told you to do away with them 2 years ago. Did you listen? No! Now see what we are stuck with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
143. Touche, K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proReality Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 06:25 AM
Response to Original message
144. I keep getting the feeling...
...that they've all got us right where they want us. They've made me that cynical.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PerpetuallyDazed Donating Member (806 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:00 AM
Response to Original message
151. This is what the "moderates" and Jon Stewart crowd doesn't understand...
(And I was at the rally by the way, and LOVED it) We don't hate Republicans; we just realize it's futile to compromise with a lot of them. They are the Party of "NO!". They offer no solutions, no leadership for the future. It's all about tax breaks NOW, screw the generations who will pay for it later. Even then, their political agenda against Obama holds priority over their job to the country.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pgodbold Donating Member (953 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:29 AM
Response to Original message
156. Rec 1,000,000... nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scruffy1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:55 AM
Response to Reply #156
162. Like that graphic
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Scruffy1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:57 AM
Response to Reply #156
163. On second thought this was another O failure
Even something so simple as giving 10% of our citizens equal rights eluded this administration.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ian David Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
157. Yay, for Bipartisanship!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:16 AM
Response to Original message
167. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
leeroysphitz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
168. Would everyone who cannot understand theis simple and truthful OP please leave D.U.?
You would be happier someplace else and the rest of us are tired of hearing your excuses and pretzel logic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 04:59 AM
Response to Reply #168
184. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 08:19 AM
Response to Reply #184
185. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
TwentyFive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
171. And you started it off by inviting RICK WARREN to give the invocation at your inaugural!!
You tried to please the religious right with your 'moderate' and discriminatory views on same sex marriage.

How many fundamentalist christian voters did THAT get you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
173. yup K&R
Edited on Thu Nov-04-10 08:40 AM by meow mix
not good
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr. Mustard Donating Member (35 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 08:53 AM
Response to Original message
175. It's the Banks Stupid
A take off from "Its the Economy Stupid", because the banks now profit when we fail. The banks control approximately 30% of GDP and because of their failed derivatives scheme, they purchased insurance against mortgage defaults, and increase penalties and fees for overdrafts and late payments.

The banks are now in the repossesion business as well. Another way for them to profit when we fail.

One of the oligopoly profits when we fail. Add in the greed of the CEO's who refuse to release money because POTUS wants them to play fair, and they are "banking" on Americans failing.

(I also give a nod to cruel Health Care corporations for recission and pre-existing conditions to deny good Americans the services they paid for. Hoping for failure, again.)

American corporations profit from America's failure. We are in the failure business now, and have created the failure model.

Yes it is the economy because of the freaking banks (mainly) and we bailed them out and they receive bonuses when the fail. Yet we lose our stuff when we fail, and are not allowed to re-enter the credit market for 10 years after we fail.

Here it is:

Until one of the parties decides to fight the big banks, and I mean fight and break them up we will be a second rate economy. They profit if they profit, and they profit if we fail so they don't care that the economy does better.

Much of the economy is confidence as well, and Bush & Co. aided by Obama demoralized us little people by coddling the banks. So the confidence factor is removed (for now) also.

The Democrats may finally get it, if they have a conscious but there is one answer and one answer only.

Break up the banks.

(and Medicare for all.)

We have to find a way to break up the banks, and choose leaders who will risk careers and their lives to break up the banks.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ThatsMyBarack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 09:17 AM
Response to Original message
177. Tried to Rec, but
Missed the deadline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jsmandrake Donating Member (32 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-04-10 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
181. Updated- PLANNED FAILURE
It aches my heart to recognize that even He (of the great promise), was in cahoots with a plan that consciously was two steps ahead of the very hope he offered. That whole debate about 'is he playing checkers or chess?'..now reveals the answer to be CHESS, against us. In this set-up -Republican Conservatives act as straw men whose purpose is to give Presidential deniability to the raid on Social Security he will now HAVE TO acquiesce to. All this post-election talk from the Administration painting Republican gains as..as...a mandate..to do the very things they pretended against while intending to. MAKES ME WANT TO SPIT
(this is just one incremental piece of the whole sick endeavor)
Obama the used car salesman.
A Bill Hicks line pops into my head----"If you're in marketing--just kill yourself. No, seriously."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-05-10 02:13 AM
Response to Original message
183. They certainly weren't the moves of a chess grandmaster, that's for sure.
NT!

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 Fri Jan 28th 2022, 04:38 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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