Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

President Obama is a....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 06:55 PM
Original message
Poll question: President Obama is a....

Sorry, polls are turned off at Level 3.

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. Fascist!!1!
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Number23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:59 AM
Response to Reply #1
65. I was gonna vote "leprechaun" but it wasn't an option for some reason...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aquart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Spaghetti.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tjwash Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
3. poopy headed meanie that makes baby-marx cry :(
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 07:03 PM by tjwash
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
26. Funny, I am still laughing. Baby-Marx! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
brettdale Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:03 PM
Response to Original message
4. A democrat
hes hoping for a great two years where he stands up to the BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Individualist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:04 PM
Response to Original message
5. New Democrat
by his own admission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Cant trust em Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:07 PM
Response to Original message
6. Democratic corporatist. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
EmeraldCityGrl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:08 PM
Response to Original message
7. Narcissist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:09 PM
Response to Original message
8. couple of your choices can be credibly conflated
can't choose from conflicting choices
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #8
9. Not even one you like?
Hmmmmmm...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. hmmm, yourself. You're not one of those are you?
I'd choose Democrat and pragmatist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #10
15. I would choose...
conservative Democratic pragmatist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #15
22. what day of the week?
:7
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:28 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. Today.
What day were you thinking of??
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #23
30. tomorrow
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #30
32. It depends...
if the facts on the ground change. Reality seems to have changed with this President.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:47 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. reality doesn't change
just our perception of it
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:52 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. My perception has changed.
Has yours not changed? Still the same? My definition of a "pragmatist" has changed. Now, I believe it depends on your basic political philosophy. If you are more conservative, then you might think differently about taxcuts than if you are a progressive? Perhaps?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:02 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. I think that you can be concerned, yet ill-informed about the political process
. . . that regulates the tax rates, benefits, and incentives. The loss of a tax break, for instance, might not occur in the mind of those affected as a positive step in the direction of some dubious, unsupported, future economic policy. I think most wage earners would just score it as an income loss at the hands of the federal government.

I'm bullish on government. I have a basic philosophy of involvement and vigilance. I owe that to the myriads of negative interests and influences which show up every day to collect our tax dollars. It remains a challenge to effect progressive changes, but, there isn't any productive alternative or effective substitute to continuing to work to build coalitions within our political system to advance our ideals into action or law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:07 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Do you think adding $1 trillion to the debt...?
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 08:08 PM by kentuck
would have any impact on the Treasuries market?

Do you think this will actually help the economy grow and help the President's re-election?

Or do you think this will help the middle-class in the short term and their futures will not be affected in a negative way?

What role do taxes play in government? Can you be bullish on taxcuts and government at the same time?

What do you mean by "some dubious, unsupported, future economic policy"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #37
38. you assume money saved would go to support some sort of net deficit reduction
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 08:22 PM by bigtree
. . . I'm assuming?

From what I see, the aim of the tax effort is to circulate money into the 'economy' to spur some sort of growth. It's another short-term/stop-gap measure which is the only type of economic policy our politicians seem to be able to agree on.

The future of the economy of the 'middle-class' isn't going to have any advantage of any long-term legislative remedies for a while. The President will propose and Congress will posture until they run out of cover.

I'm bullish on our government, but not necessarily based on one policy decision the legislature makes or the other. I'm bullish on the political process.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #38
42. I believe that making an attempt to lower the deficit might...
have a more positive impact on the economy than another trilion dollars spent in the manner spent.

Personally, I think the best stimulus would be a government jobs program, rather than taxcuts or unemployment checks. I think it has been proven that taxcuts do not necessarily stimulate the economy. This is not 1961 when tax rates were 90%. There is a law of diminishing returns, in regards to taxcuts, in my opinion.

If they were to couple the expiration of the Bush tax cuts with the withdrawal of troops from the MidEast, it would do more for our economy than about anything so far mentioned by Obama or his minions.

By the way, deficit reduction, just like in 1992, is the hot political issue of the moment.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:47 PM
Response to Reply #42
45. that's a good example
. . . of what I meant by a 'unsupported economic policy'. A government jobs program is a dubious prospect, given the coming reign of the republican-led House.

Boehner will attempt to highlight deficit reduction with some sort of spending reduction plan. We can include his upper-income tax cuts at the head of any list he might come up with.

I'm not arguing the tax scheme makes perfect sense as a stimulus effort, but that will be one of its effects. It would be naive to think the administration and others aren't pursuing the bill as a means to introduce more money into the economy. I don't think you can find another 'supported' legislative vehicle for doing that, on this scale, in this lame-duck Congress; and certainly not in the next one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #45
47. To dream the impossible dream, I guess?
I have a tough time understanding "crisis". When you are hungry and unemployed and homeless, it is a crisis. But there's no use to talk about them because the Repubs will never agree to help them and we can never reach a compromise, so therefore, we just settle for what we can get. Whatever they want to give us. We have no power. If it is not possible to get, no need to fight for it. I'm a dreamer, I suppose?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
bigtree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #47
49. what does the republican opposition do?
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 09:43 PM by bigtree
. . . they organize. Although, they're genuinely divided between one phony argument in the legislature and another opportunistic one among republican candidates right now.

Democrats are mostly divided on tactics. It doesn't stand to reason that President Obama wouldn't sign almost every Democratic oriented bill our legislators could manage. A lot of folks are looking for ways to subvert the political process to expedite their agenda that they've failed to enact. The prescription offered for success is a 'fight', but romanticized schemes to jawbone the republicans into submission are as unlikely to occur as they are unlikely to move obstinate legislators.

I am very sympathetic with the impatience with our democratic system. The political process has been rigged to advantage the moneyed. Every action is designed to discourage you from cutting in on all of that. Every action is to deflect you; weaken your resolve to vigilance; divide your coalition and push you away from participating. It's a privileged game and you're not really invited.

That doesn't mean, though, that you actually need to be invited in. It's your government; as much as it belongs to anyone else. Step right in, but, don't forget to bring as large a posse as you can manage to advantage your 'fight' for the things you want. The prospect for success has never been a guarantee - it's just a promise. It's a hell of one, though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. I agree with you...
I am not yet ready to surrender.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:12 PM
Response to Original message
11. Interesting. This tell us more about DUers than Obama.
The term "corporatist" is practically unknown outside the Nader/Duer crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #11
12. Isn't that like all polls??
Even those by Gallup?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
pnwmom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #12
14. Certainly it's often true. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NorthCarolina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #11
16. What??? Sorry, I don't believe that. Linky? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tpsbmam Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #11
44. Have fun reading.
Corporatist Google news:

http://www.google.com/#q=corporatist&hl=en&prmd=ivn&sou...

Google search:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,27030,27585,2...


I note that Ron Paul followers know the term -- he accurately asserted that Obama isn't a socialist, he's a corporatist. Among other places he's said it, this speech was at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSaQ7WPd_LM

No, DUers and Naderites aren't the only ones who know the term...or agree with it when it comes to Obama.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nxylas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:15 PM
Response to Original message
13. I voted for compromiser
There are a few things in his record, like the appointment of Elizabeth Warren, that prevented me from voting Corporatist, though I was leaning that way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
flvegan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:18 PM
Response to Original message
17. witch.
He turned me into a newt.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Scurrilous Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #17
18. Hope you get better.
:thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
yourout Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
19. Almost everything he has signed has had a loophole or function to benefit the rich......
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:22 PM
Response to Original message
20. Other - he's a "New" Democrat neoliberal aligned with the interests of the wealthy elite.
I'm old enough to remember real Democrats, and Obama is no Democrat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Iggo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. HELLCAT!!!!
HELLCAT!!!

HELLCAT!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
NoodleyAppendage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:29 PM
Response to Original message
24. DISAPPOINTMENT.
Pure and simple. We were sold a load of bullsh*t in 2008.

J
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TeaBagsAreForCups Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #24
54. TruDat !
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
golddigger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:30 PM
Response to Original message
25. I haven't the vaguest idea.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one_voice Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
27. An alien...
he can't produce a long form bc cuz he's from another planet.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
28. By his own admission... blue dog
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
reformist2 Donating Member (998 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:35 PM
Response to Original message
29. I went with pragmatist, because I think he's too liberal at heart to be a corporatist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Laelth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
31. Flypaper. Happy to unrec. n/t
-Laelth
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
33. Other: A President, faced with serious opposition from his own
party that may give that seat to a Republican in 2012. Very sad, indeed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #33
46. And why do we in the party oppose him? Do you ever wonder? (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MineralMan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:53 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. What's this we stuff? I'm also a Democrat, and I support him.
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 08:55 PM by MineralMan
I'm an active Democrat, too - a precinct chairperson and an active campaigner. Don't count only people who agree with you as Democrats. There are many, many Democrats like me out there, too. Even a majority of Democrats, actually.

You can only speak for yourself, not for other Democrats. Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Morning Dew Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
39. Doll.
In a Rossum Corporation sense, of course.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
40. Unrec for being completely unhelpful. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #40
43. I apologize for not being sufficiently supportive...
in destroying our middle class and the Democratic Party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Vickers Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #43
55. Sarcasm is not your strong suit. Nor is misplaced martyrdom. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. n/t
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TheWatcher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #43
59. How many times have I told you kentuck.
You've got to learn to lick those Boots if you want to be one of the Cool Kids.

Five Fingers, Winston!

:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Occam Bandage Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 08:21 PM
Response to Original message
41. "Pragmatist" "Democrat" and "Corporatist" are all correct. nt
Edited on Sun Dec-12-10 08:21 PM by Occam Bandage
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Amaya Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
51. a one- termer
nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
BlueIris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:38 PM
Response to Original message
52. Puppet.
If we're lucky, we'll get to see at least one of the hands that moves him before this show is over. Which it will be soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
53. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
DeadEyeDyck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Dec-12-10 11:25 PM
Response to Original message
57. K&R
trying
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Douglas Carpenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:05 AM
Response to Original message
58. a reasonably decent enough man who is overpowered by a global economic system
Edited on Mon Dec-13-10 12:09 AM by Douglas Carpenter
that is far more powerful now than it was in the 90's when Bill Clinton was making similar compromises or sellouts if you will.

In the 60's and early 70's capitalism was already extremely powerful, but it was counterbalanced to a significantly greater degree than it is now by powerful unions and other progressive forces and the relative inability of corporate power to break the power of unions by outsourcing to third world economies. Also with the cold war and as awful as the Soviet Union and its allies were - they created a global philosophic counter balance to unrestrained capital power as as well as the need to demonstrate to the world that capitalism offered more to working class people than command economy bureaucratic collectivism.

We now live in a single economic system world where there is no longer any philosophic counterbalance or any need for capitalism to demonstrate its relative progressivism and capital is as mobile as the click of a button on a laptop.

Having said this, following the market meltdown of September/October 2008 and with the election mandate of November 2008 - Mr. Obama had a unique opportunity to create a new paradigm. But unfortunately he did not cease the day. But to be honest, I did not expect him or any other mainstream politician to cease that unique opportunity. They are simply way too much part of the system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MellowDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
60. Wow, DU has no idea what corporatism is...
It has nothing to do with "corporations".
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
TeaBagsAreForCups Donating Member (320 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 08:25 AM
Response to Reply #60
66. Uhhhh, yes we do.
Edited on Mon Dec-13-10 08:59 AM by TeaBagsAreForCups
"In contemporary usage, "corporatism" is often used as a term to describe politics dominated by the interests of business corporations (Corporatocracy)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

"Corporatocracy, in social theories that focus on conflicts and opposing interests within society, denotes a system of government that serves the interest of, and may be run by, corporations and involves ties between government and business. Where corporations, conglomerates, and/or government entities with private components, control the direction and governance of a country, including carrying out economic planning notwithstanding the 'free market' label"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

"Corporatism - Definition
The term corporatism has different meanings in different contexts. Most notably, the historical usage of the term is not the same as its modern usage. ....Historically, corporatism or corporativism (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to corporations that represent economic, industrial, and professional groups. Unlike pluralism, in which many groups must compete for control of the state, in corporatism, certain unelected bodies take a critical role in the decision-making process. This original meaning was not connected with the specific notion of a business corporation, being a rather more general reference to any incorporated body. The word "corporatism" is derived from the Latin word for body, corpus. ...Today, corporatism or neo-corporatism is used in reference to tendencies in politics for legislators and administrations to be influenced or dominated by the interests of business enterprises ..."

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Corporatism

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." Benito Mussolini"

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/corporatism_come...


.... Terms, concepts, and classifications do evolve and morph over time - most critically in terms of common usage and in the mind of the body politic.

(edit for style and emphasis.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 08:31 AM
Response to Reply #66
68. +1, of course we do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
MellowDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:34 PM
Response to Reply #66
70. In the mind of the body politic....
what does corporatism mean? I would posit that they have no idea overall. Just because a very small number on the left, and not in any way a "body politic", have mistaken the meaning of the word does not change the meaning of the word. The confusion is still there, as many liberals use corporatism in its flawed meaning as proof of fascism, when fascism did not have to do with the flawed meaning of corporatism.

Also, there is a correct meaning for the term that liberals are searching for, corporatocracy. Using the wrong term will ony confuse the issue, while using a new term that does not have multipile meanings is a better alternative. New theories and meanings generally need new terms. Using terms that are associated with fascism that has really nothing to do with the new idea is a bad idea, to say the least.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 01:00 AM
Response to Original message
61. He is a corporate man and a democratic leader.
Looks to be about right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 01:27 AM
Response to Original message
62. Reagan Democrat
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Imagevision Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
63. 
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:29 AM
Response to Original message
64. My answer starts with a D
but it's not Democrat...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 08:27 AM
Response to Original message
67. Reagan disciple when it comes to economics and foreign policy.
Edited on Mon Dec-13-10 08:28 AM by mmonk
Except he won't cut and run like Reagan did in Lebanon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
69. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
rucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
71. Pragmatist above all else.
Not to say some pragmatism isn't a good thing - it is. But not when it's above ALL else.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
meow mix Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Dec-13-10 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
72. its against DU rules for me to finish your sentence. sorry.
Edited on Mon Dec-13-10 03:41 PM by meow mix
i dont want the pizza
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | 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 Nov 18th 2018, 12:29 AM
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