Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

"President Obama's strategy gets personal"

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 » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
Clio the Leo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:14 AM
Original message
"President Obama's strategy gets personal"
President Obama's strategy gets personal
By JONATHAN ALLEN & CAROL E. LEE | 4/27/10 4:33 AM EDT

Mitch McConnell is in bed with Wall Street movers and shakers and is fronting cynical and deceptive arguments on their behalf.

John Boehner is a health care Chicken Little to be mocked for predicting Armageddon if the Democrats reform bill passed.

Sarah Palin can be ignored on arms control because shes not exactly an expert on nuclear issues.

And Glenn Beck and Rush Limbaugh are just a troublesome twosome spreading vitriol.

Democratic oppo research? Comments from Daily Kos?

No, this is your president speaking.

Once chastised for not being tough enough, President Barack Obama has lately been getting personal with his political adversaries singling them out for scorn in speeches, interviews, asides and even in his weekly radio address.

Rather than just going after big groups of bad guys insurance companies, lobbyists, the media Obama has adopted a strategy that gives a face to the enemy.

By setting himself up against specific opponents, he provides a point of contrast thats useful in invigorating a base hungry for bare knuckles and bravado and forces those in the middle to choose between him and his villain du jour.

He lost some of his spunk and fight. He lost what he had in the campaign. When you campaign, you campaign against people, said Paul Stob, a Vanderbilt professor who co-operates the website www.presidentialrhetoric.com . I think there have been very conscious decisions to get back to that.

much more....
Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0410/36385.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:18 AM
Response to Original message
1. Fine, I've got a list
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 08:18 AM by zipplewrath
How's about Baucus, Lieberman, and a few of the other conservative dems that are blocking progress in Congress. So far the only democrat he's been willing to call out publicly is Kucinich. I'm sure that'd be "retarded" though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Guy Whitey Corngood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:22 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Nelson (I'm saying that the same way Seinfeld would say "Newman"). nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proudohioan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:43 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. Publically calling out Dennis...
really pissed me off!!!! I thought the same as you; what the fuck about calling out Lieberman? And the other Blue Dogs?

To me, that public calling out of Dennis was manipulative and totally uncalled for!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:48 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Progressives are his favorite punching bag
He and Rahm have left the conservative dems alone, but he is forever bragging about "rejecting" progressive ideas. He craves the "middle ground" and seems to have defined that is just slightly left of right wing, bat shit, crazy. He loves to establish himself by using the left as a shield against attacks from the right. I'm trying to figure out the most "liberal" thing he's done so far and I'm struggling.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proudohioan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. Doncha remember....
He signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act!!!!! Doesn't that make up for everything else?????


:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #6
9. "Progressives are his favorite punching bag"?? Prove it. The OP refutes your baseless polemic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:34 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. He bragged to the GOP
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 10:50 AM by zipplewrath
He bragged to the GOP that he rejected "progressive ideas".
His chief of staff described us a "retarded".
He described single payer as "unworkable", despite it being in use in several industrialized nations.
He called out one single congressman during the entire health care debate, Kucinich. Not Lieberman, not Nelson.
And of course on day 1 he gave a big wet sloppy one to Rick Warren.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
19. Where are the sourced facts or quotes? I prefer contextual facts to vitriolic spin. n/t
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 11:18 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Meeting at the Blair House
It was on all the TV's. Now you're gonna dispute that he said these things? So basically what you're saying is that you haven't been paying attention. Well, I guess ignorance is bliss. By the by, he bragged about rejecting progressives to FOX NEWS no less.


"The component parts of this thing are pretty similar to what Howard Baker, Bob Dole, and Tom Daschle proposed at the beginning of this debate last year.

Now, you may not agree with Bob Dole and Howard Baker, and, certainly you don't agree with Tom Daschle on much, but that's not a radical bunch. But if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot. No, I mean, that's how you guys -- (applause) -- that's how you guys presented it.

And so I'm thinking to myself, well, how is it that a plan that is pretty centrist -- no, look, I mean, I'm just saying, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say this is actually what many Republicans -- is similar to what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2010/03/obam...

OBAMA: the only thing I want to say, just to close up, is that when you talk about one-sixth of the economy, this is one-sixth of the economy that right now is a huge drag on the economy. Now, we can fix this in a way that is sensible, that is centrist. I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted that are you know, they were very adamant about because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system. But what we can't do is perpetuate a system in which millions of people day in and day out are having an enormously tough time and small businesses are sending me letters constantly saying that they are seeing their premiums increase 40, 50 percent."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. That was a statement of fact. I am still waiting for proof that he "bragged to the GOP". n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #26
35. Those statements were made TO the GOP
Or did you not read them? The first was to them at the first open meeting he had with them.

The second was on Fox News, you know, the public relations arm of the GOP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 09:54 AM
Response to Reply #35
39. "He bragged to the GOP that he rejected "progressive ideas" So far, I see no proof.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:00 AM by ClarkUSA
"Progressives are his favorite punching bag"

Nothing you've offered supports this claim. He was explaining the facts to Republicans regarding their false characterization of HCR as socialist legislation. For you to twist his recitation of historical fact is pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:12 AM
Response to Reply #39
41. Quotes aren't proof?
That's rich. He, in person, says that he rejected progressive ideas to Fox News and you see no proof that he said that he rejected progressive ideas. What color is the sky in your world?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #41
44. Your few quotes are not proof of your assertions that he "bragged". He was stating facts...
... not doing a dance in the end zone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:26 AM
Response to Reply #44
46. Your entire argument boils down to
nothing more than semantics. He's on Fox News, trying to defend himself against extremism, and as a defense he present that he rejected progressive ideas. He said that because he wasn't proud that he had rejected progressive ideas? He said that because he didn't want them to know that he had? Or did he say it because he wanted them to perceive him favorably?

All the examples I've listed, and there are more, are cases where he attempted to seperate himself from progressives, so as to make himself appear more favorable to the right. You don't like calling that a punching bag, fine, but he is using progressives, the people in his own party to separate himself FROM his party and move towards the right. He is running away, and proclaiming his actions publicly, from the people in his own party.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #46
50. He never said "to the GOP" that he "rejected progressive ideas". You're spinning the facts.
Your entire perspective is quite skewed, as your debunked claim that he "called out" Dennis Kucinich proves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:55 AM
Response to Reply #50
56. I provided the quote
He clearly stated, on Fox News, that he "rejected progressive ideas". I'm not sure how much more direct he could be. You want a literal dance in a literal endzone? And he did fly to Dennis' district. Not Lincoln's. Not Lieberman's. Not Baucus. He flew to the progressive district and picked the one shout out that confronted Dennis on his vote for acknowledgement. He ignores shouts daily, but that one he responded to. Why do you think he was in the district in the first place? You think he was trying to influence votes in Kansas?

You're really working hard to avoid reality here. At best you're arguing against what you perceive as hyperbole. At worst, you're ignoring reality. He is using progressives as a counter balance to the center-right. He does look for opportunities to set himself apart from them. And he actively works to make it publicly obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:06 AM
Response to Reply #56
59. You're moving the goalposts again. When did he say that "to the GOP"?
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 11:08 AM by ClarkUSA
As for his interview with Fox News, he never said he "rejected progressive ideas". This is what he said:

OBAMA:... I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted.. because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system. But what we can't do is perpetuate a system in which millions of people day in and day out are having an enormously tough time and small businesses are sending me letters constantly saying that they are seeing their premiums increase 40, 50 percent."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html


So what? He's telling it like it is, from a legislatively pragmatic POV. I am not sure why you feel the need to spin a simple statement of fact as nefarious intent on his part to keep progressives down. Funny how MoveOn.org and the unions are some of his strongest policy supporters, eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:28 AM
Response to Reply #59
64. Now you're really desperate
You're cutting quotes to avoid the uncomfortable facts:

OBAMA:...Now, we can fix this in a way that is sensible, that is centrist. I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted.. because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system. But what we can't do is perpetuate a system in which millions of people day in and day out are having an enormously tough time and small businesses are sending me letters constantly saying that they are seeing their premiums increase 40, 50 percent."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html


Notice the part you skipped? It's in bold for ya. He's fixing it in a "sensible" way, a "centrist" way, not a "progressive" way. But this is a big hug to the progressives? He said this on Fox News. You think he was trying to appeal to progressives? He rejected a whole bunch of progressive ideas. No one or two. Not "the progressive idea of single payer". No, he rejected "a whole bunch". To whom do you think he was speaking? Dennis? Move On? Or to the folks on the right? You think he was trying to make them feel more favorable about the legislation by contrasting it to the population they despise the most? You can't see that he was trying to put himself, and his bill in a more favorable light by distancing himself and the legislation from "progressives"?


It takes a whole lotta cognitive dissonance to not see this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:32 AM
Response to Reply #64
65. How in the world can you twist that into he "bragged to the GOP that he rejected progressive ideas"?
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 11:36 AM by ClarkUSA
I'm not the one who's "desperate". He's describing the facts related to the legislative process that was needed in order to get HCR passed into law. So what?

I take it you were a member of the "Kill the Bill" club? :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #65
67. No, he is pandering to the right
He isn't "describing the facts". He is attempting to appeal to the fox viewers by seperating himself from the progressives. He is trying to draw distinctions between himself and the progressives.

As for any club, I wasn't invited. And you're now switching from avoiding quotes to false dichotomies. You're gonna run out of ways to avoid reality soon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:47 AM
Response to Reply #67
68. If that's true, then why is he calling Republicans out for not supporting financial reform?
Your spin is removed from reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:53 AM
Response to Reply #68
70. We shall see
He had so little success with his progressive bashing in the Health Insurance Stimulus Package, that I've been wondering if he had learned anything. We shall see. I'm a bit worried, because Timothy ran out on day one and offered to drop the tax. Probably just one of the progressive ideas they'll claim to have dropped in the future.

This isn't over yet. But you're trying to avoid the reality of what has happened. Just because he'll change, doesn't mean it hasn't happened in the past. You will note, however, that he didn't say anything about Baucus. Guess that'd be retarded.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:22 PM
Response to Reply #70
73. President Obama has had the best first year in history but there are always those who enjoy...
... criticizing his every move, as if they could do more and better than he has. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. Just not very progressive
He's missed a chance to be transformational. Instead, he's passing GOP ideas off as democratic successes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:50 PM
Response to Reply #75
78. HCR, financial reform, immigration reform, and climate change legislation are not "GOP ideas".
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 12:58 PM by ClarkUSA
That's why Republicans are against them. Once again, your polemic is an attempt to use President Obama as a "punching bag" in order to use justify your 24/7 criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #78
79. According to Obama
HCR was "not all that much different" than what the GOP proposed under Clinton. Immigration reform was originally passed under Reagan. McCain, prior to this year, was for immmigration reform. And what climate change legislation has passed so far?

It is a DLC trick, one they learned from Reagan actually. Clinton called it triangulation. Basically it is staking out positions to take an issue away from your opponent. Basically, you find the extreme and move away from it. So you take your opponent, find his extreme corner and try to position yourself just the other side of there. Of course that may mean you're a long way from the vast majority of the area of the triangle, but that doesn't matter. It traps your opponent in his corner.

In the Clinton era, it's how we got things like DADT and DOMA. He moved TOWARDS the GOP to corner them in their extreme position. Obama did the same thing with the Health Insurance Stimulus Package. He moved towards the GOP to corner them. It worked. Of course, all the progressive ideas got "rejected" along the way. He also had to reverse himself on some issues upon which he campaigned, such as mandates, cadillac taxes, and drug price negotiations. But that's not important in triangulation. Because by moving towards the GOP you move away from the center of the democratic party. But what are they suppose to do? Run around and join the GOP?

Reagan gets idolized these days (as does Obama actually) even though by any rational review of what he did, it wasn't particularly conservative. But he was forever co-opting democratic issues and making them his own. Did ya know that Ralph Abernathy endorsed Reagan the first time around? Reagan's lone contribution to the "defense build up" was bringing a battleship out of mothballs (which was then mothballed by Bush I IIRC) and restarting the B-1 contract (which would end up grounded through the entire first gulf war). Carter actually put the rest of the military build up under contract in his one term. The 600 ship navy was of Carter's design. (He was an old navy guy after all). And he almost negotiated away our ENTIRE nuclear arsenal. Mention that to a conservative some day.

And no, I'm not going to give you "pro forma" pointers to all of this. Feel free to read a history book at your leisure. Abernathy's book is a good one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 01:29 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. That purposefully vague statement is not proof of what you're saying; it's polite persuasion.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 01:49 PM by ClarkUSA
There was plenty in HCR that were ideas from Democrats like Bernie Sanders, so much so that not one Republican voted for it.

<<Reagan gets idolized these days (as does Obama actually)>>

Prove it. This is yet another example of your persistently false characterizations of the President.


The following accomplishments by President Obama in the past 15 months were not "GOP ideas" either:

~ Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.
~ Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques"; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with the Geneva Convention standards
~ "Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.
~ Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).
~ Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.
~ Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House
~ "Forge a meaningful statement from the United Nations" criticizing North Korea's launch of a ballistic missile.
~ Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.
~ Appointed the first Latina to the US Supreme Court
~ Engaging world leaders in Europe, Turkey, Latin American and the Caribbean with "strength and humility."
~ Passed the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 in February - has played a key role in turnaround of economy over the last 3 quarters
~ $90 billion invested in clean energy economy of the future - jobs, lower dependence on foreign oil, enhance national security, clean environment
~ $10.5 billion investment in modernization of national electric grid
~ $18 billion for upgrades & modernization of public transport systems, including new high speed rail
~ $23 billion investment incentives to small businesses
~ Over $1billion in job training grants for jobs in new clean energy sectors
~ Tax credits to stimulate development of clean energy manufacturing - wind turbines, solar panels, electric vehicles, batteries, etc
~ Distributed education grants to US states, to keep teachers in schools
~ $1 billion investment in advancing use of cutting edge Health IT - By 2014, HIT will be made available to 100,000 hospitals & physicians & thousands of people trained for careers in HIT & health care, from nurses and pharmacy techs to IT technicians and trainers.
~ $650 million for Communities Putting Prevention to Work, public health program to address obesity, increase physical activity, improve nutrition, and decrease smoking.
~ Subsidized extended COBRA benefits for unemployed
~ Passed the largest middle-class tax cut in history - $288 billion
~ Dept of Transportation claims 52,000 jobs were saved
~ Guided GM & Chrysler through bankruptcy
~ Passed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
~ Passed the Human Rights Enforcement Act of 2009
~ Passed the Credit Card Holders Bill of Rights Act of 2009
~ Passed Ryan White CARE Act of 2009 - repealed HIV entry ban
~ Approved California's adoption of car emission standards for cleaner air & climate control - had been blocked by President Bush for 6 years
~ Launched the White House Food Safety Working Group - initiative to modernize the US food safety systems & better protect Americans w
~ Lived up to campaign promise & helped file the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2009, which
~ Repeal tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas & replace with incentives to create jobs in USA
~ Crack down on US citizens & companies using offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes -22,000 parties identified & $210 billion in back taxes and penalties to be collected over next 10 years
~ Collected $780 million fine from UBS for offshore banking violation
~ Cracked down on high level of financial losses from across-the-board fraud & abuse of Medicare (estimated $600 billion lost over last decade from inattention to Medicare fraud)
~ January 2010 National Summit on Health Care Fraud
~ New inter-agency Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) introduced
~ 5 new Strike Force Teams added in 5 new cities - 13 more to be added in 2011 (Strike Force teams have collected $250 million in restitutions, fines & penalties since 2008)
~ Expanded Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control (HCFAC) Program - $13.1 billion has been returned to Medicare
~ 7 new Obama initiatives, starting in 2010/2011 will generate a further $15 billion in savings for Medicare over next 10 years
~ Successful completion of largest pharmaceutical fraud case awards Medicare $2.5 billion from Pfizer
~ January 2010 launch of nation's first Health Security Strategy - comprehensive strategy to protect Americans' health during a national emergency
~ Sharply Limits Mountaintop Mining
~ New CAFE rules
~ Signed START treaty with Russia
~ Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending
~ Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices
~ Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB
~ Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information
~ Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier's family
~ The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act
~ Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible
~ Limits on lobbyist's access to the White House
~ Limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration
~ Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
~ Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren't even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan
~ Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research
~ Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research
~ New federal funding for science and research labs
~ States are permitted to enact federal fuel efficiency standards above federal standards
~ Funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools
~ New funds for school construction
~ The prison at Guantanamo Bay is being phased out
~ US Auto industry rescue plan
~ Housing rescue plan
~ The public can meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (the new plan can be completed in one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying
~ The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed
~ Better body armor is now being provided to our troops
~ The missile defense program is being cut by $1.4 billion in 2010
~ Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic
~ Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions
~ Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
~ Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program
~ Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return home to visit loved ones.
~ Expanding vaccination programs
~ Closed offshore tax safe havens
~ Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
~ Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to bring jobs back
~ Ended the previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry's predatory practices
~ Energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources
~ Lower drug costs for seniors
~ Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now realizing hundreds of millions in savings
~ Increasing pay and benefits for military personnel
~ Improved housing for military personnel
~ Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses
~ Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals
~ Increasing student loans
~ Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program
~ Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy
~ Established a new cyber security office
~ Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20 years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force; this includes new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology and cyber units and operations, etc.
~ Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts
~ Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness
~ Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient
~ Students struggling to make college loan payments can have their loans refinanced
~ Improving benefits for veterans
~ Many more press conferences and town halls and much more media access than previous administration
~ Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud
~ The FDA is now regulating tobacco
~ Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules
~ Ended previous practice of having White House aides rewrite scientific and environmental rules, regulations, and reports
~ Authorized discussions with North Korea and private mission by Pres. Bill Clinton to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons
~ Authorized discussions with Myanmar and mission by Sen. Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive
~ Making more loans available to small businesses
~ Established independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare
~ Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans
~ Limited salaries of senior White House aides; cut to $100,000
~ New Afghan War policy that limits aerial bombing and prioritizes aid, development of infrastructure, diplomacy, and good government practices by Afghans
~ Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production
~ Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters
~ Paid for redecoration of White House living quarters out of his own pocket
~ Held first Seder in White House
~ Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:06 PM
Response to Reply #80
82. Have you compared it?
It really does look alot like the bill the GOP proposed. Heck, McCain campaigned upon some of it. Yeah, it has a touch of Romneycare thrown in, of course alot of that was drawn from the same influences that the GOP used in creating their bill.

And of course they didn't vote for it. Why vote for it when your opponents will do it for you? That's one of the weaknesses of triangulation. They cab "rope a dope" ya if you're not careful.

As for a few of the rest of your post, it's full of double dipping, and is completely unsourced of course but:

~ Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.

Something that both candidates admitted would have to be done. The only question was the mix. Obama removed several of the more progressive features seeking GOP support. He got some in the House. He got precious little in the Senate.

~ Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques"; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with the Geneva Convention standards

Actually, this isn't true. Yes, he ordered it moved, not closed. He did not "abolish" the techniques, he withheld authorization, but reserved the right to re-authorize them. The techniques had ended years earlier by Bush and the memos authorizing them were withdrawn on Bush's last day.

~ "Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.

He did sign it. But something very similar was passed during Bush, and supported by GOP members of congress. Bush vetoed it, but it had rather wide GOP support. Nancy Reagan even lobbied for it.

~ Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).

Yes he did. Of course, again, this was a left over from the previous congress. It passed then, with GOP support. But again, Bush vetoed it.

~ Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House

And immediately gave an exemption to one of his appointees. And although not lobbiests, the movement of people from the very firms being bailed out into jobs where they could influence those bailouts was disturbing.

~ Passed the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 in February - has played a key role in turnaround of economy over the last 3 quarters

Again, kinda double dipping here aren't ya?


~ Passed the largest middle-class tax cut in history - $288 billion

This lame when they do it. It's not any better when we do. It's big because of inflation. And he KEPT the Bush tax cuts on the wealthy. He opposed a tax increase on the wealthiest to support HCR and preferred a cadillac tax, against which he campaigned.

And my favorite:

87. Attempting to reform the nation's healthcare system which is the most expensive in the world yet leaves almost 50 million without health insurance and millions more under insured

Attempting is right. He tried and failed. Instead he reformed the health INSURANCE industry, mandating that people buy health insurance with no guarantees they will receive or be able to afford health CARE. If their income is within certain brackets, they are exempt from the mandate which means they'll have no health insurance. And their own estimates are that once it is fully in effect, there will STILL be 25 million uninsured people in the US.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #82
84. Did you want to "Kill the Bill" rather than have HCR signed into law?
To read your polemic, you'd think there was no difference between President Obama and Republicans, which is patently false. You can denigrate and spin President Obama's accomplishments all you like, but if you think any of these things would have happened under GOP leadership, you're very misguided.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:26 PM
Response to Reply #84
85. Some of them DID happen under GOP leadership
TARP was started under Bush. So were the GM bailouts. McCain campaigned on stimulus (and cadillac taxes).

And what I asserted was that Obama liked to oppose the progressives as a way of moving towards the right. And he does.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #85
87. TARP was revamped under President Obama and so were the GM bailouts. GOP leaders opposed both.
Bush forced them through only with Democratic support. And McCain never would have passed the stimulus plan that contained the provisions that President Obama and the Democratic caucus championed.

<<And what I asserted was that Obama liked to oppose the progressives as a way of moving towards the right. And he does.>>

Sorry, a few mischaracterized quotes is not proof, it's opinion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. Which is different than "wouldn't have happened"
He's government from right of center. The fact that he isn't governing from way right of center isn't all that impressive to me sorry to say. Not exactly the Change I'd hoped for, nor that he campaigned upon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #88
91. Wrong. Republicans never would have added the repayment terms that Pres. Obama did.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:02 PM by ClarkUSA
TARP under BushCo had no strings attached. Obama's version "wouldn't have happened" under McCain/Palin. And had McCain/Palin been elected, there would have been no further auto industry bailout, either, as the GOP leadership in Congress was totally against that, too.

<<He's government from right of center. The fact that he isn't governing from way right of center isn't all that impressive to me sorry to say.>>

That's your opinion. There is no unbiased observer or presidential historian who would agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #91
92. Who said "that way"
McCain was advocating stimulus. McCain was advocating TARP. Yes, some of the details would have been different. Some of the details of HCR were different between Candidate Obama and President Obama. But to suggest that there would have been no TARP or stimulus is just silly.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:05 PM
Response to Reply #92
95. McCain was advocating Palin, too. So what? He was for immigration reform before he was against it.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:06 PM by ClarkUSA
He's completely turned his back on some of the issues that used to define him. Do you really think he would have passed the stimulus and continued TARP in the face of stiff GOP resistance in Congress and teabagger rage in the base?

If you do, then you have a better opinion of McCain than you do of President Obama.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #95
98. You're dishonest
you got caught
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #98
99. Says the person who insists against all reality that President Obama "called out" Dennis Kucinich?
I think not.

You "got caught" with your dishonest claims and characterizations of President Obama. Of course, you're entitled to your opinions, however removed from reality they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #99
102. You admitted it
When admitting that you knew you had edited your post, and then suggested I hadn't read it in my response. You knew what had happened and tried to imply otherwise.

You're dishonest and got caught.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #102
104. lol! I thought you were "done"?
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:28 PM by ClarkUSA
<<When admitting that you knew you had edited your post, and then suggested I hadn't read it in my response. You knew what had happened and tried to imply otherwise.

You're dishonest and got caught.>>

Well, that was what happened, right? You didn't read my post before you responded. ;)

Of course, I was tweaking you because you deserved it for your taunting but I knew you'd catch on and be properly outraged. And you are.

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #104
106. And done
I'm done trying to have an honest discussion with you about Obama. You're dishonest and have admitted your deception. Apparently your point of view couldn't stand without deception. Sad, because I was willing to meet you half way. I responded to ever one of your "pro forma" requests for information. Information by the by which is widely available and generally known.

I'm sorry your position is so weak that it couldn't be defended in an honest debate. I suspect even Obama would be disappointed in such actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:52 PM
Response to Reply #106
109. You're conflating again.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:54 PM by ClarkUSA
<<You're dishonest and have admitted your deception. Apparently your point of view couldn't stand without deception.>>

:wtf: I admitted nothing of the sort. It's not my fault you got caught making childish taunts.

<<I'm sorry your position is so weak that it couldn't be defended in an honest debate.>>

Laying it on a bit thick, aren't we? I'm sorry your position is so weak that you've resorted to unseemly theatrics to distract from the fact that none of your claims are remotely true except in the alternate reality of your subjective opinion.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #109
111. You clearly admitted your deception
Now you wish to blame me for your actions.

You are the dishonest critic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #111
113. When did I do that, dear? Provide the link(s) to exact quotes in context. n/t
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 04:02 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Control-Z Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:43 AM
Response to Reply #16
33. Would you provide us links for each of your points?
I've heard bits and pieces about some of your points - but really not much, and nothing in full context.

Thanks!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 07:32 AM
Response to Reply #33
36. Asked and answered
I surprises me that so many people who claim so much admiration for what the president has done, never seem to know what he has done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:02 AM
Response to Reply #36
40. No, you keep offering spin and no proof.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:07 AM by ClarkUSA
<<He bragged to the GOP that he rejected "progressive ideas".>>

No, he did not. He was explaining the facts to Republicans regarding their false characterization of HCR as socialist legislation. For you to twist his recitation of historical fact is pathetic.

<<Progressives are his favorite punching bag>>

This claim is specious at best. If that were so, why is MoveOn.org one of his biggest policy supporters?

<<His chief of staff described us a "retarded".>>

No, he did not. Rahm was referring to specific liberal activists he was dealing with at the time, not "us".>>

<<He described single payer as "unworkable", despite it being in use in several industrialized nations.>>

No, he did not: http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/21/f...

<<He called out one single congressman during the entire health care debate, Kucinich. Not Lieberman, not Nelson.>>

This is a false claim. In his Esquire op-ed, Dennis Kucinich was very complimentary to President Obama's treatment of him and praised his efforts to pass HCR: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/qa/dennis-kucinich-heal...

<<And of course on day 1 he gave a big wet sloppy one to Rick Warren.>>

That is a gross characterization. President-Elect Obama offered him a speaking slot just as President-Elect Bill Clinton asked evangelical Rev. Billy Graham to give the invocation at Bill Clintons first inauguration in 1993. Rev. Billy Graham also said a prayer at Clintons second inauguration in 1997.

Unless you are still outraged/offended at President Bill Clinton' choice of Billy Graham, it is difficult to take her anger at President Obama's choice seriously. FWIW, Hillary Clinton is a huge fan of Billy Graham (and he is a big admirer of hers). Plus, she used to attend weekly evangelical wingnut Christianist prayer group meetings when she was a Senator, which Sen. Obama never did. I guess you detest/mistrust the Clintons, too?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:13 AM
Response to Reply #40
42. I never was a big Clinton fan
Never trusted them too much.

So now your point was?

That he didn't do these things or that they were okay?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:20 AM
Response to Reply #42
45. Who are you a big fan of?
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:24 AM by ClarkUSA
<<So now your point was?

That he didn't do these things or that they were okay?>>

So far, I have noticed that when your claims are not completely specious, they are gross exaggerations of reality.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:28 AM
Response to Reply #45
48. On what subject?
I'm not much into idol worship.

I'm not sure how direct quotes are "gross exaggerations".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:42 AM
Response to Reply #48
52. Who did you support during the election year?
It's not your direct quotes that were "gross exaggerations", it was your polemic. And you did not provide proof of all of claims, which is not surprising, given they were false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #52
53. Stared out with Richardson
I tend to prefer folks with executive branch experience.

He didn't last long. I wasn't surprised. By the time it got here I think it was between Hillary and Obama and my basic rationale was that I didn't really think it was necessary to go Bush-Clinton-Bush-Clinton. I wasn't a Clinton fan the first time around. So my other choice was the inexperienced candidate that talked alot about change but was obviously keeping it vague.

And I'm not sure how you can acknowledge direct quotes, and the claim that there was no support for my claims.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #53
57. The former chairman of the DLC who was for the Iraq war before he was against it?
He and Evan Bayh had similar MOs.

<<And I'm not sure how you can acknowledge direct quotes, and the claim that there was no support for my claims.>>

You offered quotes for only two of your claims. Neither of the quotes supported the gross exaggerations you made. The rest of your claims are unsupported, either because they are false or because they, too, are gross exaggerations. I have gone over this in detail in my previous replies to you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:03 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. No, all you do is claim they are false
Despite the presence of the quotes and supporting information.

Your problem is, that you can't get around, is that these things happened. So you just try to avoid their reality.

And I don't know what all the stuff about Richardson is. If you're trying to point out that I don't have alot of political idols I worship, guilty as charged.

I don't "hate" Obama, nor do I worship him and am convinced he can do no wrong. I do recognize that he uses progressives, and the left in general, as a foil to allow himself to move to the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:11 AM
Response to Reply #58
60. That's because your gross exaggerations are not remotely true, as I have repeatedly shown. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:16 AM
Response to Reply #60
62. You have "shown" nothing
You assert alot. But, unlike myself, you provide little in the way of evidence. You just state that it isn't true, despite the direct quotes from the president himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:22 AM
Response to Reply #62
63. Of course I have. Repeatedly. See Reply 40, for example...
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 11:29 AM by ClarkUSA
Link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The only "proof" you offered is two quotes from TPM and Fox News that only showed President Obama stating facts that you promptly twisted into something nefarious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #63
66. Quotes are "twists"
I can't twist a direct quote.

You on the other hand attempted to ignore this quote in your defense.

"On one end of the spectrum, there are some who have suggested scrapping our system of private insurance and replacing it with government-run health care," the president declared. "Though many other countries have such a system, in America it would be neither practical nor realistic."

Your entire basis of "proof" tends to rest upon avoiding quotes you don't like.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #66
69. No, your claims are "twists" of the few factual quotes you've offered.Other claims are simply false.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 12:02 PM by ClarkUSA
<<"On one end of the spectrum, there are some who have suggested scrapping our system of private insurance and replacing it with government-run health care," the president declared. "Though many other countries have such a system, in America it would be neither practical nor realistic.">>

So what? He's right. BTW, where's the link?


If you don't like the reality of legislative calculus, then you get the votes for single-payer, find a credible way to make it deficit-neutral, and contact Harry Reid afterwards.

:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:09 PM
Response to Reply #69
71. You guys never seem to know what he has said
here's the link:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-pres...


I assume you'll accept the source.

You did notice how he declared single payer neither practical nor realistic, despite it being the predominate system in industrialized countries around the world. Where do progressives get these silly ideas. Good to know Obama is pragmatic, as oppose to the progressives. We've got him around to reject those ideas.


He don't like us, and he's made it very plain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #71
72. Oh, I know. He said the same thing as a candidate. I wanted you to provide the link pro forma.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 12:32 PM by ClarkUSA
I happen to agree with him and I would love to have single-payer. But I know it can't and won't happen now but President Obama's passage of HCR opened the door to the possibility in the future. Unlike you, I am a liberal Green who's pragmatic willing to acknowledge the limitations of legislative calculus.

<<He don't like us, and he's made it very plain.>>

Once again, your opinion differs from reality. In every single poll taken since President Obama has been inaugurated, a huge majority of self-described liberals like me approve of him. Of course, there's always a very small minority on the fringe who do not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. And I never said otherwise
So we've moved into strawmen now. Is your point that weak that you have to keep wandering around through these logical fallicies?

Let's see, first you denied he said and did these things. Then you denied that they meant what they said. Then you swithed to false dichotomies. Now we're onto strawmen.

He uses progressives BECAUSE they are a minority. I never claimed otherwise. Like I said, he likes to use us as his punching bag. He uses them as a counterpoint to the right wing. We'd rather be used as an ally. A little tough when he's busy rejecting you, calling you retarded, and sucking up to your opposition.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #74
76. Um, you said he said "to the GOP that he rejected progressive ideas" which is totally false.
You're the one who tried to move the goalposts, which failed. You can spin your wheels all you want, but it's clear that you are using President Obama as your "punching bag" in order to justify your 24/7 criticism.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:49 PM
Response to Reply #76
77. He said it himself
I'm sorry you are so idolizing him that you can't see that when it's right in front of your eyes. It's even on video, if that will help. Beyond that, I don't know what else to do for you. I've given you all the references you asked for (even though they were supposedly "pro forma". Yeah, right). The vast majority of it is references to direct quotes from Obama himself. I haven't made any of it up.

You, on the otherhand, have jumped from one argument to another, many involving logical fallicies. You're caught in a corner looking for a way out and grabbing at anything you can. In the last post you even admitted that you agreed with Obama's criticism of the progressive view point. Now you wanna claim he isn't. I don't know where to go with that. If I criticize him, I'm using him as a punching bag. But if he criticizes progressives, especially to the right, well, he's just stating facts.

It's called self consistency, ya outta try it some time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 01:53 PM
Response to Reply #77
81. No, you keep deliberately mischaracterizing a few of his statements as "proof" of nefarious intent.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 01:58 PM by ClarkUSA
I have been consistent in my analysis of your false claims (see Reply 40 again) while you have tried and failed to move the goalposts on many of them, as I have pointed out upthread.

Suffice it to say that you are full of opinion but short on facts, as most 24/7 Obama critics are. :)

Here are what facts look like, in case you're interested. Some of the liberal aka. progressive accomplishments by President Obama in the past 15 months include:

~ Passing the "largest" economic stimulus bill in American history.
~ Ordering the closing of Guantanamo Bay military detention facility and abolishing "enhanced interrogation techniques"; the US now has a no torture policy and is in compliance with the Geneva Convention standards
~ "Returning science to its rightful place" by lifting the Bush restrictions on federally funded embryonic stem cell research.
~ Signing laws to expand children's health insurance (financed by a 61-cent per pack increase in the federal cigarette tax the adviser did not tout).
~ Signing a law meant to improve the ability of women who allege pay discrimination to sue their employer.
~ Diminishing the role of lobbyists in the White House
~ "Forge a meaningful statement from the United Nations" criticizing North Korea's launch of a ballistic missile.
~ Lifting travel and remittance restrictions for Cuban Americans who seek to travel more frequently to the island and send more US currency to their immediate family.
~ Appointed the first Latina to the US Supreme Court
~ Engaging world leaders in Europe, Turkey, Latin American and the Caribbean with "strength and humility."
~ Passed the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 in February - has played a key role in turnaround of economy over the last 3 quarters
~ $90 billion invested in clean energy economy of the future - jobs, lower dependence on foreign oil, enhance national security, clean environment
~ $10.5 billion investment in modernization of national electric grid
~ $18 billion for upgrades & modernization of public transport systems, including new high speed rail
~ $23 billion investment incentives to small businesses
~ Over $1billion in job training grants for jobs in new clean energy sectors
~ Tax credits to stimulate development of clean energy manufacturing - wind turbines, solar panels, electric vehicles, batteries, etc
~ Distributed education grants to US states, to keep teachers in schools
~ $1 billion investment in advancing use of cutting edge Health IT - By 2014, HIT will be made available to 100,000 hospitals & physicians & thousands of people trained for careers in HIT & health care, from nurses and pharmacy techs to IT technicians and trainers.
~ $650 million for Communities Putting Prevention to Work, public health program to address obesity, increase physical activity, improve nutrition, and decrease smoking.
~ Subsidized extended COBRA benefits for unemployed
~ Passed the largest middle-class tax cut in history - $288 billion
~ Dept of Transportation claims 52,000 jobs were saved
~ Guided GM & Chrysler through bankruptcy
~ Passed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
~ Passed the Human Rights Enforcement Act of 2009
~ Passed the Credit Card Holders Bill of Rights Act of 2009
~ Passed Ryan White CARE Act of 2009 - repealed HIV entry ban
~ Approved California's adoption of car emission standards for cleaner air & climate control - had been blocked by President Bush for 6 years
~ Launched the White House Food Safety Working Group - initiative to modernize the US food safety systems & better protect Americans w
~ Lived up to campaign promise & helped file the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2009, which
~ Repeal tax breaks for companies that ship jobs overseas & replace with incentives to create jobs in USA
~ Crack down on US citizens & companies using offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes -22,000 parties identified & $210 billion in back taxes and penalties to be collected over next 10 years
~ Collected $780 million fine from UBS for offshore banking violation
~ Cracked down on high level of financial losses from across-the-board fraud & abuse of Medicare (estimated $600 billion lost over last decade from inattention to Medicare fraud)
~ January 2010 National Summit on Health Care Fraud
~ New inter-agency Health Care Fraud Prevention and Enforcement Action Team (HEAT) introduced
~ 5 new Strike Force Teams added in 5 new cities - 13 more to be added in 2011 (Strike Force teams have collected $250 million in restitutions, fines & penalties since 2008)
~ Expanded Health Care Fraud and Abuse Control (HCFAC) Program - $13.1 billion has been returned to Medicare
~ 7 new Obama initiatives, starting in 2010/2011 will generate a further $15 billion in savings for Medicare over next 10 years
~ Successful completion of largest pharmaceutical fraud case awards Medicare $2.5 billion from Pfizer
~ January 2010 launch of nation's first Health Security Strategy - comprehensive strategy to protect Americans' health during a national emergency
~ Sharply Limits Mountaintop Mining
~ New CAFE rules
~ Signed START treaty with Russia
~ Ordered all federal agencies to undertake a study and make recommendations for ways to cut spending
~ Ordered a review of all federal operations to identify and cut wasteful spending and practices
~ Families of fallen soldiers have expenses covered to be on hand when the body arrives at Dover AFB
~ Ended media blackout on war casualties; reporting full information
~ Ended media blackout on covering the return of fallen soldiers to Dover AFB; the media is now permitted to do so pending adherence to respectful rules and approval of fallen soldier's family
~ The White House and federal government are respecting the Freedom of Information Act
~ Instructed all federal agencies to promote openness and transparency as much as possible
~ Limits on lobbyist's access to the White House
~ Limits on White House aides working for lobbyists after their tenure in the administration
~ Ended the previous stop-loss policy that kept soldiers in Iraq/Afghanistan longer than their enlistment date
~ Phasing out the expensive F-22 war plane and other outdated weapons systems, which weren't even used or needed in Iraq/Afghanistan
~ Removed restrictions on embryonic stem-cell research
~ Federal support for stem-cell and new biomedical research
~ New federal funding for science and research labs
~ States are permitted to enact federal fuel efficiency standards above federal standards
~ Funds for high-speed, broadband Internet access to K-12 schools
~ New funds for school construction
~ The prison at Guantanamo Bay is being phased out
~ US Auto industry rescue plan
~ Housing rescue plan
~ The public can meet with federal housing insurers to refinance (the new plan can be completed in one day) a mortgage if they are having trouble paying
~ The secret detention facilities in Eastern Europe and elsewhere are being closed
~ Better body armor is now being provided to our troops
~ The missile defense program is being cut by $1.4 billion in 2010
~ Reengaged in the treaties/agreements to protect the Antarctic
~ Reengaged in the agreements/talks on global warming and greenhouse gas emissions
~ Expanded the SCHIP program to cover health care for 4 million more children
~ Signed national service legislation; expanded national youth service program
~ Instituted a new policy on Cuba, allowing Cuban families to return home to visit loved ones.
~ Expanding vaccination programs
~ Closed offshore tax safe havens
~ Negotiated deal with Swiss banks to permit US government to gain access to records of tax evaders and criminals
~ Ended the previous policy of offering tax benefits to corporations who outsource American jobs; the new policy is to promote in-sourcing to bring jobs back
~ Ended the previous practice of protecting credit card companies; in place of it are new consumer protections from credit card industry's predatory practices
~ Energy producing plants must begin preparing to produce 15% of their energy from renewable sources
~ Lower drug costs for seniors
~ Ended the previous practice of forbidding Medicare from negotiating with drug manufacturers for cheaper drugs; the federal government is now realizing hundreds of millions in savings
~ Increasing pay and benefits for military personnel
~ Improved housing for military personnel
~ Initiating a new policy to promote federal hiring of military spouses
~ Improved conditions at Walter Reed Military Hospital and other military hospitals
~ Increasing student loans
~ Increasing opportunities in AmeriCorps program
~ Sent envoys to Middle East and other parts of the world that had been neglected for years; reengaging in multilateral and bilateral talks and diplomacy
~ Established a new cyber security office
~ Beginning the process of reforming and restructuring the military 20 years after the Cold War to a more modern fighting force; this includes new procurement policies, increasing size of military, new technology and cyber units and operations, etc.
~ Ended previous policy of awarding no-bid defense contracts
~ Ordered a review of hurricane and natural disaster preparedness
~ Established a National Performance Officer charged with saving the federal government money and making federal operations more efficient
~ Students struggling to make college loan payments can have their loans refinanced
~ Improving benefits for veterans
~ Many more press conferences and town halls and much more media access than previous administration
~ Instituted a new focus on mortgage fraud
~ The FDA is now regulating tobacco
~ Ended previous policy of cutting the FDA and circumventing FDA rules
~ Ended previous practice of having White House aides rewrite scientific and environmental rules, regulations, and reports
~ Authorized discussions with North Korea and private mission by Pres. Bill Clinton to secure the release of two Americans held in prisons
~ Authorized discussions with Myanmar and mission by Sen. Jim Web to secure the release of an American held captive
~ Making more loans available to small businesses
~ Established independent commission to make recommendations on slowing the costs of Medicare
~ Authorized construction/opening of additional health centers to care for veterans
~ Limited salaries of senior White House aides; cut to $100,000
~ New Afghan War policy that limits aerial bombing and prioritizes aid, development of infrastructure, diplomacy, and good government practices by Afghans
~ Announced the long-term development of a national energy grid with renewable sources and cleaner, efficient energy production
~ Returned money authorized for refurbishment of White House offices and private living quarters
~ Paid for redecoration of White House living quarters out of his own pocket
~ Held first Seder in White House
~ Has put the ball in play for comprehensive immigration reform
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #81
83. Ha
You went from he didn't say that. To he didn't mean that. To he was right. To you're in the minority.


And you cut and past this stuff so fast you didn't notice there were stale references or repeats. Should I make a "pro forma" request for cites?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:27 PM
Response to Reply #83
86. You never proved any of your claims. You simply spun a few quotes into gross exaggeration.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 02:41 PM by ClarkUSA
<<You went from he didn't say that. To he didn't mean that. To he was right. To you're in the minority.>>

He never said any of the things you claimed he did. I never said "he didn't mean that." I did agree with what he actually said. And your 24/7 disapproval of him is, in fact, in the minority of self-proclaimed liberals (if that is really what you are, that is) according to polls.

<<And you cut and past this stuff so fast you didn't notice there were stale references or repeats. Should I make a "pro forma" request for cites?>>

I am aware of nothing that is "stale". However, the gist of what I'm listing is clear: President Obama is a liberal pragmatist whose record of passing legislation in his first year is unequalled in history, given the Congressional calculus.

As for "cites", here they are:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/4/5/854279/-You-Prag...

Be sure to read through the DKos diary thoroughly. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:41 PM
Response to Reply #86
89. So you have no cites and you didn't read your own post
Look way down at the bottom. The one about Health Care Reform. It's a tad stale, unless you don't think he succeeded.

He said EXACTLY what I claimed he did. I even provide the quotes. You switched for "stating facts" to "persuading". You can't even stick to your own characterizations. If he was "persuading" by saying that it was warmed over GOP ideas, who was he trying to "persuade"? It can't be the GOP because you said he never said it to the GOP.

Again, your self consistency is falling apart.

Don't fight my case, mine has been vetted before. Make your own case, and stick to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 02:51 PM
Response to Reply #89
90. Um, I did provide "cites". It appears you're not reading my posts.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:00 PM by ClarkUSA
And I see nothing "stale" in my list.

<<He said EXACTLY what I claimed he did.>>

Where did he say exactly "to the GOP that he rejected progressive ideas"? You have repeatedly failed to provide his exactly saying that.

<<You switched for "stating facts" to "persuading". You can't even stick to your own characterizations. If he was "persuading" by saying that it was warmed over GOP ideas, who was he trying to "persuade"?>>

No, you are mixing apples and oranges. I was speaking of two different statements he made during his Fox News interview. He was trying to persuade the ignorant Fox News audience that HCR was not some socialist plot by enlightening them that some of what was in the bill were some ideas gleaned from extinct moderate Republicans from almost two decades ago. Your trying to conflate that into something to be outraged about is ridiculous, considering both Hillary and Edward had very similar plans. Were you this worked up over them, too?

<<Don't fight my case, mine has been vetted before.>>

By who? I have yet to see any credible proof of anything you're claiming.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:03 PM
Response to Reply #90
93. How lame
You're editing out your mistakes to remove my points.

You're really lame. You do realize that the time of your edits are posted right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:10 PM
Response to Reply #93
96. No, I didn't. I added the "cites" before I even read your "lame" baiting taunts.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:15 PM by ClarkUSA
It just took a bit longer to find my sources and press "send" than for you to type out your predictable nah-nah's. Nevertheless, I was quite right to anticipate your next move and checkmate them.

Did you read the Daily Kos dairy? You know, that's a well-known progressive gathering place and they love President Obama over there. You wouldn't fit in there, alas. :D
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. You're dishonest
you got caught.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:19 PM
Response to Reply #97
100. No, you're the one pushing false memes here. I simply have refuted them. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator.
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. Dennis Kucinich sure didn't seem to mind, as his Esquire op-ed proved. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:23 AM
Response to Reply #10
15. Dennis doesn't even believe that Dennis was called out. Can't let that stop a good phony outrage.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:36 AM
Response to Reply #15
17. So we're going to argue semantics?
That's all ya got? Semantics? He single out one single congressman in front of his constinuents. Call it what you will, it wasn't any of the conservative democrats that blocked the most progressive ideas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #17
20. No, we're stating the facts while you are spinning like a top. n/t
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 10:56 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:20 PM
Response to Reply #20
24. So he didn't do those things?
He didn't claim to be rejecting progressive ideas to Fox News?
He didn't claim that his Health Insurance Stimulus Package was very similar to what the GOP had proposed 15 years ago to Clinton, that it was similar to what Baker and Dole had proposed?
Rick Warren wasn't there? Wow, and what color is the sky where you are?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. President Obama didn't "call out" Dennis Kucinich.
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 02:50 PM by ClarkUSA
The rest of your screed below and at this link is full of polemic but short on context as well as facts: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

He bragged to the GOP that he rejected "progressive ideas".
His chief of staff described us a "retarded".
He described single payer as "unworkable", despite it being in use in several industrialized nations.
He called out one single congressman during the entire health care debate, Kucinich. Not Lieberman, not Nelson.
And of course on day 1 he gave a big wet sloppy one to Rick Warren.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Every single one happened
And you wanna argue semantics.

I'd think you be willing to defend them.

This reminds me of the Reagan years where after Reagan spoke, they had to send out the "spin masters" to explain what he really said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:07 PM
Response to Reply #30
31. Prove it. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #31
32. Fair enough.
Rick Warren's Inauguration: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z-8R1OXWJz8
You know, that guy that hates gay people.

Rahm's apology for calling liberals retarded:
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/02/rahm-ap...
Mind you, he wasn't apologizing to the liberals that he called retarded. He was apologizing because Palin pitched a fit. The liberals can piss off until their votes are needed again.

Single Payer Unworkable: http://www.thenation.com/blogs/thebeat/537639/why_is_ba...
This link is kind of wanky and I don't actually remember him specifically saying it was unworkable. I do remember it being off the table and anyone that pushed for it being kept away from any meetings.

Can't find the one about bragging to the GOP about rejecting progressive ideals.
I don't remember this one either.

*shrugs* I recced the thread because I'd actually like to see him toughen up and realize his enemies aren't on the left.
I certainly support his recent position of slapping down the far right loons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 07:30 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. Here ya go
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 07:50 AM by zipplewrath
Not that it will matter. The standard response around here is to claim it didn't happen, and when the evidence is presented, claim that it is semantically an incorrect representation. Basically, despite anything he does, Obama can do no wrong.



"The component parts of this thing are pretty similar to what Howard Baker, Bob Dole, and Tom Daschle proposed at the beginning of this debate last year.
Now, you may not agree with Bob Dole and Howard Baker, and, certainly you don't agree with Tom Daschle on much, but that's not a radical bunch. But if you were to listen to the debate and, frankly, how some of you went after this bill, you'd think that this thing was some Bolshevik plot. No, I mean, that's how you guys -- (applause) -- that's how you guys presented it.

And so I'm thinking to myself, well, how is it that a plan that is pretty centrist -- no, look, I mean, I'm just saying, I know you guys disagree, but if you look at the facts of this bill, most independent observers would say this is actually what many Republicans -- is similar to what many Republicans proposed to Bill Clinton when he was doing his debate on health care."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/documents/2010/03/obam ...

OBAMA: the only thing I want to say, just to close up, is that when you talk about one-sixth of the economy, this is one-sixth of the economy that right now is a huge drag on the economy. Now, we can fix this in a way that is sensible, that is centrist. I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted that are you know, they were very adamant about because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system. But what we can't do is perpetuate a system in which millions of people day in and day out are having an enormously tough time and small businesses are sending me letters constantly saying that they are seeing their premiums increase 40, 50 percent."

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,589589,00.html


The last one is the worst in many ways because he goes on Fox News and uses progressives to give himself some sorta "street cred" with the Fox News crowd.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 09:22 AM
Response to Reply #32
38. Okay...
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 09:48 AM by ClarkUSA
Since I wasn't speaking to you, I am going to address what zipplewrath said:

<<He bragged to the GOP that he rejected "progressive ideas".>>

No, he did not, unless zipplewrath provides proof.

<<His chief of staff described us a "retarded".>>

No, he did not. Rahm was referring to specific liberal activists he was dealing with at the time, not "us".>>

<<He described single payer as "unworkable", despite it being in use in several industrialized nations.>>

No, he did not: http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/01/21/f...

<<He called out one single congressman during the entire health care debate, Kucinich. Not Lieberman, not Nelson.>>

This is a false claim. In his Esquire op-ed, Dennis Kucinich was very complimentary to President Obama's treatment of him and praised his efforts to pass HCR: http://www.esquire.com/the-side/qa/dennis-kucinich-heal...

<<And of course on day 1 he gave a big wet sloppy one to Rick Warren.>>

That is a gross characterization. President-Elect Obama offered him a speaking slot just as President-Elect Bill Clinton asked evangelical Rev. Billy Graham to give the invocation at Bill Clintons first inauguration in 1993. Rev. Billy Graham also said a prayer at Clintons second inauguration in 1997.

Unless zipplewrath is still outraged/offended at President Bill Clinton' choice of Billy Graham, it is difficult to take her anger at President Obama's choice seriously. FWIW, Hillary Clinton is a huge fan of Billy Graham (and he is a big admirer of hers). Plus, she used to attend weekly evangelical wingnut Christianist prayer group meetings when she was a Senator, which Sen. Obama never did. I guess zipplewrath doesn't like Hillary Clinton now, either?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:18 AM
Response to Reply #38
43. I gave quotes
He personally said he rejected progressive ideas, to Fox News no less.

Rahm called specific progressive organizations "retarded".

The only congressman he confronted, publicly, in front of his constinuents, on his HCR vote was Kucinich.

He honored Rich Warren who only months ago had campaigned publicly for the California Law. How much campaigning had Graham done?

Every single one of these things happened, and you try to deny them. Spin, obsfucate, deminish, whatever, they happend.

Changing "torture" to "enhanced interrogations" doesn't change the fact that it happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:27 AM
Response to Reply #43
47. You're moving the goalposts now.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:29 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:32 AM
Response to Reply #47
49. Ha
You agreed that every single thing actually happened and then suggested that they didn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:39 AM
Response to Reply #49
51. How did I do that? I specifically said that your claims were false and proceeded to prove it. n/t
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:39 AM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #51
54. You proved nothing
You just claimed they were false, while acknowledging the quotes were true. Just because you claim it, doesn't make it so. He is plainly using opposition to progressives and their ideas as a method of seeking support fromt the right. Furthermore, he works to isolate progressives in congress, all the while avoiding confrontation with conservative democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #54
61. Opinions are not facts. Your polemic is made up of pure conjecture.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 11:18 AM by ClarkUSA
<<He is plainly using opposition to progressives and their ideas as a method of seeking support fromt the right.>>

That's ridiculous. It's obvious that the WH expects no support from the Republicans on any piece of legislation.

<<Furthermore, he works to isolate progressives in congress, all the while avoiding confrontation with conservative democrats.>>

Prove it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:04 PM
Response to Reply #61
94. I did
You've proven yourself to be a dishonest critic. I'm done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:21 PM
Response to Reply #94
101. No, you simply kept repeating your false memes without providing a shred of proof.
<<You've proven yourself to be a dishonest critic.>>

I think not. You "got caught" with your dishonest claims and characterizations of President Obama. Of course, you're entitled to your opinions, however removed from reality they are.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:22 PM
Response to Reply #101
103. you're dishonest
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 03:23 PM by zipplewrath
you got caught, and admitted it.

It is impossible to have a discussion with a dishonest critic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #103
105. Your outrage is as predictable as it is misplaced.
Well, that was what happened, right? You didn't read my post before you responded. ;)

Of course, I was tweaking you because you deserved it for your taunting but I knew you'd catch on and be properly outraged. And you are.

:rofl:

<<It is impossible to have a discussion with a dishonest critic.>>

Yes, that's the way I've felt ever since I started replying to your nonsense about President Obama "calling out" Dennis Kucinich, but I have persevered, haven't I?

:rofl:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #105
107. And I honestly made my case
You on the other hand resorted to dishonesty.

You are unworthy of an honest discussion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:49 PM
Response to Reply #107
108. I think not. You repeatedly insisted President Obama said something he did not.
And failing to provide an exact quote of what you claimed ("he said to the GOP that he rejected progressive ideas"), you proceeded to mischaracterize his statements to infer something nefarious. You also insist he "called out" Dennis Kucinich when that is not remotely true if one were to view the transcript or video of his comments or of Dennis Kucinish's later response to President Obama HCR efforts in his Esquire op-ed.

<<You on the other hand resorted to dishonesty.

You are unworthy of an honest discussion.>>

Oh, the outrage!!

If I'm so "unworthy" why do you keep replying to me??

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #108
110. No comparison
and you know it. I was presenting my point of view, and the information upon which I based that in an honest and open manner. You on the other hand were not.

I'm sorry you have found yourself to be a dishonest critic. That was not of my doing and you cannot shift the blame to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #110
112. No, there isn't any comparison between your opinions and the true facts about President Obama.
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 04:17 PM by ClarkUSA
<<I'm sorry you have found yourself to be a dishonest critic.>>

Wrong again. I have found you to be a dishonest critic. This is not the first time I have thought so, either.

<<That was not of my doing and you cannot shift the blame to me.>>

Gimme a break. You fell over yourself trying to indict me and I made you feel foolish for doing so.

Oh, the drama!!! The inhumanity!!!

:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phleshdef Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 11:01 AM
Response to Reply #17
21. A constituent yelled "vote Yes", Obama said "You hear that Dennis?"... WOW, such a HUGE callout.
I feel sorry for anyone whos sensitivities are so fragile that something like that actually offends them. I'm glad Dennis Kucinich himself isn't so petty as to interpret that exchange as some sort of insult or "call out". Its another reason that I'm glad he is in Congress. Now if only other supporters could follow his example.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 12:18 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. It was lame
All the people to confront in front of his own constiuents, and he picks on Dennis? Heck, he didn't even do that when some guy hollered "you lie" on national TV. But one guy shouts out of a crowd and he decides to confront Dennis then and there? Give me a break.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 01:08 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. Dennis did hear..and Dennis
voted YES! Good for Dennis and the President..together, along with everyone else who cared enough to get a HCR bill passed,they did their job.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cadmium Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:50 PM
Response to Reply #21
28. That was good natured -- for
chrissake I like Cong Kucinich and contribute to him each cycle. That is hardly "calling him out" I doubt Dennis is that sensitive.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zipplewrath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #28
37. Why were they there?
The president went to his district for a reason. He ignores a thousand shout outs a day. This one he leverages.

I realize Obama walks on water. The point is, he was ON THE WATER.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dr Morbius Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. GObama! GObama! GObama!
THIS is why I wanted you! Go get 'em!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 08:37 AM
Response to Original message
4. He gave them a fair chance to work with him
They will regret passing on those opportunities.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Change Happens Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:25 AM
Response to Original message
11. Mr. President, I LOVE YOU!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Peacetrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. He has tried numerous times to get them on board.. so I have no sympathy for the right.
This is totally self infliction on their part
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudy23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:33 AM
Response to Original message
13. "Rather than going after big groups of bad guys..." Isn't it better if he makes it ideological?
Wouldn't making it personal weaken his argument, and not let him take ideological stances? If that's his strategy, I don't like it.

It lets him get away with blaming a few bad apples, rather than systematic failure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enrique Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
14. DU loves Politico!
when it paints Obama in a light that DU likes!

I think Politico sucks, but this article isn't bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 02:59 PM
Response to Reply #14
29. I don't. This Politico article is full of quotes from Republicans scolding Obama's approach.
Edited on Tue Apr-27-10 03:29 PM by ClarkUSA
However, unlike many Politico shit-stirring hit pieces about President Obama and the administration, this one is not based on claims by unnamed sources.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-27-10 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
18. Excellent!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Phx_Dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-28-10 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
55. They forgot one. John McCain is a crazy old coot who doesn't know the
Edited on Wed Apr-28-10 10:52 AM by Phx_Dem
election is over, "John, the campaign is over." You crazy old fool.

:7
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 Tue Oct 15th 2019, 03:47 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency 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