It never ceases to amaze me how respectful Obama is to people compared to Shrub

[Clintonista2]

The right wing always used to say that Shrub was the kind of guy you'd like to have a beer with, a "nice guy". Yet that was demonstrably untrue if you simply observed how he treated those around him. How many times did he get caught on tape wiping his hands on other peoples shirt? 3? (and those were just the times he was caught on tape doing it, it was probably something he did regularly). Or making fun of a blind member of the press? anyone remember that? He just had a really nasty aura about him whenever he had to interact with the unwashed masses.

Obama on the other hand, seems to be a genuinely nice, empathetic guy. Even though I may get upset with him frequently with what feels to me like inaction on some important issues, I've never felt he was in it for himself like shrub was. That alone, makes us lucky to have him as president.

[tblue]

1. I'm not sure they are even the same species.

Really, there is NO comparison. I critique Obama when I think he's wrong. But I have never seen him do anything, ever without a lot of class. He could never get away with behaving like Chimp. He wouldn't even ever call him Chimp. I, on the other hand, have no class, obviously.

[katandmoon]

2. The disdain Obama makes sure to show to progressives is the opposite of respect.

[FLyellowdog]

3. ?????

[BlooInBloo]

4. (facepalm)

Self-proclaimed "true progressives" slay me.

:rofl:

[CTLawGuy]

5. the 5%ers demand to be treated

as if they were 100%.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[JTFrog]

9. For real? Win without that 91%.

:shrug:

How does your argument entitle you to demand 100% of anything?

[boston bean]

10. So you are including yourself in with republicans, conservatives, rightwingers, that's how you get

to 100%.

There will never be 100%. And thank goodness our country doesn't make laws or policy with only a majority in mind.

There have been countless laws and scotus decisions that should make any reasonable person realize we have laws that protect minorities. And many times it flew in the face of what the "majority" wanted.

Democrats of all stripes, do not make up 100% of this population. So sir, take the 35-45% of your triangulating, moderate possee and win elections without the other 5% percent (although i think the percentage is much higher).

[JTFrog]

11. And you're changing the subject.

And you obviously missed my reference to the 91% in the sigline above:

Dems approval of Obama - 91% approve, 5% disapprove. I'm a proud 91%er

Not sure how that lumps me in with any of the fleas you mention.

*edited to remove reference to deleted post

[boston bean]

12. No it was you who changed the subject.

It is offensive to tell people that because they are only 5% of this that or the other thing that they shouldn't be able to voice their opinion, or that their opinion means less because they are only 5%. Or that they are wrong because they are in the 5%.

Hell, most people were for the iraq war. Did you feel you those in the minority there should just shut the fuck up?

[JTFrog]

13. Actually isn't that the exact definition of a democracy?

What else would be the purpose of having a majority? And the minority always has a voice. A day hasn't gone by that the Repukes haven't been in my face in the news. And thank god that minority isn't getting 100% of what they want.

My party has always been a champion for minorities. I don't agree with 100% of their actions, but then again, I don't feel that I'm entitled to have 100% of my demands met.

[boston bean]

14. That is what we fight for and argue and debate. It is not a demand, although it

may be a political strategy.

The five percent mr. ctlaw guy is talking about, are your fellow brethren under the big tent.

Do you truly feel that just because they may not be a majority their thought, hopes and dreams should just fade away. or that the 5% should just scurry under the nearest rock.

Democrats can't win without that 5% the person I was responding to was talking about.

[JTFrog]

15. Never suggested silencing anyone.

I merely agreed with the person you were responding to that those who tend to be 100% dissatisfied with 100% of this administrations actions and policies tend to be the ones that demand things 100% their way.

There is no question that the Democrats cannot win without everyone under the big tent. I just don't believe in the effectiveness of being 100% unyielding 100% of the time.

[boston bean]

16. Well there is the other factor here. Do most democrats believe in the overturn of DADT

Do they believe in no torture, gay rights, womens rights, no war, environmentalism, just to name a few.

So, is the minority really demanding something the majority doesn't want.

If so, I am in the wrong party.

[treestar]

18. Who said they couldn't voice their opinion?

Not said. No one said shut up. It was a complaint against treating the rest as though they should follow. IOW, expecting to be treated like 100% when you are five percent. That the 95% had better do what they're told or else.

[CTLawGuy]

19. I don't know how you responded to me

but I gather it wasn't flattering...

I think people around here need a little perspective, and that perspective is that the vest, vast, majority of Dems support our president even if they don't always agree with everything he does. They know, that if you want to get anything done, you're going to need him, flaws and all. These are the 91%ers.

The comparisons to Bush, the accusations of being a "corporatist," the refusal to give the benefit of the doubt, are from a loud and angry, but tiny minority. These are the 6%ers. They have every right to be heard for sure, but no entitlement to be treated as if they represent the whole of the Democratic party, because, as the numbers show, they don't.

btw see here: http://dailykos.com/weeklypoll/2010/4/29

on edit: oops, it's actually 6% disapprove. :blush:

[JTFrog]

21. +1000

[JTFrog]

7. .

[MadMaddie]

20. Wha?

What are you talking about?

[ejpoeta]

6. well that was just a political game they played in regards to bush.

i always pictured bush as the guy who would either get drunk and get into a fight or who would steal the money out of your wallet when you weren't looking. or if you asked him for a ride home he would drop you off in the wrong part of town and laugh. what, it was jsut a joke!

[Writer]

17. That's because he is not a malignant narcissist. n/t

[ecmphd]

22. Obama is very smooth in public

He deals with people that don't agree with him more respectfully as well.

[backscatter712]

23. "President I'd rather have a beer with..."

Am I the only one who'd rather have a beer with Obama?

I can see what would happen if I brought Dubya into a watering hole and drank a beer with him - he wouldn't know how to stop, he'd get drunk, hit on the waitresses, get in a fight with the bouncers, and puke all over my shirt, with that insufferable smirk the whole damned time.

I can see myself having awesome conversations, maybe a game of pool, watching some basketball, having an awesome time drinking a beer with Obama.

[harun]

24. My buddy works with mentally handicapped people. Obama visited the place

in Iowa during the Primaries and took time with everyone there to be nice to them and say hello.

My buddy was very impressed at how genuine he was.