The great Barack Obama conundrum

[uppityperson]

Someday I wish to have someone I can wholeheartedly endorse. I fear that will never happen. There is good and bad in most all of those who run for president, finding the one who has the most good, the least bad is my goal. While some may find that pitiful, it is my pragmatic reality.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2011/04/06/notes040611.DTL
Edited to give link to page 1 of 2

And suddenly we come to the crux of the problem: What shall we do about Barack in 2012?(clip)
Just the opposite, in fact. To the sneering disappointment of the puritanical left, Obama has turned out to be pretty much exactly what he said he'd be during his '08 campaign: flawed, exceedingly moderate, a resolute compromiser, overly pragmatic when he should've been a badass, temperate when he should've been white hot and furious, offering concessions when he should be bringing the hammer down.
(clip)
If you're unsure of Obama because he's been less the demigod superhero studbunny you hoped for, well, you have but to merely glance at the competition.
(clip)
So while libs can whine all they want about Obama's imperfections and so-called failures, the instant you turn it all around and look at the alternatives, and then hitch them to the current GOP-led House's plans to gut the budget and spew hate on women and gays, the arts and the poor, promote Islamophobia and kowtow to the rich, well, suddenly Obama shines all over again like the gleaming savior we all want him to be.
...(more)

[Cali_Democrat]

1. "Obama has turned out to be pretty much exactly what he said he'd be during his '08 campaign"

Bullshit.

[MNBrewer]

2. Exactly!!

Yes we can became No, we can't
Hope became Fuggetaboutit
Change became More of the same.

[MissDeeds]

4. +1000 n/t

[uppityperson]

10. flawed, exceedingly moderate, a resolute compromiser, overly pragmatic when he should've been a bada

"flawed, exceedingly moderate, a resolute compromiser, overly pragmatic when he should've been a badass, temperate when he should've been white hot and furious, offering concessions when he should be bringing the hammer down"

I like this description of him.

[ProSense]

12. Yeah,

he campaigned as a super progressive, promising to nationalize the banks and enact single payer.

What a disappointment!

[Cali_Democrat]

13. You wanna answer my question now?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=647711&mesg_id=647823

:shrug:

[ProSense]

15. .

(click on above)

[Cali_Democrat]

22. Still running away from the question I see. n/t

[Hawkowl]

27. Transparency?

Warrantless wiretaps? Closing Guantanamo? Filling his cabinet with Wall Street Banksters? Expanding the Pentagon budget and war profiteering?

Did I miss these campaign promises? Or was I just naive? :puke:

[SidDithers]

3. Mark Morford is brilliant...

K&R.

Edit: link in OP goes to the 2nd page of a 2 page article. Make sure you read page 1 too :)

Sid

[uppityperson]

8. Thanks, I changed the link to page 1

[Lyric]

5. "libs can whine" Yeah, I stopped paying attention there.

I've heard that sort of phrasing enough to recognize the kind of person who's using it.

[SidDithers]

6. You obviously know nothing about Mark Morford, then...nt

Sid

[MzNov]

20. I've been a rabid Morford fan for years

today I canceled my subscription to his articles. I had no idea he was such an Obamapologist and was deeply heart broken :-(

[shanti]

24. sure is

sad that it's coming from the chron. the sacramento bee has equally repug editorialists.

[joeybee12]

7. No, Obama does not shine all over again, he is simply better in comparison...

Apparently Mark is still drinking the Kool-Aid.

[JuniperLea]

9. No two people will ever agree 100% on 100% of the issues...

I don't care if you are married to the person, their twin, or their president... you will never always agree with everything. To think that is possible on any level is beyond stupid.

[pnwmom]

11. People who thought he was more liberal than Hillary were just projecting

their wishes onto a blank canvas.

He made it clear that he believed strongly in compromise -- and that is why many progressives hate him.

[MzNov]

18. No, that isn't why progressives "hate" him

and most don't hate him, they are profoundly disappointed.

He was preaching bipartisanship, not compromise, which he does at every turn. Cave. Cave. Cave. He never got the bipartisanship, but he certainly has perfected the compromise portion of the program.

He's turned out to be the corporate loving president we feared, among other things.

[pnwmom]

25. How can you have bipartisanship without compromise?

Get real.

[MzNov]

32. you can't.

but he compromises everything WITHOUT bipartisanship.

you get real.

[TheKentuckian]

29. Sweet, we have compromised ourselves into worse position than when the Chimp was in charge!

and reinvigorated a dead radically regressive party.

Anyone who strongly believes in compromising with the TeaPubliKlan radicals is no better than they are because by definition you are advancing their insane and toxic positions.

[pnwmom]

30. The Tea Party-ers rise is because of the left's successes.

The radical right hates freedom of choice, gay rights, and has no regard for preserving the environment.

I don't believe in compromising with Tea Party people, but neither does Obama. He HAS been working with other Repubs who are less radical.

[TheKentuckian]

35. They are all TeaPubliKlans. There is little effective difference.

It also makes zero difference because the essential point remains the same because the aims are largely the same.

There aren't any productive Republican policy prescriptions and their ideology is utterly failed. Why would a sane and decent person wish to advance any aim of the bastards? Dwight Eisenhower is not walking through that door? Sane in the TeaPubliKlan party is pretty far off the deep end.

There is nothing to compromise on. Everything they desire to do is gawdfuckingawful because "moderate" only means they aren't trying to institute theocracy or at least aren't rabid about it but are dedicated to funneling all resource control to the wealthy, destroying the environment, pro war, and massive expansions of poverty at all times.

There is nothing to "compromise" on and "less radical" could easily be defined as still worse than Bush by a wide margin.

Obama is too well educated, has far too great an intellect, and has far too much experience in dealing with these wastes of skin to compromise with such folk and the acts mean he is complicit in advancing their agenda. Same goes quadruple for Reid and Durbin because they are old schoolers who have seen it all first hand.

[Fire Walk With Me]

14. If Obama were not understated, were indeed a 'badass', would any more people have voted Democratic

in the 2010 election where we allowed Republicans to take over?

It is our fault, not Obama's. Every single one of us has to vote every single time or it doesn't work. Obama said in an email just prior to that election, that it would determine the course of the country. He was and is correct.

[RaleighNCDUer]

21. Well, let's see. What reason did he give us to vote before the election?

Did we see him FIGHT to close Gitmo?
No.
Did we see him end the war in Iraq?
No, he trimmed the number of troops by 2/3 and CALLED it a withdrawal (If a guy only pulls out 2/3s of his partner, she's still getting fucked.)
Did he deal with the financial crisis?
No, he gave the perpetrators a shit load of money and said "don't do it again" - while making no provisions to ensure their compliance.

Now, I did vote for him, but that doesn't mean I can't understand why someone else might not bother.

If he fought, and lost, a public fight over Gitmo - that might have held a few voters.
If we had 5,000 troops in Iraq, instead of 50,000 - that might have held a few voters.
If we had bailed out the banksters, but sent a few CEOs and other assorted fraudsters to prison - that might have held a few voters.

Would it take a 'badass' to do that?

Seriously?

[Fire Walk With Me]

23. Good point! We shouldn't vote!

???

[RaleighNCDUer]

34. Every single one of us has to vote every single time or it doesn't work.

And it doesn't matter what we are voting for?

Tell me, did you vote for banksters to get bonuses for crashing the economy?

Did you vote for the subverting of the US judicial system, by the allowing of military courts to try people they tortured confessions from?

Did you vote for expressly disallowing the prosecution of anyone for said torture?

If our votes are the only way we can express displeasure at such things, we are to not to wield that power?

VOTE FOR OUR GUY - NOT QUITE AS EVIL AS THE OTHER GUY!

[Hawkowl]

28. No. It's not OUR fault

Our leader failed to lead. Leaders are accountable. I WILL NOT be a battered wife. "If I only tried harder, he'd stop being angry with me." is absolute, complete, and utter bullshit.

[young but wise]

16. K&R

[RaleighNCDUer]

17. Crap.

There is nothing about the way that he campaigned that indicated he would preemptively surrender the high ground to the other side every time.

Sure, compromise is sometimes necessary and inevitable - but you NEVER start negotiation by compromising. You don't play poker by showing all your cards, while letting the other player never show his, and taking his word for it that he really holds a straight flush.

Know why the other side does not respect him? He never fights. They know they can say and do anything, and his response will be more compromise.

So, he never said he wanted single payer (actually he did, but that was pre-campaign talk). But he did say he wanted a public option. How do you get a public option? Demand single payer, and negotiate down to a public option. Don't start with a public option, and when they oppose it say "well, never mind".

Where the hell are the comfortable shoes he talked about during his campaign? He did NOT wind up being what he campaigned on. He is far to the right of his campaign persona. All you have to do is look at what he said, and what he subsequently did.

[MzNov]

19. + 1.5 zillion n/t

[readmoreoften]

26. The centrists call us "the sneering left" and "libs" more than the Right do anymore.

From now on I'm calling you all the "stupid centrists". I'm about sick of your nasty crap.

[TheKentuckian]

31. Yup, yup...I'm about to the point where I'm good with putting the ball in their court too.

They can either stridently oppose the TeaPubliKlans or live under em forever.

No more compromise, no more riding the ideological fence. That goes for the country support liberals or be crushed under by the fascists.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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