The Bait and Switch

[daredtowork]

Last week Obama was winning standing ovations from everybody by making speeches about things he can't deliver - like free Community College.

This week Obama is trying to push through a massively unpopular deal he can deliver, because it's an actual legislation in Congress: TPP.

The Community College thing was "politics-splained" to me as something that will make the GOP look bad and that will set the agenda for the next Democratic Presidency. (Like I believed Universal Healthcare was the agenda for this one...).

Sorry Eternal Boosters, I am suspicious. I am wondering if there has been a mad race to pump up the President's popularity JUST so he can get enough backing to push the TPP through. (Not to mention the epic $534 billion Pentagon budget request).

I do not believe the Community College thing will ever happen. Because no one even spoke a peep for the take-aways from the poor in Cromnibus (which included take-aways from Pell Grants), I believe public infrastructure will continue to be eroded even under Democratic Presidents. They will keep shouting "middle class", but some how the legislation as written will actually be a big old gift to their top donors, who will continually erode the middle class in pursuit of their own interests.

The populist/middle class evidence against TPP has been on the table for some years now, but Obama still believes we, the people, need to "get educated" about it?

Only vague promises have been dangled, but the THREAT that is being pushed through is very real.

Seems like a bait and switch to me.

[fredamae]

1. Have you heard about this?

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/01/28/medi-j28.html

I am unfamiliar with this website.....but if true.....

[4139]

3. Here's a washpost article...

It is very nice until you get way down to:


The most high-profile effort has been with accountable care organizations (ACOs), which are groups of providers who share in the savings – or losses – for managing patients on a budget. An estimated 7.8 million seniors enrolled in Medicare are currently being served by ACOs, according to the administration....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/01/26/the-obama-administration-wants-to-dramatically-change-how-doctors-are-paid/

[daredtowork]

4. hmm isn't "rationing" usually used by GOP critics...?

That said, I'm pretty worried about the plan to incentivize doctors for "outcomes", because I think it will encourage doctors to "see" improvement rather than help patients get disability services they need. Of course if the government's goal is to push patient's off these services whether they are disabled or not...

Doctors are complaining that the ones that serve the poor and elderly (who have the worst "outcomes&quot will get the fewest bonuses, so they will be treated unfairly again.

I have to say doctors really lack perspective about the overall economy. I heard one complaining about he "should have gone into IT to make the big bucks". He was saying that in a room full pf patients who were making minimum wage-30k/yr. if they were working at all.

[magical thyme]

10. I think it will incentivize doctors to move problem patients on to somebody else.

filter out the difficult to diagnose and hard to treat, and focus on the simpler diseases and injuries with a clear outcome.

[daredtowork]

13. I can see this

Am in a super grumpy mood about this today, in fact.

Yesterday I had a doctor's appointment with things on the agenda, but the doctor pushed me out the door because she was running 2 hours late. Perhaps this would not have been such an issue if the same exact same hadn't happened 6 weeks ago: this was a re-scheduled appointment. I couldn't reschedule again since she's booked through March. ARG!!!

[1monster]

25. On the other hand, some doctors are making a killing out of treating Medicare patients.

My husband has Parkinson's and he pays a $70 co-payment everytime he sees his doctor (or the doctor's PA). According to the statement we get from the Medicare provider, they pay $140 for each appointment with the doctor which means the doctor gets $210 for each of my husband's appointments. That's $210 for each 15 to 20 minute appointment.

Nice work if you can get it.

[daredtowork]

36. Yep, lack of perspective...

Though I think in some cases the billable hours are being eaten up by administrative and legal/insurance fees, and that's why doctors are kvetching.

[daredtowork]

19. News released on same day as Super Bowl

On Google News it seems to have gone primarily to business journals. Is that where the Obama Administration sent the press releases? Or is it that who they invited to the press conference? This is the glowing headline from Forbes:

The White House Promises Exciting Medicare Reforms, But There's A Catch

http://www.forbes.com/sites/leahbinder/2015/01/30/the-white-house-promises-exciting-medicare-reforms-but-theres-a-devil-in-the-details/

(The "catch" is for the doctors, who have to meet quality standards to get bonuses, etc...)

I did see this errant article from a primary care physician:

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/bs-ed-hhs-medicare-20150129-story.html

As mentioned in my preceding comment, I second this emotion. I have a complex medical situation, but there are a lot of things that could have been done for me if my primary care physician had been able to deal with more than one problem per visit. Instead, my problems have been strung out far longer than they've needed to be, I've been kept in a lot of pain and disability when that didn't need to happen, I've been kept in poverty and on public support when I could have been "work ready" sooner, etc. If the government wants to save money, it could empower primary care doctors to ask people like me: "What are your barriers to health?" and listen to the answers. My primary barrier to health has been my very-well-meaning medical clinic itself! But as a patient, I'm caught in the middle of a "terms of employment" fight between health care providers and the government.

[newthinking]

22. It is a good website with general good analysis - This one I slightly disagree with

I can see the perspective: If you compare this move to other much better systems in the world it looks atrotious. But for our system it is probably a move in the right direction *if* it is followed up by careful analysis and adjustment.

It is called "outcome based care" and it is already in place in some states such as Oregon.

The "risk" is that instead of getting more holistic about care, care gets missed. It requires Drs to really be on top and paying attention to each patient more fully, which of course is not natural to the way our system has tended to work.

[daredtowork]

37. Who determines the outcome?

Does the doctors say: "Okay, my tests say you're well now."

Or

Does the patient say: "I'm feeling much better now, thank you!"

[Teamster Jeff]

61. HHS Sylvia Burwell is from Walmart so it's not surprising that the plan is to "Walmartize" Medicare

Obama's appointments tell everything you need to know about this president

[daredtowork]

65. Oh dang is that who she is?

The Walmart exec who is still being paid by Walmart while she's working for the White House? I almost forgot about her. Of course she is.

Talk about an unholy conflict of interest!

And that's who he asked to re-architect Medicare?! Apostles of Walmart? Behind closed doors?

Now is there any questions about what class policy is serving here vs. the EMPTY PROMISES?

[Newest Reality]

2. Good Points

I share your concerns and admire your critique.

We need more cogent, healthy skepticism about what is being dished out to us as bromides and pablum.

[daredtowork]

5. Heh.

Hopefully I don't get any boiling oil dumped on me for playing right into GOP hands or something.

But this is really what the situation looks like to me. Other DUers can educate me if I'm wrong.

[BainsBane]

6. It's about his legacy

They are things he would like to see passed, and if the public exerted enough pressure on their representatives they theoretically could be. And yes, making the GOP look bad is a big part of it. It's also a set of ideas that should help frame 2016, if Dem candidates cooperate. I don't think it had to do with TPP. Much of what he does and says now is about his legacy. All Presidents want to be remembered as significant, great even.

[daredtowork]

7. Legacy is about what got PASSED

A hundred years from now Obama's paragraph (if he gets that) in the textbook will be about what HAPPENED during his Presidency. A Great President DOES Great Things.

I believe the Community College thing and all the Middle Class/Working Class rhetoric during the SOTU were about getting his popularity numbers up NOW.

[BainsBane]

8. I agree that it's about what gets passed

That doesn't stop the president from thinking about his legacy. If Dems regain congress in 2016 and the proposal is passed, it would be part of his legacy.

I don't think it's a nefarious plot to get TPP passed. I can't see how it would further than goal, or that it would be necessary. Free trade deals have been backed by both parties for decades now. It there much chance of the treaty's not being ratified? Regardless, if that were the case, he would need to speak to the public about why they should convince their senators to support it. Community College's don't do that.

[elias49]

11. Yo! Rip Van Winkle...Dems already LOST congress in 2012.

[Art_from_Ark]

76. Democrats lost the House in 2010

They lost the Senate in 2014.

[daredtowork]

12. That would be the fantasy outcome

I suppose Obama can dream about the next President passing his agenda so he gets credit for it.

But the next President might decide they want their OWN legacy instead, ditch the Community College idea BECAUSE it has another President's stamp on it.

"Nefarious plot" is putting it strongly - I would frame it more as: "Washington politics as usual", but writ large at the public's expense. This is what makes me bitter.

Regarding that last part - are you saying Obama is just trying to look like he's okay with a "done deal" - or trying to adopt a decades long process into his Legacy no matter how he feels about it, just for the sake of Getting Something Done?

[BainsBane]

18. Politics as usual, for sure

However, your argument seems to be based on the assumption that there are a large number of people who think like folks on DU. I suspect the numbers of people who even know let alone think about TPT are relatively small.

I would assume that the President supports TPT. If he didn't, he wouldn't have dispatched emissaries to negotiate the treaty. My last point wasn't about Obama as much as the general stance toward free trade deals by the two parties. I remember all this with NAFTA, and it got more attention in the media because of Mexico and the fears and prejudices associated with Mexicans. Without strong unions, there isn't a significant political base to enforce opposition to such deals. And the fact is today capital is global. That, I think, is probably what is most unsettling for people and has led to recent concerns about "corporatism," when in fact moneyed interests have controlled this country since it's outset. Now capital has no nation. It exists outside the nation state, is loyal to nothing and no one but profit. It has upended social relations of production and expectations concerning the state and its relationship to citizen.

[daredtowork]

20. Good point

I am assuming the Community Colleges proposal and the SOTU address were widely popular. I'm also assuming President's Obama's current popularity numbers are largely a result of those things and not other things like, say, his support of TPP.

Also, good point about lack of ability to organize large-scale opposition with the systematic dismantling of unions.

[newthinking]

26. Not if a president is thinking in terms of legacy after office

Content moved to post below

[newthinking]

24. I am glad he is bringing these things up. But the sceptic in me sees this as Preparing for the after

career.

A little of this to assuage the people, a little of that to assuage business interests. TPP is a historical move (it will change the world - likely not in a good way) though and will likely be what he is remembered for if it passes.

Call me a skeptic, but it has always appeared to me that there has been a little "devil" whispering in the President
's ear (vs the angel we see in his speeches) telling him not to fuck up the after benefits to his family.

That is the great temptation of modern office. In a time when being part of the 1% carries so many advantages for one's family, it takes an extraordinarily principled personality not to be seduced into thinking past the 8 years in office.

[daredtowork]

42. He's young, too

What do you think he's angling for in his next career?

[Oilwellian]

9. He did the same with ANWR

The same day he protected ANWR from drilling, he opened up our Atlantic Coast to the same damn thing.

[daredtowork]

14. hmm, so there's a chance this might be strategy? nt >.>

[whatchamacallit]

15. Same old mollifying song and dance n/t

[daredtowork]

16. How come we don't get any actual mollifying

We only got verbal allusion to mollifying...

[Faryn Balyncd]

17. I think you've nailed it.

[daredtowork]

21. I'm gratefully surprised that some people were thinking the same thing. nt

[lark]

23. That's all too often the case with many so-called Dems

Universal healthcare becomes an insurance mandate and no single payer and (red) states can opt out thereby totally screwing their working poor because ACA doesn't help people who are really low income. A bill to keep the government open becomes a total giveaway from the American people to the bankers that wrecked the economy just a few years ago and Obama signs it instead of doing the right thing and vetoing it. He had the upper hand and totally gave away the show for the benefit of the 1%.

There are only a handful of congresscritters that really represent us, the 99% - Warren, Sanders, Grayson, Sherrod Brown are some of the good ones.

[AndyTiedye]

30. Red States Can Opt Out Because of a Supreme Court Ruling

Universal healthcare becomes an insurance mandate and no single payer and (red) states can opt out thereby totally screwing their working poor because ACA doesn't help people who are really low income.

ACA as passed by Congress and signed by Obama did help the poor by extending Medicaid to them.

The Supreme Court stepped in and allowed states to opt out of that, as an obvious attempt to sabotage the ACA without taking the heat they would get from completely overturning it.

Of course the wingnuts blame Obama instead, but we should know better.

[daredtowork]

39. It astounds me this was allowed

This is literally a death sentence for some people.

And for others it's a disability sentence...which places them on the taxpayer's dime anyway.

This was not just nutty even from the wingnut perspective, it's inhumane. Seriously, an outside country could step in and call the US on its Moral Leadership on that one.

[Phlem]

27. Trust me, the

*look over here, FREE college!* was not lost on me. What is lost on me are the apologists and fan bois totally oblivious to the obvious TTP's potential decimation of the middle and lower class. This is what I got from someone here, "If the TTP is being negotiated in secret, I would want Obama negotiating it for me."



phuck.

[ND-Dem]

35. because, you know, he looks good and has a nice family.

[PosterChild]

28. If you want free community college . ..

... as I do, then a robust, productive economy is necessary. We won't have that unless we are actively engaged in a global market economy, and that requires treaties with our trading partners.

Free community college doesn't mean anything without the jobs that demand that level of education, and couldn't be paid for without a global market for our goods and services.

[bvar22]

29. ...because this "robust" global market...

...is working so well now that the TPP will only make it better.

Study Reveals Massive Job Loss in South Korea-U.S. Trade Deal

A new Economic Policy Institute study reveals the harsh reality of the “over-hyped” and job-killing Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (KORUS) and warns of the further potential job loss the Trans-Pacific Partnership would inflict upon the American middle class.

Instead of increasing U.S. exports from “$10 billion to $11 billion” and supporting “70,000 American jobs from increased goods exports alone,” as the White house promised, U.S. domestic exports to South Korean fell $3.5 billion and 40,000 American jobs were lost in KORUS’s first year. While the KORUS deal has increased the already-massive U.S. trade deficit and slashed American jobs, imports from South Korea have jumped by $5.8 billion, a nearly 40 percent increase.

Estimates for 2013 suggest no reversal in the trend.

“Policymakers need to stop negotiating trade deals that hurt the U.S. economy,” said Robert E. Scott, the study’s author and EPI’s Director of Trade and Manufacturing Policy Research. “Unless free trade agreements reduce our too-high trade deficits, they won’t have a net positive effect on U.S. employment. This isn’t a radical stance on trade—it’s textbook economics.”

Despite job loss already caused by KORUS, the Obama administration is negotiating yet another flawed trade agreement that involves more than a dozen Asian countries, including South Korea. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), according to the study, “would significantly increase the threat that rapidly-growing trade deficits and job losses in the United States would be locked in if the TPP is completed.”

http://www.goiam.org/index.php/imail/latest/11721-study-reveals-massive-job-loss-in-south-korea-us-trade-deal

Capital will ALWAYS be able to out run Human Rights, Labor Regulation, and Environmental Protections.........

UNLESS our governments slow them down and advocate for the working classes of the World.

[PosterChild]

31. The working classes of the...

...world? Um, sorry, our government isn't responsible for the world's working classes.

Within our government's actual range of responsibility, it seems that, outside of a negotiated trade treaty the alternatives trend towards free trade or no trade - which alternative do you favor?

[bvar22]

32. OK. Have it your way.

Let our government advocate for the Workers in the USA for a change.

[PosterChild]

58. Right on! And...

... provide our people with greater opportunity and achievement not only through greater engagement with the world, but also through expansion of public education, such as free comunity college.

[daredtowork]

49. TPP Graphic

I filched this from another DU post for you:

[PosterChild]

56. I've seen it....

...obviously it is not factual in nature, but instead made up of speculative innuendo based on incompetent leaks made for the purpose of souring any agreement at all.

I suggest that we make our assessment based on the actual completed agreement.

[daredtowork]

59. Which should have been discussed more publicly

...so we wouldn't have to deal with these accusations of "speculation" and "innuendo".

Try Robert Reich's 2:15 critique here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026165056

[PosterChild]

63. I'll take a look at the critique...

...but I want to address the issue of open discussion. Serrious negotiations of this sort are never conducted openly. That’s because negotiations are intrinsically trade offs between various positive and negative affects on various interest groups. The overall deal cannot be fairly assessed by considering individual terms and conditions apart from the whole. You have to look at the full impact to determine whether or not it is a good deal.

If the discussions are open the negotiators are unable to explore trade offs, pros and cons and the overall balence without the whole negotiation being soured by interest groups that focus exclusively on some poposed policy that is not to their immediate advantage without consideration of offsetting positive aspects.

[daredtowork]

68. The very fact so many interest groups are involved

is already bad news. The primary interest group should be the majority of the American people.

[PosterChild]

69. The majority of the American people...

... is made up of a large varity of overlapping interest groups. Nothing gets done in a modern, industrial, democracy without lots and lots of interest groups being involved. Managing that and coming up with something that benifits the majoity and that other nations can buy into is what the process is designed to do.

If you don't want any agreements at all, an open process would accomplish that. If you want an agreement that can benifit the majority of Americans, in fact benifit many more than just a majority, a confidential process and an up-or-down vote is the best and the only way.

[daredtowork]

71. This is the elitist way of looking at things

...once too many of the previously excluded "others" get involved, they just gum up the works and stall things. The elites are used to getting their way, and they view being opposed as "gumming up the works" and "stalling in committee". It doesn't occur to them to just give way and try reconstructing society in ways that are fairer. From the "other" side, it is the elites that are stalling and gumming up the works!

There was an interesting article a few days ago about black members of the House being "in revolt" over new seniority rules - they brought out what had become a truism for them: whenever black people finally "got there" playing by the rules, white people changed the rules.

I think this can be said for people who are used to wielding power in general. A couple days ago, I got to listen to an extremely entitled white privileged male deliver his screed about the "angry Left". The problem was he couldn't actually identify any members of the Angry Left. It was just a strawman that he and his Imaginary Center wealthy Democrat friends had imagined to play off of. The Angry Left was who they were Above and More Reasonable Than. The Angry Left were the ones who Stalled Things and didn't let this Privileged White Elite Male have his way.

There are not "too many interests to deal with". There are just interests that the Power Elite doesn't want in the room. And they will keep dealing out labels and reasons and threats and sky-is-falling warnings to keep them out.

[BainsBane]

72. That's a traditional political science model

though I'm not so sure it applies anymore, if it ever did. Not in a world where the financial interests are global rather than bound to nation.
Additionally, SCOTUS through decisions like Citizens United has created a situation where the wealthy are able to exert overwhelming influence, even in comparison to their role historically, which has always been significant. Actors and groups do not compete on equal footing for influence. Money gives all the power to the financial elite, who no longer has any interest in the well-being of the nation since their profits are global and don't depend on a thriving middle class.

[ND-Dem]

34. we could have free college today, if it were a priority. but we won't, whether engaged in the

race to the bottom that is free trade or not.

no jobs are coming. the idea is to create a global top 20% and leave the rest to sink.

[PosterChild]

38. It will become a priority...

... due to efforts like Obama's to make it a priority, and due to the rising need created by the necessity to compete on a global scale. Just as, in gereations past, public education through high school became a priority and a necessity.

Closing ourselves off from the global economy is not going to move us forward on educational initiatives. In fact, they go together, and we aren't going to achieve higher educational and other social goals without increasing involvement with the world at large.

We all know what a "hermit kingdom" looks like. The America we know, and the America we want, cannot exist as a "hermit kingdom".

[ND-Dem]

40. no, it won't. because contrary to the rhetoric and talking points, capital doesn't need a lot

of college-educated people to keep their profit flowing -- and with free trade, they need even fewer.

what they may need, which is what CCs are moving to now, are short-term bogus and comparatively expensive 'certificate' programs 'proving' competence in some relatively low-skill 'skill'. This has the double benefit of getting students to spend a relatively high amount of money just to get a relative low-wage job, and keeping the colleges in business so as to keep a small fraction of the 'middle class' in employment.

[daredtowork]

46. Additional hidden cost to the unemployed

All the unpaid time they spend trying to convince employers to hire them with a few wimpy certificates to their name. (The DOR just enrolled me in an online program for Microsoft suite! Seems like Microsoft got paid, though!)

Ooh, or what about the therapy sessions - absorbed by the State's mental health resources - for the stress caused by long-term unemployment because of these low quality education inflictions on the poor?

[daredtowork]

43. Yep the 500 billion is going to the Pentagon instead. nt

[ND-Dem]

44. yep. because everyone agrees we need more war! at least, everyone who 'matters' agrees.

[ND-Dem]

33. k&r

[Marr]

41. I wonder if 'promoted free Community College' has been added to that laughable List yet?

[pampango]

45. So Obama does not care about us, only about his own power and wealth. Sounds like a tea party

view of Obama. He is duplicitous, does not mean what he says and is only out to line his pockets. I've heard the same from too many far-right republicans.

[Phlem]

47. He still is a Politician first.

I'll just leave this here.

[daredtowork]

48. You're calling me a tea party republican?

First, lol.

Okay, I take it you can't be familiar with everyone on DU. I invite you to click my sig, check out my situation, and then call me tea party republican to my face.

[pampango]

50. I'm saying we all disagree with one policy or another but most do not accuse of him of lying and

intentional misdirection to deceive us.

[daredtowork]

52. I'm accusing him of wielding a political strategy

This sort of sleight of hand does involve lying. But then the President lies all the time - to keep National Security secrets, to conduct foreign policy, etc. It's naive to think otherwise.

I'm bummed when the President practices deception on the American people. Frankly, I thought he was doing a little "perception manipulation" around the Sony Hacking case as well.

That doesn't make me a Tea Party Republican. That makes me a disappointed social-left Democrat.

[pampango]

55. "This sort of sleight of hand does involve lying." "That doesn't make me a Tea Party Republican."

Perhaps not, but it is the argument that Tea Party Republicans make. They believe he is not interested in what is good for the American people but what is good for himself.

But then the President lies all the time - to keep National Security secrets, to conduct foreign policy, etc. It's naive to think otherwise.

Of course, they do. And of course "national security secrets" and 'foreign policy' are not what we are talking about is it. We are talking about lying to his own people to further some type of agenda to increase his own power and wealth. That is a different kind of lying.

[daredtowork]

57. So if I don't Go Along then I'm DISLOYAL, Is That It?

Now there's a fascist theme from the beginning of time.

Sorry, but real GOP behavior would be pretending I don't see moral aberrations in my own political party.

I think American people realize that our President, whatever party is from, can't always tell us everything. And then his opponents are going to cry out, "LIAR!!!"

But the American people do expect to be told the truth themselves on matters that don't relate to security. And what I'm saying is that President Obama has perhaps been overly trained in PR thinking and political tricks - and perhaps he doesn't even think of "LOOK OVER HERE!" as a lie. But if it is, ultimately, a bait and switch, it ultimately is a lie. And Obama shouldn't be doing that to us.

[pampango]

62. Of course not. You can disagree with a policy without calling him a liar. We all do it.

Sorry, but real GOP behavior would be pretending I don't see moral aberrations in my own political party.

I think tea party republicans see 'moral aberrations' in Boehner and his sort all the time.

I think American people realize that our President, whatever party is from, can't always tell us everything.

Of course not. But calling him a liar is not the same as saying he is not telling us everything. I do expect tea party republicans to "cry out, LIAR!!!"

President Obama has perhaps been overly trained in PR thinking and political tricks - and perhaps he doesn't even think of "LOOK OVER HERE!" as a lie. But if it is, ultimately, a bait and switch, it ultimately is a lie.

So basically, Obama may not really be lying on purpose. But because he is so trained in 'political tricks', he just doesn't know any better. At least you're not "crying out, LIAR".

[daredtowork]

64. As I see it one of the fundamental differencences

between the GOP and the Democratic party is supposed to be that the GOP is supposed to tell a smooth story and the party gets behind it for the sake of winning. Democrats, on the other hand, are supposed to be about doing the right thing, not pushing slick propaganda.

I don't like the idea of Obama engaging in the politics of distraction to get a political thing done - especially if he's doing it because he thinks the American people aren't behind it. The American people should be behind it if he wants to be *our* President and if he wants to leave a legacy of being our *legacy*.

So if you want to continue to insinuate that I'm somehow a member of the Tea Party because I have this criticism of Obama, go ahead, but your words are meaningless since you're talking to a socialist-left Democrat.

And you can revisit your insinuations while you are wondering whatever happened to that Community Colleges thing during the next Presidency.

On the other hand, perhaps challenging him to make good on his words NOW might get something done. Try it.

[pampango]

66. "I don't like the idea of Obama engaging in the politics of distraction to get a political thing

done - especially if he's doing it because he thinks the American people aren't behind it. "

I would not like that either. Of course I am not the one suggesting that is what he is doing. And I don't think he believes that he is doing something the American people aren't behind - unless you have seen polls that I have not.

So if you want to continue to insinuate that I'm somehow a member of the Tea Party because I have this criticism of Obama ...

Of course that is not what I said but if it makes you feel better.

What you said was:

And then his opponents are going to cry out, "LIAR!!!"

This sort of sleight of hand does involve lying.

Let me be clear. You are not a tea party republican. But you accuse him of lying for political advantage just as they do.

[daredtowork]

67. Let's look at this another way

Tea Party Republicans will say a Democrat is "lying for political advantage" when it suits them. But they will look the other way when their own candidate does the exact does the same.

What I am noting is that politicians don't always tell the truth as a matter of their jobs, so Tea Party Republicans are hypocrites when they call people on it. This is the phenomenon you are pointing out.

I am ALREADY positing that both parties will not always be honest in the course of their jobs, and I don't want to be a hypocrite about it and call a Republican on something I'm not willing to call a Democrat on.

The particular thing I'm calling Obama on is NOT in the course of his job of keeping State secrets, etc.

The particular thing I'm calling him on has to do with media strategy and tactics. As Woo Me With Science said, it is the sort of thing developed in corporate PR war rooms. I expect both parties are using these tactics as well. I don't want EITHER side to use them, and I don't think it is a NECESSARY part of the President's job.

Therefore, I am calling President Obama on it and saying I don't approve of that tactic. This frees me from being a hypocrite when I point to the GOP and say I don't like them using that tactic, either.

Get it?

[bvar22]

74. I'm still waiting for him to "immediately re-negotiate NAFTA",

and "make EFCA the Law of the Land".

[woo me with science]

79. Suckers!

Something tells me it's gonna be an indefinite wait...

[NCTraveler]

77. He has lied in the past. At best he has used deception in the past.

Frightening you have no clue of that. These aren't accusations. Deception on a grand scale is a fact.

[woo me with science]

51. Lies upon lies upon lies. Yes, bait and switch is the corporate MO.

Used on Madison Avenue, and now used serially by our own government to dupe and exploit its own citizens.

This is the difference between corporate government and representative government. Corporate government operates for profit, within a moral cesspool of deception. The goal is to put one over on us in order to reap as much profit as possible, rather than to fulfill the democratic, moral and ethical imperative of serving as our democratic representatives.

Lies upon lies upon lies.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=865705

A pattern of election year speeches brazenly misrepresenting his administration's own behavior.

...That heavily publicized speech about reining in military involvement...followed immediately by Obama's escalations, new wars in Syria and Iraq, funding of the Gaza horror, and a new trillion-dollar nuclear weapons escalation.

....The shameless claim to support net neutrality, while deliberately appointing corporate shills with an opposite agenda.

....Obscene lies about supporting whistleblowers, when we have all witnessed this administration's treatment of Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, and the relentless, systematic crackdown on whistleblowing in the federal government.

...Highly publicized lies about caring for the environment, while opening the Atlantic for drilling and pushing the malignant TPP.

...Brazen lies and promises to protect the 99 percent, while twisting arms for Cronybus, *more* deregulation of criminal banks, and more predation of the masses by the One Percent.



War is Peace.
Freedom is Slavery.
Ignorance is Strength.
Torturers are Patriots.

We all live in Oceania now.

Corporate government lies for corporate ends. It has contempt for the people and sees us as merely entries in a profit ledger, "human resources" to exploit rather than human citizens to serve. It is savagely amoral and antidemocratic at its core and seeks to dismantle the democratic systems that allow us to protect ourselves from its machinations. We are witnessing the deliberate, malignant destruction of democracy by corporations and their purchased politicians.

Third Way "Democrats" are liars and predators. They are antidemocratic. They are the Wall Street-funded, deliberate infiltration of our party by the corporate predators, working with corporatist Republicans to usher in the dismantling of our democracy itself.

[daredtowork]

53. Too much training by "PR specialists"?

There is also the "bad news on Friday" thing. I remember that tip from the West Wing. Now I'm noting the release of the timing of the new news about Medicare changes on Superbowl weekend...

[woo me with science]

54. It's what corporations do.

By definition, they exist solely for the growth of their own profit and power. They advertise and manipulate to maximize their profit, and they don't represent anyone but themselves. The welfare of actual human beings has no place in their calculations.

[Phlem]

60. +10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000

yep.

[daredtowork]

70. Did you see the whopper above?

Walmart exec (still on payroll of Walmart foundation!) overseeing the "lean-sizing" of Medicare!

The emphasis on "incentives" suddenly makes sense, too - that's straight out of the Senior Executive Payola mind. I wonder if anyone thought to point out how and why the VA waiting list scandal happened, too.

Wouldn't it be an interesting world if the cadillac-sized incentives went to people struggling on the ground instead of the people already floating around in the upper atmosphere? Like say: person gets off of welfare - $100, 000 bonus!!! Suddenly don't only have job, they can pay off debts and make a down payment on a house! Actually - it wouldn't hurt if the reward for getting a job was just the wiping out of welfare debt in the places welfare is paid out as a LOAN rather than a subsidy. The State is all thrilled to get it's money back, but the poor person is set up to fail all over again as they struggle to pay back their debts with their minimum wage job. They may have student loans or child support or liens on traffic fines...and then they have to pay back welfare on top of that? You have to wonder if half the homeless people are just poor slobs who after tearing their hair out for a few weeks of that finally couldn't take it any more and gave up. Even sleeping on a sidewalk was better than the constant grabs at poor people.

Hmm - where to start a movement? GIVE BIG FRAKKING BUSINESS BONUSES TO POOR PEOPLE WHO JUMP FROM WELFARE TO WORK

[woo me with science]

73. kick

[great white snark]

75. Obama has always pulled high favorability numbers from Liberal Democrats.

I doubt they feel as if they are being lied to.

Whatever your political standing may be, as already commented on, your views and memes sound teabaggish. There is a difference between healthy skepticism and nefarious reasoning for all his actions.

I suppose the perpetually ungrateful will always see him as a "used car salesman"

[daredtowork]

80. I would say those who are calling me "teabaggish"

have an agenda of trying to shut me up through name-calling.

My "views and memes" as you call them are obviously not tea-baggish as nearly everything I post here has to do with upholding social programs and the inhumanity of not doing so. Those are social left views, not tea-bagger views. You seem to be conflating "tea-baggish" with critical of Obama. People who are on the left can and should criticize Obama. He promised Hope and Change. He delivered very little of that. Now at the 11th hour, he is making empty promises. It would have been nice if he had delivered Hope and Change when he still had the means to do so.

Again, I think you are just slinging around the word "tea-bagger" to mean critical of Obama. I don't see how my "views and memes" in support of housing, SSI/SSDI, Welfare/General Assistance, and occasionally Feminism add me to that particular party otherwise.

On the other hand, it is FASCIST to suggest someone is disloyal if they dare criticize the leader. Try that "meme and view" on YOURSELF.

[Octafish]

78. Speech is free.

Getting something done is another matter.

Thank you for a great OP and thread, daredtowork!

[woo me with science]

81. kick

[woo me with science]

82. kick