Why does the President seem to use his bully pulpit...to bully Democrats?

[Poll_Blind]

He specifically stated that although the majority of the American people were in agreement with him, he capitulated to the Republicans- using a hostage analogy for Chrissakes- in which negotiating with hostage takers is a bad thing unless the hostages are hurt.

Hurt by Republican ideological purists.

Out of that same mouth he excoriated (in a rather prolonged fashion) Democratic "ideological purity" and "sanctimoniousness"- when he clearly capitulated to the Republicans for that exact reason.

PB

[eleny]

1. kr

[polichick]

2. Because he has more in common with the right than the left?? nt

[jaxx]

Noooooooo because we're supposed to be on the same side...

the Democratic side. People choose to forget that in their zeal to take down the Democratic President.

[hfojvt]

10. the same side?

You mean the side that wants to reverse the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy?

I agree, we are supposed to be on the same side. It's not funny how that same Democratic President keeps switching sides.

[jaxx]

12. The President hasn't moved.

If you listened he told you so.

[frylock]

18. so when he campaigned on eliminating tax cuts for the upper 2%..

that was all a dream?

[jaxx]

21. No, he said today that is his goal.

He also said he wouldn't let 2 million people go without to prove a political point. Unlike the black and white unrealistic view of the world, gray is the common denominator. People over politics. Pick the timing, this is people time.

[hfojvt]

23. yeah, rich people time

You know there was another President who claimed that tax cuts for the rich was all about the little working people.

"Yes, I'm worried about the deficit. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the fellow looking for work. I'm worried about the deficit, but I'm more worried about the single mom who's worried about putting food on the table for her children, so she could find work. And that's where the focus of this administration is going to be." May 12, 2003

Isn't it amazing that the Government can only help those poor people by giving huge tax cuts to the rich?


"We need tax relief that creates the greatest number of jobs. (Applause.) The goal is to create a million new jobs by the end of next year. I've submitted a good, strong plan that will help meet that goal. The United States Congress must not only listen to your voice, but must listen to the voice of somebody looking for work. We need aggressive action out of the United States Congress now." May 6, 2003

See, because of the economy we have to pass a tax cut for the rich.

"When you hear the debate about this kind of class warfare, rhetoric about, oh, this is for the rich, only for the rich -- I want you to think about the Joe Kempers of the world. I certainly will. A fellow who worked for our government, and now a fellow who we trust with that $3,500, because it's his money. And when he invests it, it's going to have a positive effect. All the Joe Kempers of the world taking that extra money and investing it will mean somebody else is likely to find a job, and that's important for our fellow Americans to understand." Feb 12, 2003


But it's all good, because the tax cut isn't ALL going to the rich, just most of it, and we are only passing it because we care so much about people like Joe Kemper and other average Joes.


Now, Obama is also talking about averages.

"This is my approach: tax relief for everybody, in every bracket, averaging $1,600 per family, while still reducing our national debt and funding important priorities." Feb 5, 2001

[hfojvt]

24. but he has moved

now he is fighting to extend those Bush tax cuts, tax cuts he specifically promised that he would eliminate.

[Individualist]

7. +1

[mike_c]

3. utterly failed presidency-- too inexperienced, too little commitment....

Another opportunity wasted in the name of "mainstreaming" the democratic party.

[Poll_Blind]

9. Thin-skinned. Responds to pressure by acquiescing instead of fighting back from a principled...

...position.

:cry:

PB

[jaxx]

16. LOL let's discuss thin-skinned.

The President just stood up there and told you about reality and people can't handle it.

[frylock]

20. blah blah blah reality..

blah blah.

[jaxx]

22. Aren't able to discuss it yet?

Ok.

[frylock]

27. i just did..

that's all i hear you saying.

[bobbolink]

25. S.Q.U.A.N.D.E.R.E.D.

:cry:

[glitch]

30. He said he was a new dem, a blue dog. That means neoliberal. Believe him.

And start working around him.

[Poll_Blind]

40. Yup. n/t

PB

[kath]

4. Funny how that works, eh?

[phleshdef]

5. He has spent 99% of the last 2 years slamming Republicans as the backwards party of No.

Why is it that his critics on the left can shit all over him, never take any of his explanations to heart and then cry about it when he ever defends himself against your bullshit?

He also vehemently defended Democratic ideals during this press conference.

[Supersedeas]

39. but, didn't he just capitulate to the party of No...making No that to change and No to hope that

much more of a powerful and viable alternative to his campaign against the naysayers.

[Write Left]

6. Opposition to torture is also a symptom of ideological purity.

I guess ideological purity is achieved whenever a person stands up for what is right.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

8. Well, he has to be strong and uncompromising with somebody..other than Republicans.

[Jack Rabbit]

11. Because he spent two years listening to Rahm Emanuel

. . . who thought the base was a collection of retards.

I wonder what Rahm calls Republicans like Sarah Palin, Jim DeMint or the Three Stooges of FoxNews.

[Individualist]

14. and still takes his marching orders from DLC.

[TexasObserver]

13. I don't know, but it's yet another bad decision on his part.

[Moondog]

15. Because the Pukes fight back?

[frylock]

17. because democrats let him

[bigtree]

19. he's speaking to Congress

. . . to their failure to resolve this themselves. I guess you feel they've been just peachy?

[hfojvt]

26. I feel that if one side needs to surrender

that it should be the other side. Resolving it by giving up isn't really a satisfactory solution, is it?

[glitch]

28. Wow, sanctimoniousness. Really?

Irony ain't just for Republicans. Oh wait.

:thumbsdown:

Bernie, Nancy, there's the red flag, it's go time.

[Poll_Blind]

29. Yes, really. As soon as ti becomes available I would recommend watching the President's press....

...conference in full.

It's not available yet.

PB

[glitch]

31. Yikes. Well, at least we're finally getting some transparency. :( nt

[Poll_Blind]

35. Here ya go: It's now up in the DU videos section.

HERE

Please consider voting in the DU poll linked under the video to give your reaction!

PB

[ProSense]

32. Compromise is not capitulation, and

calling out Republicans is a good thing.

But he has never done it to the other guys.

Obama slams GOP for obstructing economic progress

Obama Blasts Republican Economic Policies: GOP 'Snake Oil' Could Jeopardize Economy

When it comes to legislating and getting things done, compromise is part of the equation.

Kucinich on GOP Compromise - Cenk on MSNBC

People can debate whether the deal is good or bad, goes too far or not far enough, but writing off every compromise as caving isn't realistic.

The President is dealing from where he needs to deal. Congress has a role here, and they need to exercise it fully to come to agreement on moving forward. As the President said, it doesn't get any easier after the end of the year.

[WiffenPoof]

33. So, From His Own Analogy...

...he gave into the terrorists.

-PLA

[somone]

34. Sociological analogy: Domestic abuse is easier

than abuse of strangers (or your enemies)

[okieinpain]

36. because you're suppose to have his back and it hurts when your

family smacks you on the head and tells you something you already know.

[BlueIris]

37. Abusers abuse. It's what they do.

I'm happy to see it's not working any more.

[Eddie Haskell]

38. K&R

He's no leader.