Andrew Sullivan: Obama "easily" most effective politician, "currently stupidly under-rated"

[UrbScotty]

Here are the political accomplishments: defeating the most heavily favored party machine in decades (the Clintons) while actually bringing his biggest rival into his cabinet, where she has performed extraordinarily well; helping to cement the GOP's broad identity as extremists opposed to compromise; entrenching black and Hispanic loyalty to his party; retaining solid favorables and not-too-shabby approval ratings during the worst recession since the 1930s. 44 percent of the country still (rightly) blame Bush for this mess, only 15 percent blame Obama.

On policy: ending the US torture regime; prevention of a second Great Depression; enacting universal healthcare; taking the first serious steps toward reining in healthcare costs; two new female Supreme Court Justices; ending the gay ban in the military; ending the Iraq war; justifying his Afghan Surge by killing bin Laden and now disentangling with face saved; firming up alliances with India, Indonesia and Japan as counter-weights to China; bailing out the banks and auto companies without massive losses (and surging GM profits); advancing (slowly) balanced debt reduction without drastic cuts during the recession; and financial re-regulation.

Yes, there have been failures. The election of Scott Brown; the 2010 mid-terms; the surrender to Netanyahu and AIPAC; the botched and ill-conceived war in Libya; the failure to embrace Bowles Simpson up-front; the collapse of cap and trade (maybe not such a bad thing anyway). But notice what hasn't happened. Where are all the scandals promised by Michelle Malkin? Where are his Katrinas and Monicas?

When I read commentaries expounding on the notion that this man is competely out of his depth, I just have to scratch my head. Given his inheritance, this has been the most substantive first term since Ronald Reagan's. And given Obama's long-game mentality, that is setting us up for a hell of a second one.

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/08/who-is-washingtons-most-effective-politician.html

[Vanje]

1. Andrew Sullivan is not a Democrat.

Andrew Sullivan is not a liberal.
Andrew Sullivan is a fiscally conservative libertarian who broke with his Republican brethren when he was outed as a gay, and they would not let him into their club any more.

Andrew Sullivan loved GW BUsh during his term too.

[Peregrine Took]

2. +100 n/t

[boxman15]

3. Can you argue with the record he presented?

I don't think he necessarily agrees with all of the things he did, based on his ideology, but Sullivan is much more of an independent-thinker than you give him credit for. He's certainly conservative, especially economically, but he's a rational thinker and argues his points based on facts. He was critical of Bush, as well.

Hell, I think Ronald Reagan was a successful politician. I disagree passionately with 98% of what he did, but he got things accomplished.

[trumad]

5. they cant

It goes against their narrative.

[FedUp_Queer]

25. Actually, given I'm a "they," I very much can.

1) gitmo still open, bagram expanding.

2) No public option (this was NOT universal health care). Back room deal with big pharma (and abandoning campaign promise to allow importation of Canadian drugs).

3) DADT is NOT repealed (and the military is pondering separate for us evil gay people who just can't keep our eyes off of those beefy, irresistible burly bootyful straight men).

4) More war in Afghanistan. Still in Iraq (and don't give me that tripe about "non-combat" troops being there).

5) Combat in Libya. Combat in Yemen. Combat in Somalia.

6) Domestic cuts exceeding military cuts.

7) Extended Bush tax cuts.

8) Position that government has complete immunity for warrantless wiretapping (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-than-bush)

9) Extraordinary rendition still going on.

10) Prosecuting more whistleblowers than in recent memory.

11) Indefinite detention.

12) Continued to detention even for people ACQUITTED at Gitmo.

13) Ever increasing military budgets.

14) Kowtowing to Wall Street (Geithner, Summers and Rubin; fundraiser on upper west side here in NYC for bankers at $33,800 a head).

15) Watered down "financial regulation" (with no Volcker Rule; too big to fail still in place).

16) Busted the unions at GM (even though did a "good" thing bailing them out...unions had to give pension and benefit concessions).

17) Just appointed Teabagger attorney as US Attorney for Utah.

The list does, in fact, go on.

[Jakes Progress]

38. They won't reply. They love lists that aren't factual.

It is all they have. Your list is truth in effect and verifiable, so they won't reply. They want to gloss over.

[boxman15]

45. I'll respond.

1. This is thanks to Congressional obstructionism and no senator willing to bring any of these inmates into their states. If I recall correctly, only 6 (or some low number like that) Democratic senators voted for closing the facility.

2. You can thank Blue Dogs and GOP obstructionism for a lack of a public option. The votes were not there. The bill is not perfect, and it wasn't handled perfectly, I won't pretend that it was. But, you can't tell me that the bill doesn't do a hell of a lot of good. You're kidding yourself if you can't admit that.

3. DADT repeal was certified by Obama and the Pentagon just recently, and will end in September. And little rumors, rumblings, and trial balloons don't refute anything. Give me a break.

4. One of his major campaign promises was to refocus on Afghanistan and send more troops there. That's exactly what he did. And, troops are still on schedule to leave Iraq by the end of 2011.

5, 9, 11. This is one area (foreign policy) in which I am disappointed with Obama, especially with regards to Yemen and Somalia. Libya is "better" in that it was a UN action done with NATO.

6. You can thank the Tea Party and the GOP for that. That's what happens when you sit out elections. The other side gets more of what they want.

7. In exchange for the Bush tax cuts, unemployment benefits were extended (the GOP was holding them hostage). Had he not struck that deal, unemployment benefits would've ended and taxes would've gone up for the bottom 98% as well in an extremely shaky economy. That's not fair and would do no good. I am upset tax cuts for the rich were extended, but if you think there was any other choice, you're kidding yourself. What a fucking joke.

8. Again, one of Obama's campaign promises, had you been paying attention, was that he wouldn't repeal the Patriot Act, but instead push for reforms including more transparency. These efforts have been slowed by Congress, but that shouldn't shock you at all.

10. Another area in which I disagree with Obama, but if I were in the administration, I would probably be with them.

12. I haven't heard that, sorry. IF true, group that with 5, 9, and 11 for me.

13.Again, one of Obama's campaign promises was to ratchet up the War in Afghanistan. That means more money, unfortunately, and it's ridiculously tough to cut the defense budget (which needs to be done).

14. Because they sure loved financial reform, especially that CPFB! Yup!

15. Again, thank Congress. Don't like it? Fill Congress with liberals. Or you can sit on your ass all day and whine.

16. That's hyperbole if I've ever seen it. My father works in the auto industry, and has many, many, many friends who work for GM (he works for Ford). They are ALL grateful for the steps the Obama administration took to insure that the auto industry survived. And trust me, the UAW is still a strong force here.

17. And that position would be sitting vacant otherwise.

And the lists of things Obama has done right far outweighs those he's done wrong, in my opinion. Check out those lists you despise for some reason and Politifact's record of Obama's campaign promises. He's gotten a hell of a lot done, and you are willfully ignoring these efforts if you think otherwise.

[creon]

70. excellent response

[cliffordu]

120. Excellent refutation of that sniveling shit above.

I hate posts that imply the Prez works in a vacuum, as king.

[Tumbulu]

147. excellent response- thanks for posting (nt)

[FedUp_Queer]

152. It's always somebody else's fault.

Here is all of it.


1) gitmo still open, bagram expanding.

2) No public option (this was NOT universal health care). Back room deal with big pharma (and abandoning campaign promise to allow importation of Canadian drugs).

3) DADT is NOT repealed (and the military is pondering separate for us evil gay people who just can't keep our eyes off of those beefy, irresistible burly bootyful straight men).

4) More war in Afghanistan. Still in Iraq (and don't give me that tripe about "non-combat" troops being there).

5) Combat in Libya. Combat in Yemen. Combat in Somalia.

6) Domestic cuts exceeding military cuts.

7) Extended Bush tax cuts.

8) Position that government has complete immunity for warrantless wiretapping (http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/04/obama-doj-worse-th... )

9) Extraordinary rendition still going on.

10) Prosecuting more whistleblowers than in recent memory.

11) Indefinite detention.

12) Continued to detention even for people ACQUITTED at Gitmo.

13) Ever increasing military budgets.

14) Kowtowing to Wall Street (Geithner, Summers and Rubin; fundraiser on upper west side here in NYC for bankers at $33,800 a head).

15) Watered down "financial regulation" (with no Volcker Rule; too big to fail still in place).

16) Busted the unions at GM (even though did a "good" thing bailing them out...unions had to give pension and benefit concessions).

17) Just appointed Teabagger attorney as US Attorney for Utah.

The list does, in fact, go on.

1. This is thanks to Congressional obstructionism and no senator willing to bring any of these inmates into their states. If I recall correctly, only 6 (or some low number like that) Democratic senators voted for closing the facility.
I see you didn't actually respond to the question. O(GOP)bama has done little or nothing to actually close Gitmo. He has done a lot to expand Bagram and to have the CIA and military use it the same way Bush used Gitmo...and make the same arguments Bush made about it being beyond the jurisdiction of America's courts.

2. You can thank Blue Dogs and GOP obstructionism for a lack of a public option. The votes were not there. The bill is not perfect, and it wasn't handled perfectly, I won't pretend that it was. But, you can't tell me that the bill doesn't do a hell of a lot of good. You're kidding yourself if you can't admit that.
Actually, I can thank for O(GOP)bama for never trying to get a public option. Again, you don't address the whole comment. I can also thank O(GOP)bama for making his backroom deal with Billy Tauzin and Big Pharma before he ever came to the table over "negotiating" health care.

3. DADT repeal was certified by Obama and the Pentagon just recently, and will end in September. And little rumors, rumblings, and trial balloons don't refute anything. Give me a break.
Actually, you have no idea what the heck you're talking about with DADT. They are, in fact, considering separate showers for us gays. This is not a "little rumor." The notion that they would even consider it is beyond disgusting. Thanks, O(GOP)bama.

4. One of his major campaign promises was to refocus on Afghanistan and send more troops there. That's exactly what he did. And, troops are still on schedule to leave Iraq by the end of 2011.
I don't quibble with O(GOP)bama for keeping a campaign promise about Afghanistan. The fact is that any "strategy" (whatever that is) is an abject failure. Further, the fact is that there will be more troops after his "draw down" at the end of 2012 than when he took office.

5, 9, 11. This is one area (foreign policy) in which I am disappointed with Obama, especially with regards to Yemen and Somalia. Libya is "better" in that it was a UN action done with NATO.
I like your comment of being "disappointed" with O(GOP)bama. Indeed, he went further than Bush ever did with the indefinite detention and assertion that they will continue to detain people who were even ACQUITTED in the tribunals. I have to also admonish his extreme cowardice in not trying KSM in a civilian court in lower Manhattan...where I happen to work. As far as the "need" to increase the defense budget to fight all these war, particularly Afghanistan, that's rubbish. The congress has been funding Afghanistan with "emergency supplementals" the same way Bush did...and for which candidate O(GOP)bama rightly criticized him.

6. You can thank the Tea Party and the GOP for that. That's what happens when you sit out elections. The other side gets more of what they want.
Actually, that has nothing to do with the Teabaggers. Remember, that O(GOP)bama actually proposed MORE THAN this in cuts. In fact, the lopsided cuts to domestic spending is thanks to Mr. "Progressive."

7. In exchange for the Bush tax cuts, unemployment benefits were extended (the GOP was holding them hostage). Had he not struck that deal, unemployment benefits would've ended and taxes would've gone up for the bottom 98% as well in an extremely shaky economy. That's not fair and would do no good. I am upset tax cuts for the rich were extended, but if you think there was any other choice, you're kidding yourself. What a fucking joke.
Wow, you got this one wrong again, too. O(GOP)bama got one year of unemployment benefits in exchange for TWO years of Bush tax cuts and nothing for the 99ers...way to negotiate there. The worst part is that he didn't have to except the Bush tax cuts at all. Another major strategic error on O(GOP)bama's part. I will love to see what you tell the folks needing unemployment at the end of this year what to do when their benefits run out.

8. Again, one of Obama's campaign promises, had you been paying attention, was that he wouldn't repeal the Patriot Act, but instead push for reforms including more transparency. These efforts have been slowed by Congress, but that shouldn't shock you at all.
This answer is patently laughable. Particularly since it has nothing to do with the Patriot Act or its repeal. As the lawsuit Jewel v. NSA states, the plaintiff's brought a lawsuit to sue the government for conducting wiretaps without warrants. The Bush administration moved to dismiss the case using the "state secrets' defense. After the change of administration, the court actually asked the justice department if, given the change in administrations, it still wanted to take that position. The court (and the Electronic Freedom Foundation) were shocked when the now O(GOP)bama justice department not only said it had no change in position, but actually went further and stated that the government now believed the government is completely immune from suit. In other words, our constitutional scholar president kind of indicated he didn't agree with that part of the first amendment that says the people have a right to seek redress of their government.

10. Another area in which I disagree with Obama, but if I were in the administration, I would probably be with them.
Another nonstarter. Candidate O(GOP)bama encouraged whistle blowers to come out of the shadows, only to be there waiting for them to prosecute them.

12. I haven't heard that, sorry. IF true, group that with 5, 9, and 11 for me.
Yes, that is just awful, right. Imagine that. Mr. Constitutional Scholar just wants to ignore our "courts" aka military tribunals

13.Again, one of Obama's campaign promises was to ratchet up the War in Afghanistan. That means more money, unfortunately, and it's ridiculously tough to cut the defense budget (which needs to be done).
It's only ridiculously tough when you don't actually want to do it. Seems it wasn't that tough to seek to huge cuts to the Community Development Block Grant and a 50% cut to the Community Services Block Grant http://www.governing.com/blogs/fedwatch/Obama-budget-creates-rift-with-mayors-once-a-core-constituency.html.

14. Because they sure loved financial reform, especially that CPFB! Yup!
Say what you want, but financial reform was a joke. The banksters hate any reform. However, the fact is that the reform that O(GOP)bama pushed through was weak at best. He didn't even propose or talk about reinstating Glass-Steagall (which Clinton signed to repeal). He kept in place too to fail. And there is no Volcker Rule. In addition, as I stated and to which you did not respond, these people that "hate him so much" seem to have no problem giving him enormous amounts of cash...as I said at that Upper West Side fundraiser to the tune of $33,800 a head. Then his appointing the exact people who were the very root of the problem...Geithner (who should in jail after his tenure as Chairman of the NY Fed, Lawrence Summers and Mr. De-Regulator and Repeal Glass-Steagall and former Citigroup Chairman himself Robert Rubin.

15. Again, thank Congress. Don't like it? Fill Congress with liberals. Or you can sit on your ass all day and whine.
It's always Congress. It's always Congress. O(GOP)bama was never out on the stump explaining anything about Glass-Steagall or reinstating the rules where banks couldn't operate across state lines (this, dear friend, is why before 1998 banks COULDN'T be "too big to fail."). As for electing liberals, I do my part thank you very much. I have Charlie Rangel, Kirsten Gilibrand as my congressman and senator...yes, Schumer is nothing but a Wall Street whore, but with $17 million in a campaign war chest unbeatable.

16. That's hyperbole if I've ever seen it. My father works in the auto industry, and has many, many, many friends who work for GM (he works for Ford). They are ALL grateful for the steps the Obama administration took to insure that the auto industry survived. And trust me, the UAW is still a strong force here.
As i said...it was good to save their jobs, but he decimated the Unions and their benefits and pensions in the process. Of course they are grateful to have jobs. Other they wouldn't have. However, what they gave up were the solid, high-wage Union jobs that they had. http://labornotes.org/2011/07/will-auto’s-three-tier-wages-be-table.

17. And that position would be sitting vacant otherwise.
Great response. Of course the teabagger was the only choice. Give me a break. There are plenty of sane candidate for the US Attorney for Utah.


All in all not a bad shot. Seriously lacking but not a bad shot. I do say I admire the O(GOP)bamacons breadth of cognitive dissonance and ability to look at what he's done and find any semblance of liberalism or progressivism left in there. Finally, there are some other things that are most egregious. Letting Bush, etc. get away with torture and committing crimes we put people to death at Nuremberg for was appalling. And, now, defending War Criminal Donald Rumsfeld in his current lawsuit where a former service member is suing him individually for torture, etc. in Iraq. Recently, the Court ruled that the service member COULD sue Rumsfeld in his individual capacity, but thank God O(GOP)bama's administration is right there defending ol' "We know where they are" Donnie. Mr. Progressive and Liberal strikes again.

[LiberalLovinLug]

162. Thankyou for that concise response

The original poster's main excuses for Obama's utter lack of fight for traditional Democratic values is BLAME SOMEONE ELSE. Either congress or liberal voters.

He had BOTH houses for his first two years.
Even now he has two out of three, if you include the executive branch. Of course the votes count, but how do those votes get made? Not only from pressure by corporate lobbyists, but also from pressure back home in their ridings. Obama had many many opportunities to use the bully pulpit to call out the Rethugs for what they are, myth-making opportunists who only look out for the top 3%. And we all know the power of his oratory skill, one that even defeated the Clintons. One example was his refusal to explain the benefits of ACTUAL universal healthcare, both financially in the long run, and the reality of real unburdening of health worries for the citizens he is supposed to be looking out for.

And the same can be said for most of the above mentioned issues. I think that what appalls most true Democrats is his total lack of effort for social justice issues, and values that place average people ahead of multinational corporations bottom lines or any discomfort for the elite class, and the Wall Street barons who hoodwinked billions from firstly homeowners, and secondly all taxpayers with "too big to fail" bailouts, without at least some penalties for those responsible, or any subsequent regulations with any teeth.

To those with a social conscience, fighting the incursion of the corporate, religious fundie, and military oligarchy dominance into our lives.....even if he lost that fight (due to RW MSM hammering, lack of donor funds, etc) ..., this would be better than losing out to the fascists anyways by capitulating to them at every opportunity, and excusing his way into failure (ie..It's all congress's fault!) or have others on message boards do it for him.

[uponit7771]

164. Bashers continutally ignore the impact of Republican congress....

[FedUp_Queer]

165. Bashers?

Since when, booby, is pointing out where he is wrong bashing? If you are interesting in being a tow-the-line right or wrong, partisan, be Republican. The issue, at least for me, is this. I've worked on Capitol Hill as a staff member. I'm well aware of how it works. I don't ask for 100% or even any percent, actually. My quibble with Obama is not ONLY the results, which I think are rather poor. My issue with Obama is that he doesn't even try. He didn't even try for a public option, for instance. If he had tried, if he had hit the pavement, if he had gone outside DC and held press conferences and pounded away the need for it and lost, fully putting the weight of the bully pulpit and lost or even compromised, I couldn't quibble with that. But he didn't. Then the rendition policy (which Congress has nothing to do with) or expanding Bagram and using it the same way Bush used Gitmo are Obama policies. The indefinite detention or continuing to hold acquitted detainees are Obama policies, that don't need Congress' consent. Again, absolute immunity from lawsuit that his justice department argued has nothing to do with Congress. The decision not prosecute Bush War Criminals had nothing to do with Congress. All this made me believe something. Either he was the biggest dupe or bad negotiator and the GOP kept outmaneuvering him or he actually believed that stuff. I had what I call an Occam's Razor moment. The simpler explanation, all things being equal, is true. For me, it's that he believes that stuff. The point is...even if he had a democratic congress, there are too many ways he's like Bush, in my opinion, that don't require congressional approval. Even with a democratic congress, he would still be for indefinite detention, extraordinary rendition, etc. Given those things, which are Obama, and Obama alone, I don't see how anyone can maintain he's anything but a conservative republican (small r)...because he's a "big D" Democrat, but that's the only reason he's not a big r republican.

[primavera]

159. Congress is a problem, alright, but consider this:

The House of Representatives has 435 members. The Tea Party Caucus has 53 members. These escaped mental patients constitute 12% of the House, yet are effectively running the show. How is this possible?

I think we need to look at this carefully because simply getting more Dems into Congress may not be the solution if what matters is not having a majority, but the way you're exercising power. We're playing by the traditional rule book; the Tea Party is not. And Congressional Repukes are learning from the Tea Party's incredible successes swiftly - we can expect more shock doctrine style, artificially induced, hostage-taking crises in the future.

The Tea Party fanatics are not interested in compromising or negotiating - their whole claim to fame is their rigid, uncompromising stance. Moreover, there is no middle ground on their policy agenda. We are witnessing a clash of two rival viewpoints on the role of government: either you think government is a bad thing that should be abolished, or you're sane and you understand that government plays an essential role. The two positions are antithetical to each other. There is no happy compromise; any ground gained by one side is ground lost by the other. I think we desperately need to learn that these are not people with whom one can negotiate or compromise. They must be marginalized and restored to their proper place as a radical fringe splinter group whose deranged demands are to be ignored. Congress right now is a street fight, a bar room brawl; it's not a salon debate. We need to start acting accordingly or we will continue to get the shit beaten out of us, no matter how many Dems there are in Congress.

[jaysunb]

166. +1 n/t

[MissDeeds]

47. +100

And you were being kind. Your list could have gone on and on.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

87. 18) Raiding medical marijuana dispensaries ...

In fact, stepping up enforcement.

[dflprincess]

111. 19) Cracking down on whistleblowers

Harder on them than Bush was.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

132. 20) Deported record number of undocumented workers.

Yeah, this guy's progressive. :eyes:

[TheWraith]

122. Unfortunately, your list is almost entirely false.

1. In case you missed it, he made that one of his first acts, then got hamstrung by Congress.

2. Again, blocked by Congress.

3. Yes, DADT is repealed. You might want to read the news once in awhile.

4. We're out of Iraq at year's end.

5. Saying that there are wars in X countries doesn't make it true.

6. Actually, the military cuts are equal to the domestic ones, and much larger if you include homeland security under the umbrella of defense.

9. Um, no. Again, saying something doesn't make it true.

13. In fact, he cut the military budget, and had even prior to the debt deal planned for $400 billion in defense cuts over the next 10 years.

16. You apparently don't know the definition of "union busting."

And on...

[Name removed]

153. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[bhikkhu]

14. The wording othe executive order should be stronger, to eliminate possible loophooles

That's what I get out of the write-up. The order was a good one, and probably had the desired effect, and hopefully ended the building culture of torture we had seen, but it could also be better.

[EFerrari]

63. And then he turned around and opened a black site in Somalia.

That must be one hell of a loophole.

[quakerboy]

48. I can, and most heartily.

"On policy: ending the US torture regime; prevention of a second Great Depression; enacting universal healthcare; taking the first serious steps toward reining in healthcare costs; two new female Supreme Court Justices; ending the gay ban in the military; ending the Iraq war; justifying his Afghan Surge by killing bin Laden and now disentangling with face saved; firming up alliances with India, Indonesia and Japan as counter-weights to China; bailing out the banks and auto companies without massive losses (and surging GM profits); advancing (slowly) balanced debt reduction without drastic cuts during the recession; and financial re-regulation."

Almost all fluff with no substance, in some cases outright and even evil lies. This is what a really bad liar would put on his resume if he were in President Obamas shoes.


Point by point:

Torture... addressed by others.

Prevention of second great depression... We are far from out of the woods. With the S&P downgrade, the end of stimulus, and massive cuts to social services looming, combined with the lack of ownership and manufacturing, we are looking right down the barrel of a newer bigger great depression, in my opinion.

Universal Health care: I don't have health care, and do not look likely to get it anytime soon. My sister loses her HC coverage this month, without any prospect of getting any again soon. and with the cuts that will now have to be negotiated, the little chance that low income persons had to get help are probably one of the first things on the chopping block.

The "cost reigning in" is all supposition, with no basis in reality at this point. People still pay more than last year.

two new female Supreme Court Justices... Granted, and good on him

ending the gay ban in the military... Granted. More to be done, but good on him.

Ending the Iraq War... That will be news to the family of Marine Staff Sgt. Leon H. Lucas Jr. who died serving in Iraq, August first 2011, "while conducting combat operations". I cant call enough bullshit on this. The others are irritating, but this is a flat self serving lie.

justifying his Afghan Surge by killing binladen.. Binladen was killed in Pakistan. What does that have to do with justifying Afghanistan?

and now disentangling with face saved... With whom?

firming up alliances with India, Indonesia and Japan... You mean sending more of our jobs there and letting more of them come take jobs here under H1B?

as counter-weights to China... Really? Cause they don't seem to have slowed down at all.

bailing out the banks... You mean giving away tax dollars that could have gone to help desperate home owners to rich bankers instead? That is now a good thing?

and auto companies without massive losses (and surging GM profits)... Granted, and good on him for that one.

advancing (slowly) balanced debt reduction without drastic cuts during the recession... Um... I guess our definitions of massive cuts are different. I see massive cuts in a time when influxes of new revenue were what was needed.

and financial re-regulation... Not seeing this happening yet. Only time will tell, but I am skeptical. Given the willingness to work with the major offenders to get them out of hot spots(IE saving the bad mortgage money) while giving the "mythical little guy" a false hope of help seems to be the play of the day.

[primavera]

124. +1 - n/t

[Fantastic Anarchist]

85. Ending torture? Universal health care?

How do we know he ended torture? Gitmo is still open!

And what is he talking about regarding universal health care? Did I miss something?

[bertman]

101. Maybe you can't argue with it IF you consider that he really WANTED to send us back to double-dip,

or IF you believe that he has no intention of ending the war in Afghanistan any time soon, or IF you believe that he really does want to protect the "job creating 2%" from having to pay their share of taxes, or IF you consider Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and other social programs to be in need of cutbacks. Yeah, he might be considered a SUCCESSFUL politician IF you think the conservative agenda is a good thing for him to pursue.

I am a liberal who does not consider advancing the conservative/right-wing/destroy-social-programs/militarize-the-world agenda to be something a Democratic politician should consider a "success".

[trumad]

4. stomp louder

[CakeGrrl]

7. So, let's confirm:

Republicans who say good, or at least fair and reality-based, things about Obama: Ignore them!

Ex-Republicans/Libertarians of the Professional Left (Hamsher, Aravosis, Uygur, Greenwald) with former or current associations with the GOP? Listen to every "Obama is the worst thing to happen to the Democratic Party because he's so weak and he hates you" thing they say!

Got it!

[housewolf]

9. Disagree

Andrew Sullivan left the Repubs because he couldn't abide GWB's war/torture/Patriot Act/etc policies. On social issues he's very liberal.

He may not be a registered Dem but he's a stronger supporter of Obama than many on this site and has been very consistent in that support. He's an independent thinker.

[Vanje]

10. Sullivan is not a DEmocrat

You can believe what you like.

[Pisces]

15. No he is not, but he is a sane Republican that voted for Obama. He has said that his party is

putting up insane candidates. He has publicly stated he was wrong about the Iraq war and GWB. Sounds reasonable to me.

[nsd]

19. Sullivan endorsed Obama, but he's not a citizen and can't vote. (nt)

[Pisces]

20. You are correct.

[Vanje]

62. I don't think Sullivan voted for Obama

Sullivan is not a citizen of this country.

[politicasista]

142. +1. He also supported

Senator Kerry and you are right. He criticzed GWB, the Iraq war and strongly supports Obama.


edit "voted" for "supported"

[elleng]

161. Yes

[housewolf]

51. I never said that he was

I said that he wasn't a Republican

There are more colors in the world than black and white, and there are more political leanings than Democrat and Republican.

[a la izquierda]

127. The poster above you just said that...

or can't you read? I am a socialist, but I can appreciate and respect people's opinions/arguments if they make legitimate sense, regardless of their past or present political affiliation (so no, I don't agree with 99% of Republican-speak). It's called having an open mind and being able to analyze arguments and discover facts or fictions. If you can't manage this that is YOUR problem. The Democratic party does not require lockstep group-think, regardless of the problem that engenders.

[tomp]

109. switching form repub to independent or even deomcrat....

....does not make one an independent thinker. the making of such a statement is a clear indication of shallow thinking.

the only proper and "reality-based" orientation to u.s. politics is to understand that both the republican and democratic parties serve the rich, and only the rich. the game is played by the democrats maintaining a facade of "liberalism," i.e., lots of pretty speeches and bones and crumbs here and there, which are tossed to the people whenever it gets too hot in the kitchen, and generally removed whenever and as soon as possible (see the obama presidency).

anyone hiding behind obama for liberal cred is by definition an asshole, in that he/she does not understand that obama is a totally transparent servant of the rich, except to the brainwashed, such as yourself.

[Number23]

13. Neither is Bernie Sanders. And yet we hear from him 673 times a day around here

Edit: I recognize you had more words in the body of your post, but since I didn't read them, this is in response to your subject heading.

[Kind of Blue]

17. +Infinity! Any good said about the

president makes some people's heads explode. The Derangement Syndrome is deep.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[Jakes Progress]

35. You agree with disagreeing with things you don't read?

That tells us a lot.

[Kind of Blue]

39. You really need to grow thicker hide

if that's all it takes. You make it way too easy.

[ClarkUSA]

55. Again, you're attacking Obama supporters on a forum that supports President Obama for re-election.

Perhaps you are at the wrong forum?

[Jakes Progress]

34. You don't agree with what you haven't read?

Typical.

[Kind of Blue]

37. And so are you. n/t

[Jakes Progress]

40. Ooooh. Cryptic.

Bet you think it makes you seem smart. Actually it only looks like you are responding without reading again. Kinda funny.

[Kind of Blue]

44. Ooooh. Crptic. Seriously though

Don't care what you think.

[Jakes Progress]

76. Then why reply?

I think you care a lot.

[Kind of Blue]

83. Don't really care enough to get

too involved with your strange question-answer response about something you've perceived I haven't read. With the rabid I tend to keep it short and sweet.

[Jakes Progress]

86. See. You do care.

Caring is good. Actually having something to say would be good too.

My original post dealt with your cheering the poster who said she didn't read a post but disagreed with it anyway. Do you think that is a good way to proceed? Wouldn't it be better to actually have some response prepared based on a reading of the text you are talking about?

[Kind of Blue]

98. I think you ought to re-read what

Number23 was responding to that I also fully read before agreeing. I still stand with 23's assessment. IMO, she didn't have to read any further than the subject line - the poster's opinion is very clear and nothing new added to the body of it.

I'll leave you to answer your other questions based on your misconception.

[Jakes Progress]

139. So you're a headline only kind of person.

S'okay. Skimming the surface and knee jerk reactions are one way to go through life. To each their own.

But if you are a headline only person, please check back at your own. See how full of information they are. See. If you really want to engage (which you must if you keep coming back to this sub-thread) you shouldn't be able to just argue opinion. The point to engaging in a discussion, in disagreeing with an opinion, is to understand the basis for that opinion and to try to argue the merits of that basis. It's hard to argue opinion otherwise. Then it would be like sausages. Sort of "I like knockwurst" and the response of "I hate knockwurst". Or cars. "I drive a Honda" vs. "All imports suck". See. Nothing really intellectual or productive there.

On the other hand. If you said "I drive a Honda because..." and I replied that "Your reasons given for driving a Honda don't hold up because . , ," Then you have a discussion. But if you just read a headline, decide you think you know what is being said, and pop off a "you suck" reply, you have exercised your knee but you haven't added to anything.

My point, not my misconception, was that N23 made a big deal of not reading the post. You cheered her opinion. If you only wanted to cheer one part of her post, then perhaps you should have said that. What I commented on was the endorsement of not reading a post to which one replies and being proud of it.

But shallow waters are nice too, I guess.

[Number23]

67. And I bet you think that you look like an "informed renegade" for repeatedly chasing after people

who's sole crime is disagreeing with you and supporting this President.

You've posted three times to Kind of Blue trying to chastise her when all she did was say that she agreed with my earlier comment. If you think this makes you look principled or knowledgeable instead of thin-skinned and kind of pathetic, you are woefully mistaken.

[Jakes Progress]

75. Check the numbers here.

The renegades are the people who post repeatedly in support of non-Democratic principles just because their fave says to.

The "crime" involved was the same as yours. You are proud to say that you disagree with a post that you admit you haven't read. Really?

Then you can explain how my post makes me look thin-skinned. I would think the thin skin belongs to the person who whines about being disagreed with and finds picky alert reasons so that they don't have anyone pointing out their silliness.

And I don't know what things "look like" to you, but, yes I am informed. I also post informed replies because I read the posts I reply to. You ought to try it.

Or you can just go with your knee-jerk method.

[Kind of Blue]

78. What a crime! LOLOL...

If that's all he/she's got, it really is pathetic besides being comedy now.

[Number23]

145. And what kills me is that

they'll be the first ones screaming that THEY are the ones being "bullied" around here. :eyes:

Btw, it's soo good to see you!! :hi: I hope that you and your family are well.

[Kind of Blue]

151. It's always good to see you!

:hug: And hope you and yours are well! Everyone here is hanging in there strong, making headway on the issue, and living fine :)

[OneGrassRoot]

90. Great point. :) n/t

[MNBrewer]

148. Bernie Sanders is relevant, being that he's a US Senator.

Andrew Sullivan is a trite "pundit".

[Number23]

158. That has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand

But I'm guessing (hoping?) that you already know that.

Someone made issue of the fact that Sullivan was not a Democrat and I responded. If the only people whose opinion carried any weight around here were Senators, we'd be hearing alot less from Paul Krugman, Glen Greenwald, Cenk, Jane Hamsher and even Dennis Kucinich for that matter.

[and-justice-for-all]

169. Yeah, he may be a Democratic Socialist, but Sanders is still on our side..

Sullivan, not so much.

[JI7]

29. Sullivan supported Kerry in 2004 so he started changing before Obama came along

[Tarheel_Dem]

42. Bernie Sanders, Ralph Nader & Glenn Greenwald aren't "Democrats" either. (nt)

:shrug:

[Fantastic Anarchist]

88. Yes, they're to the **left** of Democrats.

Crucial difference.

[Tarheel_Dem]

105. One's a Socialist, another is a Libertarian, and WTF knows what Nader is.

:shrug:

[Fantastic Anarchist]

107. Socialist and a **Left** Libertarian.

Nader, also, is still to the left of Obama in terms of corporate policy.

[Tarheel_Dem]

108. I'm not arguing with you. The post I responded to stated that Sullivan "is not a Democrat".

I merely pointed out that neither are those named in my original response. If we are constantly deluged with every fart & drip from those three around here, should Sullivan be excluded because he's of a different party? :shrug: Afterall, they all are. Greenwald & Dan Choi have recently pushed Gary Johnson(R) of NM as an alternative, but their crap still gets posted here incessantly.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

129. No worries. I was making my observations too.

I wasn't intending on being argumentative. I can see your point, but also, I think it's easier to swallow criticisms/support from the left, as opposed to the right.

[roguevalley]

56. he's a punk.

[PatrynXX]

65. So how does that factor into his comment?

Shall I discount Colin Powell? He's just proof that not all Republicans are insane.

[Ikonoklast]

102. Glenn Greenwald is not a Democrat.

He has professed wanting Republican Gary Johnson to run for president.

He is a Libertarian with absolutely no previous experience as a politician or a political commentator that only cares for his pet issues and how they affect him personally, and criticizes anyone that doesn't genuflect before his vast ego.

See how that works?

[Butch350]

140. So...you don't like andrew or obama...

so your saying his words here are not true.

[ElboRuum]

143. Not liberal != stupid.

Andrew Sullivan is one of the few conservatives who actually deserve the label and has an intellect worth engaging, even in disagreement. Only a fool would say "oh, he's not a liberal" and use that for an excuse for sticking one's fingers in one's ears.

On edit:

I'll even go as far as to say that if the makeup of the Republican party was more like Sullivan and much less like the Ryans and Boehners and McConnells we have now, we'd probably be debating on (and winning) the issues, rather than butting heads against the farcical Congressional asshattery we are experiencing now. Shit, we may even still have our AAA rating and be on the road to something looking like an economic recovery.

[pam4water]

156. +1

[flamingdem]

6. A generally smart Republican, I expect him to change parties shortly nt

[housewolf]

8. Thanks for posting

I enjoyed the read

[Cosmocat]

12. Sullivan is correct ...

I wanted BO to stand on the taxes in December, and was disappointed when he did not.

But, people are living in an absolute fantasy land on two different poles with him. The crackpot Rs who think he is a raging socialist, and the left who cant' abide the solid gains he has made working with either a weak kneed D congress or R house ...

Our peeps need to WFT up, and fast.

This putting bullets in BO only leads to a president Perry and complete control of congress by Rs ...

[Pisces]

16. Couldn't agree more.

[FedUp_Queer]

26. Exactly.

Criticism is bad. We must tow the line. He does nothing wrong. Just as the GOP placed the mantle of infallibility on Bush, we must do the same with Obama. Sorry, booby, but when O(GOP)bama starts acting like a liberal, he will get the support of real liberals. But, the fact is, he's not a liberal. He's a corporatist, pro-Wall Street, anti-union conservative...on the other hand, it's nice to see him supporting the protesters in Wisconsin with moral support and his bully pulpit. Oh wait...that was just a dream I had...no backbone or moral anything currently occupying the White House.

[Cosmocat]

69. When you have to create a false pretense ...

to argue against, your are weak in your position.

I noted, I was disappointed in him over taxes. He is not perfect.

But, he is INFINITELY better than you make him out to be.

And, given he is a GOOD democratic president, and given that it is either him or the republican candidate, the coattails of either, you can live in an idealistic dreamworld that leads to complete republican control of DC, or get behind our democratic president.

[FedUp_Queer]

154. WRONG.

I'm not getting behind anybody who is a conservative, corporatist, pro-wall street DINO. Sorry, booby, ain't happening. There's too much Bush there...and worse.

[Butch350]

141. May the current state of the economy won't let him be a Liberal.

[FedUp_Queer]

155. Huh?

The current state of the economy CALLS OUT for a liberal. In addition, being for extraordinary rendition, the expansion of Gitmo East (aka Bagram), for indefinite detention, continued incarceration of acquitted detainees and fellating wall street are always wrong...ALWAYS, and have no economic impact.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

89. He had 59 or 60 Senators and a Democratic House for a good portion of his first term.

Why still the center-right policies?

[Kind of Blue]

18. He's got that right. Can't recommend enough.

KnR!

[craigmatic]

21. If this were the 90's Obama would be seen as a better president having maybe done too much.

But due to the huge changes and struggles we currently find ourselves in, I don't think he's done enough and alot of people feel the same way. They don't feel like the things he's done have benefitted them personally.

[ClarkUSA]

22. Thanks for the facts. Andrew Sullivan is smarter than any PUMA, freeper or Koch Bros. astroturf.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

50. Why are you denigrating Obama supporters on a forum that supports President Obama for re-election?

[SharksBreath]

23. I guess Sullivan got the message. Look at the big picutre instead of the details.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

92. Yeah, "Don't get bogged down in the details."

Silly us. :(

[Vattel]

24. In the fantasy world of Andrew Sullivan

getting OBL justified the Afghan surge ("justifying his Afghan surge by killing bin Laden"). Ridiculous claims like that make me wonder whether this "independent thinker" can think.

[cpwm17]

110. He used the anthrax attack to call for nuking Iraq

He was a huge Iraq War supporter. He definitely implied that he wanted the US to go in with nukes. There is nothing Andrew Sullivan can do to make amends for that:


"We have to extend it to Iraq. It is by far the most likely source of this weapon (anthrax); it is clearly willing to use such weapons in the future; and no war against terrorism of this kind can be won without dealing decisively with the Iraqi threat. We no longer have any choice in the matter. Slowly, incrementally, a Rubicon has been crossed. The terrorists have launched a biological weapon against the United States. They have therefore made biological warfare thinkable and thus repeatable. We once had a doctrine that such a Rubicon would be answered with a nuclear response. We backed down on that threat in the Gulf War but Saddam didn't dare use biological weapons then. Someone has dared to use them now. Our response must be as grave as this new threat.”


http://www.antiwar.com/blog/2007/04/11/andrew-sullivan-still-lying-after-all-these-years/

[SemperEadem]

30. if Sullivan's measure of his successes

is the he didn't trip over his dicque while in office, then he may have a point.

However, in the totality of his time in office, I see him about a little less effective than Jimmy Carter--and Carter had the Camp David accords going for him.

Gitmo is still open.
Health care is really not much to brag about now that it's been watered down to weak kool aid.
He's basically turned his back on progressives and have become an Eisenhower republican.

I don't consider those to be successes.

[madrchsod]

32. delete

[madrchsod]

31. sullivan`s fantasy world..

when did we get universal health-care?

reigning in health-care costs? on universal healthcare?

alliances to counter china..oops sully must have missed this- BRIC http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BRIC

he can justify the effects of the Afghan surge by killing bin laden? so he could save face? now that`s an interesting concept.

did sullivan actually get paid to write this?

[Recursion]

46. We got universal health care when HCR tripled the funding of FQHCs (nt)

[seeker4ever]

53. You ARE kidding right?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

95. Did that cover everyone? You know, what "universal" means? n/t

Edit: Move quote

[Recursion]

116. Yes. Anyone can go to an FQHC

And pay on a sliding scale based on ability to pay.

[Better Believe It]

33. He is critical of Obama's "failure to embrace Bowles Simpson up-front" !!!!

So long as Obama tries to implement their "entitlement" cutting proposals everything will be just fine!

[madfloridian]

54. You took the words out of my mouth.

[hay rick]

91. One of his better failures.

Lord protect me from his "successes."

[placton]

36. yeah this guy is a political genius and a great ---

asshole

[Tarheel_Dem]

41. I can agree with that! Rec.

:kick:

[seeker4ever]

43. With Democrats like this...

[Safetykitten]

49. Krugman is an asshole, but now we are reduced to getting talking points from Sullivan?

So horribly sad and pathetic.

[ClarkUSA]

52. He happens to be right. "sad and pathetic" = those who attack Sullivan for praising Obama.

[HomerRamone]

57. Sullivan endorses the Catfood Commission! nt

[ClarkUSA]

59. DLC Bill Clinton sympathized with Paul Ryan at a right-wing conference over "do-nothing" Democrats!

St. Dennis of Syria thinks Bashir Assad is a beloved leader!

St Bernie endorsed Mitch McConnell's debt plan proposal!

I don't agree with any of them but somehow they all get a pass.

The only difference is Sullivan doesn't pretend to be a Democrat or a liberal. But he does admire this President honestly which is more than I can say for some of the 24/7 dishonest attacks I see lobbed at Pres. Obama on the thinnest of pretexts.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

96. Sad and pathetic that you believe a Republican's lies. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

113. Sad and pathetic = you don't know the facts. Sullivan isn't a Republican and he isn't lying.

Your bilious comments are suspect, though.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

130. Your ad hominem notwithstanding ...

... Sullivan is lying.

Where is this universal health care he's talking about? And that's just one point from many on his list.

[mitchtv]

128. Sullivan is a "good Gay"

leave Andrew alone!!!!

[Name removed]

58. Deleted message

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

[JimDandy]

61. Must be channeling Jekyll and Hyde n/t

[EFerrari]

64. I just read that we were only supposed to post right wing links

to expose their agenda, not to agree with them.

[ClarkUSA]

119. Andrew Sullivan supported both John Kerry and Barack Obama for President.

Which is more than I can say about some DUers and their sources.

[ooglymoogly]

60. As an R he is absolutely right.

Nobody has done more for the pugs than 0.

[Vinnie From Indy]

66. Sullivan is an amateur Thomas Freidman in regard to being wrong

about most everything. He LOVED Smirky when he was getting his war on. Fuck Andy Sullivan! He doen't know jack shit.

[Vattel]

72. "amateur Thomas Freidman" you nailed it

[JoeyT]

68. Given that assaults on civil liberties haven't been halted at all, and Obama supported the

Patriot Act, Sullivan is not only not a Democrat, he's a pretty shitty libertarian.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

97. Bingo was his name-o!!!!!

You nailed it.

:toast:

[creon]

71. I am not dissatisfied.

Obama is a realist.
he is not a "conservative"
He is not a "liberal".

Like most realists, he cannot be put into an ideological box.

Politics is the art of the possible.

Sullivan is basically right.

[paulkienitz]

73. I would never dispute that Obama is a winner at politics

I just wish working people had some inclusion on the winning team.

[trud]

74. what space-time continuum is Sullivan living in?

Ending torture? Ending the Iraq war? On what planet has this happened?

We're supposed to think he's a success because he doesn't have a bimbo in the closet?

[sulphurdunn]

77. Obama has accomplished much more.

Thanks to Obama the recession is over. People are going back to work. Universal health care exists for everyone. Spending on R&D and infrastructure repair are going apace. Tax subsidies have been expanded for green energy entrepreneurs. The poverty rate has declined. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are over. The Patriot Act surveillance state has been dismantled. The military budget has been slashed. Criminal banksters have been indicted for fraud. The Bushco gang is in jail for war crimes. Labor rights have been expanded. Public education has been removed from the tender mercies of hedge funds and tax-exempt billionaire foundations. Oil and gas exploration in the Arctic have been halted. Deep water drilling in the Gulf has been stopped. Citizens United v. FEC has been overturned. Shale fracking for natural gas has been suspended and the Bush tax cuts have expired. The Democratic party is no longer divided. Yep. the Prez has sure got a lot done. Hasn't he? And he's done it all with bi-partisan support!

[Fantastic Anarchist]

99. I hope that was sarcastic.

I'm being a little clueless this morning. I hope that was sarcastic, which I think it was. ;)

[sulphurdunn]

149. It most definitely was.

[_ed_]

79. "Enacting universal healthcare"

Where was I when Obama enacted universal healthcare?

[hay rick]

93. Obviously not in Sullivan's alternate reality.

[_ed_]

94. Seriously,

just the definition of the word "universal" just can't be used for a system that still leaves up to 40 million uninsured.

[eShirl]

103. no shit!

[_ed_]

80. "Ending the Iraq war"

Where was I when we ended the Iraq war?

[Fantastic Anarchist]

100. You were in the hospital receiving "universal health care."

They whisked you away to Gitmo, only to find that it wasn't there. They were going to torture you, but decided against it.

That's where you were when the "Iraq war ended."

Welcome back, my friend. :hi:

[_ed_]

104. You missed the part where I saw a news report saying

that we'd be prosecuting Bush war criminals, too.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

106. Oh yeah, you were at the trial. ;)

;)

[treestar]

112. Rovian - attack their strengths

The war is over - quit playing with words to pretend it's still on.

[_ed_]

121. These people might differ with your assertion that the war is over

http://icasualties.org/Iraq/index.aspx

[seeker4ever]

81. What could be bad about a Republican praising Obama...

It happens here all the time! LOL!

[ClarkUSA]

114. Sullivan isn't a Republican. Republicans praise Bill Clinton all the time.

"GOP Praises Clinton":
http://www.politico.com/politico44/perm/0311/clinton_vs_obama_46fede27-c8d5-4f81-9577-b48d36efa80d.html

The feeling is mutual, too:

"Bill Clinton praises the Republican Party":
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/957582/

[primavera]

126. And with good reason

Clinton passed some incredibly destructive rightwing laws that the GOP could never have gotten enacted without his help.

[_ed_]

82. "ending the gay ban in the military"

This was ended by a court order in advance of the plan Obama and Congress had to end it, so you can't credit him. It was the judiciary, not the executive or legislative branches that ended the ban.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

84. Enacting universal health care????

Did I miss something? Where is this "universal health care" he's talking about?

Oh, and of course Sullivan likes Obama. They're both Republicans.

[ClarkUSA]

115. Consumer Watchdog: "Obama Puts Public Option And Single Payer Back On The Table" (2/28/2011)

Obama Puts Public Option And Single Payer Back On The Table

At the National Governors Association, President Obama just threw his weight behind a bi-partisan effort in the US Senate to allow states to innovate with health reform, including adopting a public insurance system or single payer health care system by 2013 instead of 2017... The idea is to let states meet federal targets anyway they want to, rather than how the federal government prescribes, by 2013 rather than the current 2017 deadline.

This is one of Obama's only moves left, and a smart one. It gives progressive reformers in California and elsewhere the ability to move forward on ambitious reform plans that can pass at the ballot box in 24 states but would never get the time of day in Washington.

Facing strong legal challenges to the individual mandate, Obama did the right thing by offering flexibility to states to meet targets for access and benefits in the Affordable Care Act. He took a page from longtime labor leader Joe Hill: "Don't Mourn, Organize." He's giving those of us who favor a public insurance option to the private insurance market an opportunity to move our states forward. We better take Joe Hill's advice too and start organizing.

In my book The Progressive's Guide To Raising Hell, I point out how the initiative process in 24 states and the District of Columbia are the best hope to get the type of health insurance reform that Obama promised in 2008. Today's announcement, if Republicans in Congress bite, lets us act on ambitious reform via ballot measure before 2014, the date mandatory insurance is set to take effect. Game on.

Source 1: http://www.consumerwatchdog.org/blog/obama-puts-public-option-and-single-payer-back-table

Source 2: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/02/28/951074/-Obama-Puts-Public-Option-and-Single-Payer-Back-on-the-Table

Vermont is now single-payer: http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=VT+single+payer&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

[ooglymoogly]

123. Yup time to trot out the illusion of that tired old kabuki masque.

So everyone who was paying attention can remember what was really going down.

A broken record rarely makes a coherent or believable statement that would change the mind dealing in realities.

[Fantastic Anarchist]

131. Sullivan said he's "enacted universal health care."

Your link doesn't show me where this has been done.

It does describe a certain strategy where it could be enacted in 24 states. That's hardly universal for the whole nation.

[seeker4ever]

135. LOL! Now if THAT doesn't make him credible...

I don't know what would, LOL!

[seeker4ever]

136. Aw, C'mon! Facts is facts! LOL!

[Bluesbreaker]

117. Saying it don't make it so

Sullivan makes a lot of claims without providing any corroborating evidence they are true. He's a Republican, albeit a Log Cabin Republican, so I can see how Obama's views are in line with his. Some of his claims are patently false (bailing out banks without massive losses!). Sheesh

[noiretextatique]

125. +1000

sullivan is "in love" because obama is a black man who can speak intelligently. he pretty much said that when he gushing about endorsing him. with friends like sullivan...

[TBF]

118. Of course he's effective - but for whom? nt

[WoodyM90]

133. Obama will win reelection easily.

Not because of support from Democrats but because the PTB in the republican party will want him to. They have rolled him from the start of his administration. Beginning with the public option in the health care bill. They continue to roll him up and including offering Social Security and Medicare offered before it was even asked for. This was a violation of Democratic principles of any true Democrat.
They would have him to roll to get what they want and then blame him when it hits the fan.

[seeker4ever]

134. Wow Weeeee, So Many Recs! CLEARLY, Obama's a Winner!

[azmesa207]

137. Andrew Sullivan

say Obama has done so well in his term as president and cant understand the people who criticize him . He also say say his presidency is his unrated and is the most successful since Ronald Reagan . That may in fact be true because Obama has acted more like Reagan a republican than a democrat during his first term .That not what a good democratic president should do .

[amborin]

138. LOL! Andrew Sullivan! Big Conservative loves Obama?!

[russspeakeasy]

144. bullshit.

[Skittles]

157. a buttload of bullshit

[MNBrewer]

146. Sullivan is a 20/20 hindsight pundit

Too bad he can't be taken seriously on any current, contemporary issue.

[Fearless]

150. When supporting Obama they're his accomplishments... the defeats must be Congress's fault...

I love politics.

[politicasista]

167. delete. ni n/t

[elleng]

160. Smart

[AlbertCat]

163. On policy:

ending the US torture regime;

Has it ended?... Or just been reduced? Less blatant.

prevention of a second Great Depression;

This remains to be seen.

enacting universal healthcare;

Where? Where's the "universal" part?

two new female Supreme Court Justices

What does the fact they are female have to do with anything? Palin is female. Bachman is female.

ending the Iraq war

It's ENDED? We aren't fighting there anymore?

justifying his Afghan Surge by killing bin Laden

Who was comfortably in the biggest house around in PAKISTAN, not Afghanistan.

advancing (slowly) balanced debt reduction

By giving the GOP 95% of what it asks for (that's glacial, not just slow) with emphasis still not on revenue, but still on cuts



I'm sorry.... most of this list is questionable at best.

Moving forward.... in geological time. Things should be great by the next eon!

[seeker4ever]

168. 64 Recs for a Push Right Load of Shit. There IS Still Hope For Us Yet!

On a site that used to be so filled with "lesser-evil" "slide-to-the-right" mung the current trend look promising! What is that trend? That Progressive policy is a good thing and pushing Left is a good thing. That slow death by cowardice and denial are bad things.Yeah!~