And the hits just keep on coming

[MadHound]

With the appointment of William Daley, the left is once again being told to fuck off. This is another sign that Obama is simply a corporatist president, more concerned about Wall St. instead of Main St. With the architect of of NAFTA back in the White House, it is obvious that we're not going to get any kind of meaningful job creation out of this administration. In fact, it is more than likely that corporations will find it easier than ever to ship jobs overseas.

This is another disappointment, but not unexpected. Though Obama campaigned as a liberal, man out to protect and help the people, he has shown time and again that the ones he is out to protect and help are the corporate, rich and powerful.

Meanwhile, we on the left are not just being ignored, but are being routinely demonized, even though he wouldn't have gotten into office without the help of the left in this country. Daley's appointment is simply more of that, a continuation of the "hippy" punching that this administration engages in routinely.

Perhaps Obama simply doesn't care, after all, as he has indicated before, he has no qualms about being a one term president. Or perhaps he believes that liberals truly don't have any other place to go. Whatever the case may be, he is burning his bridges with the left in this country, and is thus looking increasingly like a one term president.

But then again, why should he care? With the millions he already has, not to mention his lifetime pension, healthcare and other perks a former president gets, he can insulate himself from the economic disaster his Wall St. staffers are creating. We are the ones who will being paying the price for his follies, for years to come.

Another sad day in a disappointing administration.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[patrice]

2. Perhaps you'll pardon my reservations toward anyone who uses the word "simply" nt

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fascisthunter]

4. He's a Corporatist and Used the Left to Get Elected

it's done...

[Bobbie Jo]

5. And the smears just keep on coming.

[walldude]

6. So you're saying that appointing a

board member of JP Morgan/Chase, Bank One and Boeing to a high government position is a good idea? That this person will stand up for the poor, the middle class and working people?

Awesome. And here I was thinking appointing a board member of a huge military contractor was a bad idea. What a fool I was.

[pacalo]

8. C'mon, walldude. That's ridiculous.

As Britney Spears once eloquently said, in between her gum smacking for emphasis, "Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that, you know, and be faithful in what happens."

:rofl:

[walldude]

9. Faithful.. yeah lotta that going around. Blind faith.

Scary as all hell.

[lonestarnot]

22. Yes it is!

[mod mom]

78. yes it is.

[treestar]

87. Why is it impossible for such a person to do that?

Grayson was a lawyer who worked with Robert Bork as a clerk.

Feingold was a lawyer in a private firm.

Dean's background:
"Howard's father worked at stock brokerage Dean Witter. The family was quite wealthy, Republican, and belonged to the exclusive Maidstone Golf Club in East Hampton. As a child he spent much of his time growing up in East Hampton; the family built a house on Hook Pond<6> there in the mid-1950s. There the boys– Howard, Charlie, Jim and Bill– "rode bikes, played with a model train set, built elaborate underground forts." While in New York, the family had a three-bedroom apartment on the Upper East Side part of Park Avenue, where Dean still sometimes stays.<5>"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Dean

I'm sick of this crap, you are prejudging people due to their career. But only those you want to pre-judge.

[WinkyDink]

96. Daley has a history as well as a career.

[bluestate10]

102. His history has been one of working for democratic causes.

Chicago is one of the world's great cities because of Bill Daley's positive influence on his brother and on the people of that city.

[WinkyDink]

145. Not according to the one thread about his advising Gore to capitulate, 2000.

[bluestate10]

101. Not only is the poster prejudging.

The poster also does not realize that the left can't get s*** unless moderates agree with them. President Obama is taking a reasoned tact for the country, good for him and good for the country.

To assume that Daley has not and can't work for everyday people because of his business background is closed minded pure raw arrogance, and displays a vast reservoir of ignorance and temerity on the poster's part..

[MadHound]

12. Tell me, what is the smear?

That Daley is another corporatist sell out? Look up NAFTA, look at his record.

That Obama is another corporatist sell out? Look up his record, look at the people he has surrounded himself with.

It's not a smear if it is the truth.

Sorry you can't handle the truth.

[SpartanDem]

13. Sellout?

Calling the president a sellout the same week the epa impose greenhouse gas regulations. The same week a law requiring insurance to spend more careand made drug cheaper for seniors doesn't giv you a lot of credibility

[tomp]

15. the same day california bc/bs seeking 59% rate hike? nt

[KansDem]

24. And this after a 39% rate hike last year...nt

[MadHound]

20. Well, given his faceplant cave on the tax cuts for the rich, the public option,

And other major promises he's failed to keep, I think it is entirely apt. Your opinion may differ, but the fact of the matter is that when push has come to shove on Obama's major campaign promises, he is much more likely to sell out that actually fight.

It's right there in his record. Deal with it.

[Bandit]

34. "law requiring insurance to spend more"...........or what?

:shrug: And you think these huge conglomerates are just going to follow along meekly? :crazy:

[Selatius]

37. So Daley being behind NAFTA is a smear and not a fact? nt

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[sabrina 1]

59. You call that 'debunking?

I actually agree with Daley there, that the WH completely miscalculated the public's reaction to their Windfall For Insurance Corps bill. I guess they thought we'd buy the propaganda about how forcing people to buy a shoddy product from corrupt Corporations was a good thing. Seems the American people were smarter than they thought they were.

[Richard Steele]

127. The PLAIN SIMPLE TRUTH, however unpleasant, is not a 'smear', Bobbie Jo. nm

[Nite Owl]

7. Another disappointment

another day. Not surprised anymore in the least. He's lost me and my family.

[russspeakeasy]

28. And me and mine.

[WillowTree]

10. A Chicago politician appoints a member of the Chicago political royal family.

Quelle shock!!

[somone]

11. It's going from disappointing to disgusting to despicable

[robcon]

14. Daley's a good guy, and will help the president win re-election.

I'm glad he's on board.

[Jakes Progress]

17. Yeah. As long as Obama gets re-elected we can excuse anything.

Who cares about wars, jobs, healthcare, privacy? All that is on the negotiating table as long as we get our Obama back?

The problem with this kind of thinking is that it is this kind of action that will cost us the next election. Playing to the beltway and using Washington conventional wisdom is not the way to win.

[pecwae]

18. That's all that matters

in the eyes of far too many.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

25. Yes We Can! excuse anything to get him re-elected!

We can excuse being sold on on healthcare reform, we can excuse him stopping Spain's inquiry into war crimes by the Bush criminals, we came excuse the ramping up of the "war on terror" and the the mercs, we can excuse the secret deals, we can excuse the slap on the wrist for the Wall Street criminals that almost sunk the country, we can excuse the use of Ray-gun's trickle-down economics when we have millions of people out of work with no jobs in sight, we can excuse the continuation of spying on Americans and the new policy of assassinating American citizens without trial, we can excuse torture and permanent detention, we can excuse a WHOLE LOT, becasue it's Obama, goddammit, and he's a Democrat.

So get with the program or shut the hell up!

[abelenkpe]

63. Don't forget

Citizen's United....it sickens me that no one has done anything to reverse that abhorrent ruling or to block it with legislation. Too busy hoping corporations will back them I guess.

[obxhead]

26. That kind of thinking

is putting party or politician before the people. Fascism is alive and well on both sides of the isle.

[FrancisTreptoe]

27. Well unless we get another candidate to replace him.

We should stick to obama, unless you would like the some dipshit GOP candidate taking office in 2013. I know things aren't ideal with Obama, but lets face it. We cannot afford to fuck around with the GOP in the white house at this point.

[abelenkpe]

67. That was the only reason I voted in the midterms

too keep the fools on the right out.

[Harry Monroe]

36. And don't forget about losing our souls in the process

The middle class and poor in this country are SO FUCKED!!

[MadHound]

21. Hmm, when will somebody in this administration start helping the people

Sorry, but given that Obama's attention has been more focused on corporate American rather than the real American, I have a hard time working up enthusiasm for another Wall St. bloodsucker in the administration, no matter whether he helps the president get reelected or not.

In fact the president's priorities in this appointment, getting reelected vs helping the people, is fucked up.

[abelenkpe]

65. Just bring back Dean if he's concerned about re-election. nt

[FraDon]

23. Don't forget the GREAT job Daley did managing Gore's 2000 campaign.

More millionaire foxes in the hen house. More chicken feasting for the wealthy; more forced fasting for the feeble.

Yet another sad footnote.

[Historic NY]

46. I guess people don't realize its hardball time.........with the 112th.

http://www.lyricsdomain.com/scroller.swf?id=29266&af=25&cf=0xFCD98B&speed=2&font=&size=10&color=0x555753&tc=0x555753&tha=100&btc=0xEC7331&bga=25&bgc=0xEC7331&ima=85&url=

[Major Hogwash]

52. Yup, they're already handing out orders to the boys downtown.

To get their act together. Obama is going to be re-elected, whether they like it or not.
He's got a major player on his team now, shape up or ship out.

I totally agree.
Obama is going to ignore the House, pander to the Senate just a little, and be on the campaign trail by June.
Before the other side even knows what hit them.
He's going to win in a landslide now.

Daley gets things done, he's not a molly coddler.

[AngryOldDem]

148. So we get four more years of the same.

Yeah. I can get behind that.

[inna]

16. quelle surprise.

the only thing that would surprise me at this point would be his appointing anyone even slightly progressive.

on the other hand, i'm curious about the real reason why Emanuel and Gibbs left.

[woo me with science]

19. I used to dream about bloodsucking monsters.

Now I dream about bloodsucking monsters with briefcases.

[WhaTHellsgoingonhere]

29. Obama is really doing all he can to get re-elected, like...

...pander to big business and the banksters, and being a "war president," you know, because war presidents get re-elected.

[leeroysphitz]

30. President Obama is what he is and we all know what he is. The question nowis...

When do we stop rushing out to post our outrage about each new bit of proof of what we all already know and when do we start doing something about him?

2012 is just around the corner.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[slay]

57. You're not alone.. many of us know

that it's going to have to get worse before it gets better. The debate among real progressives is - is it better to support the Dems who will tank the country slowly, or not and let the Repubs just tank it fast so we can finally say "SEE - THESE WAYS DO NOT WORK - WHAT MORE PROOF COULD YOU WANT?"

I was torn about it and voted for Obama in 2008. That will not happen again.

[Poboy]

94. This IS the choice now.

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gman]

39. Perhaps if the left made a difference in the last election

instead of whining and complaining, things might be different.

[Historic NY]

43. +10,000000

[Dawgs]

44. They did make a difference. They voted out the blue dogs.

Facts are important.

[AllTooEasy]

47. and opened the door for Republicans. Boehner would like to thank you!

Blue dogs are always better than Republicans, just as Speaker Pelosi is always better than Speak Boehner.

[Tesha]

136. No, Blue Dogs are *NOT* "always better than Republicans".

The Blue Dogs have destroyed the Democratic "brand".

A few decades ago, if you had asked the man on the street what
Democrats stood for that was different than what Republicans
stood for, they would probably have been able to tell you. But
nowadays, it's impossible because the Blue Dogs stand for
exactly the same things that mainstream (e.g., "Northeastern"
Republicans used to stand for. So given all of the things that
Blue Dogs support/oppose, it's no longer possible to describe
what Democrats as a whole support/oppose.

Sure, Blue Dogs aren't modern day completely-insane rabid
Republicans. But they are far from the mainstream of real
Democratic/democratic thought.

But in destroying our brand, Blue Dogs have done immeasurable,
long-term damage to our party. We should have taken the hit
of ejecting them years ago. Now, it's too late for our party.

Tesha

[rhett o rick]

152. Blue Dogs are worse than republicans. Blue Dogs pretend to be Democrats and then stab you in the

back. Bastards.

[ProSense]

48. "Facts are important."

"They did make a difference. They voted out the blue dogs."

The "voted out the blue dogs"? How?

Unless you're talking about voting Republican, the only options were not voting or writing in another candidate. The latter two options would lead to a Republican win so are you saying that they allowed Republicans to win? If so, how can someone blame Obama for losing the House if people intentionally "voted out the blue dogs"?

[Dawgs]

49. Voting third party is not allowing a Republican win.

Nice try though.

[ProSense]

51. Third-party voting caused the blue dogs to lose?

Really?

[rhett o rick]

72. What do you think of the CoC boy Daley? nm

[Kahuna]

54. It's not? Then why does the republican always win?

I need a scratches head smilie.

[treestar]

86. And replaced them with Republicans?

:rofl:

Very ineffective.

[readmoreoften]

53. Is this a joke? Obama used Cesar Chavez's iconography and phraseology to get elected.

Woodcut aesthetics? "Si se puede"? These are radical union and leftist historical elements. Much of the left thought that this was a form of "dog whistle politics"--Obama letting us know he was on our side. The left ELECTED Obama. The "New Moderate Dems" were too busy apologizing for voting for Bush in 2000 to do any of the heavy lifting.

[Cherchez la Femme]

60. That's a gigantic assumption you're making

that it was the left who didn't vote Democrats in,
and you know what they say about Assuming...


No, it couldn't have been Independants, could it? Y'know: those not beholden to any certain party?

Nahhh... I'm sure they voted straight Democratic across the board. It's those Lefties fault!!111!ONEONEONE :eyes:

Oh, yes, and it's the Left that whines, but your post is...notwhining???

And if you feel irate that I merely intimated you were whining -- it's OK for you to outright accuse others of doing so?


So anyhow, which is it? Is the left so small they're meaningless and virtualy powerless, or powerful enough they can turn elections? Ya can't have both, you understand, so it's got to be one, or the other.

Yet I have heard both, and from the very same people here. :shrug:

But I really wanna know which one it is.
Make up your minds; for Goddess' sake pick one and stick with it, not just whatever happens to fit whatever spin you wish to promote during whatever minute.


Eating your own, and this example coming from the very top.
This is beyond insane.

[Gman]

98. What the hell are you talking about??

You jump all over the place. I posted two lines and I have no clue what you're trying to reply so I'll just have to guess. It's real simple. The left provided the momentum for Obama to get elected. They could have done the same thing last year, but they sat on their hands and whined and complained and voted 3rd party, or cussed "corporatist" Democrats (whatever the hell that is) and they, just like they did in 2000 helped elect Republicans. Talk about too friggin' stupid to even be allowed to vote.

[Cherchez la Femme]

108. Who's wihining and cussing?

Who?

:eyes:

(Pssst: the answer rhymes with 'Who')

[WinkyDink]

97. "Whining and complaining"? Care to back up that slur?

[Gman]

99. Sure

Go back over the last two years of DU for an example. The Obama bashing started less than 48 hours hours after he was elected. Everyone was horrified when he selected Rahm for COS. It went downhill from there. Much whining and complaining and bitching and moaning.

[WinkyDink]

146. And how did that Rahm thing work out? One person's "whining" is another's cogent disagreement.

[bluestate10]

103. The "Left".

Would have defeated an extraordinarily effective democratic governor of my state had loyal democrats and independents not stepped up and overwhelmed them and republicans on election day. What I see from the left is a collection of people that only care about their provincial interests and none at all for the interests of 98% of other democrats. Their arrogance both insults me, enrages me and hurts me deeply as only a sibling can, all in the same instant.

[Tesha]

134. Your side loves to claim that the Left made no difference.

Frankly, Obama didn't win by that big a margin that
you can safely claim that we made no difference.
And for 2012, you're teeing-up a full-scale experiment
to prove just *HOW MUCH* of a difference the Left makes
because we're rapidly reaching the point where *NO ONE*
on the Left is going to vote for Obama in 2012.

Then we'll see how little we matter.

(Frankly, I'd have assumed some lessons would have been
learned from the great "shellacking" of 2010. But then, I
assumed wise folks would have learned something from
the Coakley Croaking earlier that year, and it's obvious
no one on your side took any lessons from that.)

Tesha

[bluestate10]

142. Let me see.

I can either not get a lollipop to suck on in 2012. Or I can put a gun to my head and blow my brains out. Which do I choose? Slap, slap. I am awake now, gotta stop dreaming like the Left.

The choice that you say the Left is set to make in 2012 is insane. The difference between incremental progress and being set back 20 years is enormous, IMO. Help elect a republican President and a Republican Congress, we will be fighting "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and Terry Schiavo all over again. I will use a gentler version of Rahm's statement that hurt your Lefty feelings so badly, "That plan is fucking insane".

[Tesha]

151. You seem to assume that we are making *ANY* sort of progress.

Wars? Both still going on.

Economy? Still headed downhill.

Constitutional rights? Fading faster than ever!

Healthcare reform? Vast giveaway to insurance companies accomplished!

Banking reform? Vast giveaway to financial institutions accomplished!

What the Left is telling you is that this country is still going to Hell.
It can be a long, slow trip with the current style of Democrats or a
roller-coaster ride with the Republicans. but the ultimate destination
is precisely the same place.

And we're no longer in favor of any route that ends in Hell so the
sooner the Democratic party shapes up, the sooner we have at
least a scant chance of avoiding Hades. 'Think the party will shape
up by 2012? They're not showing any signs of it and your rude
comments about the "lollipop" are just the latest proof.

Tesha

[dmallind]

40. You do not speak for "the left" or "liberals"

Neither do I of course but I am not writing as if I do. In poll after poll self-identified liberal Democrats have approved of Obama more than moderate or conservative Dems, usually at an 85%+ clip. I strongly predict this news will not change that. A small section of pure ideologues long ago decided Obama can do nothing right, and will seize on this news as confirmation bias. It will have zero effect on Obama's approval, popularity among Dems, or electoral chances as a per se criterion. If Daley significantly redirects policy that may shift these metrics either up or down but we have no clue yet if he will, and adding yet another whinging point for the agitators who gave up on Obama around McClurkin if not before will do bugger all except keep their impotent foot-stamping going. Face it the people who see this as a "corporatist" sellout (or even the peeople who use "corporatist" as an insult at all) are as fringey and as powerless as those who abandoned GWB as a RINO sellout because he hadn't outlawed homosexuality and abortion by 2002. The Constitution and the Green parties get about the same number of throwaway votes for a reason, no matter how dominant support for their policies are on the big right and left internet fora respectively.

[sulphurdunn]

56. We pure ideologue, leftie, liberal fringies

thought we had a certain understanding and expected a wee bit of quid pro quo from Mr. Obama for our support on minor policy matters such as ending some wars, restoring habeas corpus, support for global climate treaties and green technology, job creation, financial regulation, public option health care reform, closing Gitmo, ending torture and an investigation of the alleged criminal conduct of his predecessor to mention but a few minor issues he promised to address and has not. It is now abundantly clear that he has no intention of addressing any of them in any substantive way. So, unless Mr. Obama has a serious come to Jesus moment, you can count me in the "throw away vote column".

[jaxx]

58. That's President Obama, get it right.

You got Iraq ending, green job growth, job creation, financial regulation, health care reform, tried to close Gitmo, ended torture...it all can't be done in 2 years and in the next 2 years with the pubs in the house. But none of it was good enough, it was constant carping from the fringes. You counted yourself in the throw away vote column. Damn shame, you coulda done better by sticking with the President.

[walldude]

69. Iraq Ending? 7 Dead soldiers in Iraq in December. Bet they

didn't think it was "over" Job Growth and creation? You're kidding right? Heath Care Reform? Oh Yeah now we're ranked 49th in the world 2 whole steps above Kuwait. Party time! Ended torture? Umm.. ok sure if you say so. Replaced it with CIA death squads too. Wow a 2 for 1.

Financial Regulation? Yeah, right. That's why a banker is now WHCOS instead of a goddamn accountant. It's a good plan really, put someone in who has been rich and powerful all their lives. I'm sure they'll have a good understanding of what the average American goes through trying to survive this rigged game. :eyes:

[sulphurdunn]

91. Get this right.

It could all have been done in 2 years and should have been. It is unlikely to be done in 2 more years or 4 more years. If Mr. Obama was an employee of mine I'd can his ass, but he isn't. He works for Goldman Sachs, and gets political cover from apologists like you.

[jaxx]

100. What an absurd comment.

I take it you don't like the President?

[sulphurdunn]

113. Syntax and denotation

Absurd: ridiculously unreasonable, unsound, or incongruous.

Apologist: one who speaks or writes in defense of someone or something

So what part's absurd? It is certainly not unreasonable to conclude that Mr. Obama does the bidding of Wall Street. It is a fact that I'd fire his ass if he worked for me, and there is no doubt that you are an apologist for him.

When you deem to launch a dismissive, snarky little quip like "what an absurd comment" you should at least be certain that the comment you wish to demean is rather more absurd than your own.

[Cherchez la Femme]

66. As for me, I'd rather be a pure ideologue,

leftie, liberal fringie than a pragmatic woodchuck.

But that's just me :)

[bluestate10]

143. Democrats and Independents will give you your"come to Jesus" moment.

We did it in Massachusetts when the Left tried to pull shit and defeat an effective democratic governor/Lt. governor team, and we will do it again with an effective President Obama. Go ahead, marginalize yourself more by throwing away your vote. This time, you will NOT be allowed to pull a Florida 2000 on the country.

[bluestate10]

104. Well said!!!! nt.

[guruoo]

41. Time for a fact check....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=126577&mesg_id=127175

[AtomicKitten]

92. facts?

Facts get in the way of a hyperbolic rant, doncha know?

[bluestate10]

105. Facts mean nothing to some on DU.

To them President Obama is a sellout, regardless of how much difficult and meaningful progress President Obama has made. They would rather get crushed in a Presidential election, ala Michael Dukasis and live under years of regressive republican rule yet have their "purity". Sort of like ramming a sharp metal spear through one's brains instead of putting a bullet through it, just as well, one surely is just as dead all the same.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Kahuna]

50. What helps the country helps the left too, no? Also, it is just wrong

to say that the president hasn't helped Main Street. Main St. was helped by the Stimulus. It saved jobs that kept consumers spending. It also helped the unemployed which kept consumers spending. The more consumers there are to spend, the more jobs that are saved. This is just plain logic. The banks hold the wealth of our nation so they had to be saved. The corporations hold the jobs so they also need incentives.

All of these policies help the country as a whole, and the last time I looked the left is included. Seems they just want a little more than everybody else. And spare me a diatribe about how the left elected the President because that also is not true. The left alone couldn't get a dog catcher elected. The outcome of elections always depends on how independents vote. And also spare me a diatribe of how the "left" did the groundwork for him. Certainly many on the left DID work to get him elected, but they were not the only ones. Are you telling me that all those first time voters voted because they're hard core lefties??? I doubt that. But if you believe it, I'd like to see some proof.

[bluestate10]

106. Hear! Hear! nt.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[BOG PERSON]

61. obama would have gotten elected with or without the left n/t

[Cherchez la Femme]

70. Well OK! Now we're getting somewheres!

So the Left isn't needed? Who woulda figured that big old tent done shrunk, but it sure did!

But it's good to know.
Make sure, when you see people whining about how the Left didn't vote Democrat and that cost elections, that you educate them as to their mistaken assumption that the Left has any power, or say, in the Democratic Party. :hi:

[bluestate10]

107. I am pissed at the Left.

But the Left is part of the democratic equation. The Left brings ideas to the table and gets some of them implemented. Now, only if the Left would accept their role. As a moderate, I won't get everything that I want, but as a moderate, I don't expect to get everything that I want.

[Cherchez la Femme]

110. That's reasonable.

So... what has the left gotten from this administration? Not *everything*, but name some things.
OTher than a virtual kick in the teeth.
What were some things the Left got that they should be happy about?

[bluestate10]

115. Femme.

1) The Health Care reform that did happen. What existed before? Single payer was not going to happen, but as health care reform that did get passed proves the wisdom of reform, single payer will likely be one of the future goals that a nation will embrace.

2) Financial reform. Why do one think republicans want to kill what did get enacted? What existed before?

3) Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". How long has the Left wanted that done? In addition, military service leaders are implementing the policy change fast under push from Obama. Would a President suitable to the Left even have gotten repeal?

4) Saving GM and Chrysler. Some on the Left would call this corporalist servitude, but the working class people of those two companies, Ford and working class employees of all of the three company's suppliers that are still getting paychecks and benefits would likely beg to differ. Do you care to explain why this outcome was not a good one for the Left?

5) Employment pay equality for women in the workplace encoded in law, with penalties for violations. How long has the Left been fighting for that?

[Cherchez la Femme]

118. Did you write that with a straight face?

Surely you know that NONE of those are important Liberal causes. Not unless I missed a secret meeting of "the professional Left" where they decided to devalue --drop the bar down to the ground-- their long-standing principles just so one single person, a certain president (the hell with the population numbering in the millions, f'ing selfish whiners!) could be lauded.
Corporate giveaways, far from on the behalf of the people, and milquetoast "finance reform" that does absolutely NOTHING to ensure that this world-wide economic meltdown will not happen again. The President has bent over backwards for Wall Street, and they still hate him.
And always will.
As for bailouts, whether of automobile companies or of banks or whatever...
those were Liberal causes? O rly?

If you don't know that what you listed was severely, and rightly so, criticized by the Left
then I guess I should ask how long were you in that coma & how do you feel now?

There is a caveat As for women: We're in the third millenium, women have had the vote for not even a century and we're supposed to be overjoyed, in awe that equal pay is finally "encoded"? :eyes:
We see exactly how you --the general 'you'-- think of us and our rights, oh yes we do. It's beyond me why we're expected to fall on our knees in recognition of something that should never have had to be 'encoded', something that in any moral way, in any civilization should have occurred naturally and without question. It reminds me of my brother --an Ivy League educated engineer-- who needs to be congratulated and praised the very few times he conquers that difficult and intricate piece of machinery called a toilet paper dispenser.
Did you know that in Chinese society there are (at least) two ways to thank a person? There is a small token tap, just barely acknowledging the person doing what they should do, whether by job description, custom, morals or fairness -- that it is improper to really Thank anyone for simply doing what's normally expected of them.
Then of course there's the proper Thanks for a person going out of their way to do something kind which they need not have done.

(You want thanks for a Liberal Triumph? ERA
although that should be a given, too)


& Those sentiments go for any homo sapiens who have been denied their civil rights whether by skin tone, gender, sexual preference, religion, & on and on...

Fine, I'll give you a token tap -- just as this 'encoding' was token.
But it is no great Liberal triumph,
and I know you know better.


We don't have to get our way ALL the time, but what about some?
How about one?
Give me one --just one-- truly meaningful, truly and utterly Liberal piece of legislation from this administration, no corporate giveaways, no back-room deals,

a sop, if you will, to "the Left".


And no, being called 'drug addicts' or 'fucking retarded',
or if one is gay, that they are "pedophiles" and 'indulge in incest', or that it just would cost too damn much money if given the same rights as y'know, 'normal' people
--those aren't compliments in this universe. Perhaps in one of those other dimensions, other parallel universes in which this marvelous chess game I've heard so much about is played

but no, not in this one.


And you may want to sit down and think really think about how you would react, how you would feel
--if your prior work, down to your fundamental principles, your raison d'etre, were not only being dismantled but publicly mocked and trivialized ...and for what? What possible good does that do?
--if any of this was the status quo, fuck fairness; deal with it (and besides you're lucky to get what you got so why aren't you satisfied?),
--or, regarding the slurs, directed exactly at you

and by someone who's supposed to be on your side no less, some who you believed was being truthful with you, and whom you worked to elect.
Then you won't be surprised at the response from "the Left".
At all.

[Name removed]

129. Deleted message

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

[abelenkpe]

62. during an economic crisis

frequently compared to the depression where thousands of people are losing work and their homes, watching their standard of living fall, it is a strategic mistake to be seen aligning yourself with the same people that many believe are either partially responsible for the economic downturn or with those seen as benefiting from the economic downturn. That is why is pisses people off on both the right and the left to see Obama's pick of white house chief of staff, economic advisor's, treasury secretary, etc. Even if one can justify those moves one still needs to recognize it is a bad PR move. The Obama administration risks looking more like the Hoover's administration than FDR's. And anyone who doesn't recognize this and thinks it is OK to ignore the growing disappointment and dissatisfaction is a fool. The administration needs to combat that in a very real and tangible way or risk losing the next election.

Fighting about it and alienating other liberals isn't going to help either.

[bobburgster]

64. Another 4 years....

that is all he's looking for.

[johan helge]

68. I don't mind Obama being challenged in the primaries, but liberals should vote for Obama in the GE

I would like to see Obama challenged in the primaries before the 2012 election - but not supporting Obama against the Repub is crazy. It's Nader in Florida 2000 all over again.
As Paul Krugman said before the 2010 election (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/30/opinion/30krugman.html): "Just to be clear, progressives would be foolish to sit out this election: Mr. Obama may not be the politician of their dreams, but his enemies are definitely the stuff of their nightmares."

[blindpig]

71. The election of Obama proves that voting changes nothing. n/t

[Ikonoklast]

73. Only in Democratic Socialist Republics.

Like the ones you admire.

[blindpig]

77. Misdirect much?

Stay on topic.

In truth Cuba is more democratic than this country. But you just stick with the lies we have been told sine childhood if that makes you feel better.

[Ikonoklast]

79. Pointing out truth.

Yeah, Cuba, the land of the free.

Please stop, even you don't believe that.

[blindpig]

83. Actually, I do.

And let me just fry your brain a little more, communists are more democratic than either of the major parties.

[bluestate10]

116. Absurd!!! nt.

[bluestate10]

109. Genius, absolute genius.

To select Cuba as the shining example posed against our democracy. I would rather be in a near democracy and have food on the table than live in one where visiting relatives have to cart in life basics. But, Cuba does have one advantage, I would like to get my hands on and re-furbish one of the 57 chevy's that are the most modern mode of private transportation on the island. Might be able to get my hands on a few in-use buggy whips in the bargain.

[johan helge]

74. Health care reform will save many lives.

Imagine if Gore had won in 2000 - there would have been no Iraq war.

Liberals have to understand a simple thing: It can always get worse.

[blindpig]

80. And leave many more with inadequate overpriced health care.

Gore = no war, you gotta be kidding, he may not have been such a strutting dickwad but the results would have been more or less the same.

[johan helge]

85. This isn't difficult.

The whole idea of universal health care is that everyone pays, so that the minority that needs care - but everyone in that minority - gets care and gets it without being ruined. This isn't difficult.

I repeat: Gore would have avoided the Iraq war. This is not difficult.

[blindpig]

88. Now that is some exceptional sophistry.

When massive numbers cannot afford to pay it ain't universal.

As per Gore, wishful thinking, if this Democratic administration is any indication. As though one man could stop the Great game, even if he were willing, which I doubt.

[johan helge]

89. I don't know

to what extent health care reform will give universal care. But it's probably the closest Obama could get, given the Congress. And - it's the closest the US has ever been. And - it would never have happened, with the Repubs in charge. It's that simple.

As far as I remember, Gore was against the Iraq war from the start. How do you know President Gore would have started the war? And anyway, he would have done more than Bush on climate change (it's difficult to do less), etc.

There's always a difference. And: Dem election victories will move both parties leftwards, as Repub victories have moved both parties rightwards.

Gotta go. Happy new year!

[blindpig]

90. "Dem election victories will move both parties leftwards.."

You are clearly not paying attention.

[johan helge]

119. You think about the Tea Party etc.?

Yes, that's not according to what I say, you are right. I don't know why the Repubs have reacted to Obama by becoming, if possible, even more crazy and shameless. So there are exceptions to the thing I said. But Obama is just one Dem victory. More Dem victories will sooner or later force the Repubs leftwards, so that they can win again. Just like Reagan and Bush sr. forced Clinton rightwards, so that the Dems could win again. That's the general pattern.

[blindpig]

128. Politics

The Republicans can't be seen agreeing with him, can't run to the left of him, no choice but to run batshit crazy right. They have painted themselves into a corner but this does have the effect of pushing the entire conversation to the right.

[johan helge]

138. Yes,

perhaps you're right.

[bluestate10]

117. Gore would have likely avoided 9/11.

and the Afghani war that resulted from that tragic day. But the Ralph Nader elected G W Bush did not avoid 9/11 because his ass-hat people chose to ignore intelligence that signaled that an attack on the US mainland was imminent. The Left red faced-ly claim that the US Supreme Court elected Bush, but ignore that votes by Greens put the right-wing dominated USSC in position to intervene.

[johan helge]

120. Thanks,

I'm so sick of all the Nader apologists!

[Union Scribe]

124. So you are, essentially, blaming the left for 9/11

Gotcha.

[bluestate10]

130. Yes. Purely a Greens delivery of agony, devastation and national angst.

With their boy Ralph Nader out front leading the charge. Any other questions for me?

[MadHound]

140. Yeah, I have a couple of questions for you.

First one, do you even know what the fuck you're talking about? Let me clue you in to a few things.

First of all, while campaigning in Florida, Gore was in favor of more offshore drilling off the coasts of Florida. This pissed off so many people in Florida that 400,000 liberals, and 200,000 registered Democrats switch their vote to Bush out of protest. So that takes care of the meme that Nader's two percent is what swung the election.

But it gets better.

Early on in the recount process, the Gore campaign (including the wonderful aforementioned Mr. Daley) was handed the means with which to not just win the election, but to banish the Bush family to the political wilderness forever. This was in the form of Florida's votescrubbing scandal. Journalist Greg Palast gave the Gore campaign all his research, all the details, including the names of 50,000 African Americans who had their right to vote negated (and more names were coming in all the time, it eventually totaled over 200,000 people who were disenfranchised).

Now think of this, you have been handed the means and method to not just win the election, but to banish one of the worst political families to the political wilderness forever. What would you do? Yeah, me too, I would have put this out there for all to see.

But for some strange reason, on the advice of people like Daley, Gore and his campaign held on to this information, and this cost him the election. It has also cost hundreds of thousands of people their right to vote, as the now successful Votescam tactic went national in the following elections.

So really now, do you honestly think that this is all on Nader? If so, then you refuse to recognize what really happened, and are simply looking for a scapegoat that allows you to beat up on the left.

[bluestate10]

144. Creative rationalization.

But absurd none the less. Florida is known as a swing state for a reason, votes of many democrats and republicans are up for grabs, been that way for a while. But Florida 2000 was known for weeks to be coming down to a hundred of thousands of vote, if not hundreds.

Your observation about the 400,000 liberals and 200,000 republicans is rather self serving to the argument you hope to present. So Gore was weak on offshore drilling on the Florida coast, so they vote for an oilman that would surely drill there. Brilliant piece of reasoning on your part, I had in mind another description, but deferred.

Granted, if African American voters were prevented from voting, the Gore campaign should have prevented that obstruction from happening. But as it was, those African Americans did not vote, assuming I believe your "facts" (given the 600,000 oil whopper above, I am somewhat reticent about believing). 3500 Greens that wasted their votes on Nader DID vote and knew that the margin in Florida was razor thin coming into election day, but wasted their votes anyway and given the final margin, elected Bush. Bush went on to allow 9/11, invade two countries, hit the nation with all types of right-wing social experimentation, appoint two obstructionist Supreme Court Justices, and rack up 8 trillion in national debt. The Left did not do the things that Bush did, but they surely enabled him to do them.

[MadHound]

147. Talk about rationalizing

Your casual dismissal of both historical reality and disenfranchisement, all to make your point that it was the "evil Greens" is laughable on the face of it.

You don't believe me, so I guess you don't believe Dem's internal polling, which is where I found the issue of how Gore's stance on offshore drilling effected the voters.

I guess you don't believe the journalist Greg Palast, who is recognized world wide. He wrote about this in his book "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" available through your local bookstore or at Amazon.

So will you believe Al From when he states that Nader's campaign actually helped the Gore campaign? Probably not, since you seem to want to only selectively believe facts that fit into your biased little world view. But here goes anyway.

"The assertion that Nader's marginal vote hurt Gore is not borne out by polling data. When exit pollers asked voters how they would have voted in a two-way race, Bush actually won by a point. That was better than he did with Nader in the race."

<http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=127&subid=179&contentid=2919>

Did you get that? The head of the DLC is saying that Nader's presence in the race actually helped Gore. But I suppose you will discount that as some sort of conspiracy or such, even though From, as head of the DLC, had every reason to blame Nader.

I will await your irrational, but nevertheless entertaining, explanation of that.

[Union Scribe]

153. That raises many questions, yes.

But they're mostly variations on: are you fucking stupid?

[bluestate10]

111. But Liberals don't understand.

When rightwing Presidents are in office and throwing s*** all over, I see liberals out protesting in the streets and wonder what the f*** is wrong with them. Many of the protesters likely wasted their vote voting for a no hoper, or just sat on their ass on election day.

[johan helge]

121. Exactly

I think they feel more progressive by not voting for the Dem candidate. But what they do, of course, is make the Repubs smile. To beat the right, the left needs to support the same candidate. And that means voting for a candidate most of us disagree with to some extent. The candidate often in his heart disagrees with himself too. Both Dem and Repub candidates, I think, portray themselves as closer to the center than they really are (see Conservatism, Compassionate or Bush, G. W.).

[bluestate10]

131. At least we can influence a democrat, to an extent, even blue dog democrats.

We can't influence republicans. Protesting in the street leads to arrests and legal expenses, but does not accomplish a f****** thing. I will take President Obama, or any democrat, any day over a republican.

[johan helge]

139. Yes, I agree

Health care reform would not have happened without the blue dogs. That's how progress is made, by making an alliance against the worst people.

[MissDeeds]

75. K&R

Agree completely.

[katty]

76. Daley and others...Obama is installing his own live ATM machines

for the top floor-only.

[DemocraticPilgrim]

81. We either vote for our future or we don't bottom line. We join the partty not complain it's gone way

wayward.

[treestar]

82. Did you even have someone you wanted for this job?

Did you tell President Obama who to appoint?

If he didn't know you wanted a particular person in that job, how was he to know?

[bluestate10]

112. The Left would prefer.

A extreme liberal that would run around proposing policy that had no prayer of getting enacted, even to a 5% level. But the Left would be happy with such an appointment, because they would be standing on purified ground. Oh my!!!!

[treestar]

133. And then would probably start accusing that person of not having balls or

something, when nothing did indeed get done.

[JoePhilly]

84. More hyperventilating.

Obama hates the left! Obama hates the left! Obama hates the left!!

I love the "it is obvious that we're not going to get any kind of meaningful job creation out of this administration" ... except we already have.

Appointing Daley is "hippy punching" ... bwahahahahaha!!!!

And as for his "bruning bridges with the left".

Humm ... 50% overall approval ... very high approval from Dems and Liberals. Just not on the current DU or Huffpost.

[bluestate10]

132. The Left hyperventilates, then does.

NOTHING. I like the post that one member made where she pointed out that the Left could not elect a dog catcher without independents going along. Add to that moderate-progressive and moderate democrats.

[JoePhilly]

141. Yup.

[Name removed]

93. Deleted message

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

[WinkyDink]

95. Wall St = $$/donations. Main St =.............

[rucky]

114. Daley is the Lieberman of Cuomos. n/t

[BzaDem]

122. Perhaps Obama realizes that he has the highest approval among Democrats in 50 years, and that there

will always be a tiny minority who will never be satisfied no matter what? In both parties, with every president?

It's amazing how many people here think they represent the left (or even a non-negligable portion of the left).

[Name removed]

123. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[meow mix]

125. recommended

he's a good actor

[affrayer]

126. I have to agree but...

Another sad day in a disappointing administration.

So far the record is clear, it's far better to have a stinking pile of disappointment like Obama then a pant load of failure like Bush Jr and the republicans.

[hayseed]

137. The Ford vs. Chevy

two party thing is such a bore. By now it should be obvious that these politicians are corrupt monsters be they democrats or republicans. Our state and local elected officials should have been on guard and warning the people but they are corrupt or incompetent. It would good to see some threads on how we can fix our country instead of dopey cheer leading for ruinous felons.

[affrayer]

149. Take a close look at what you said:

two party thing is such a bore. By now it should be obvious that these politicians are corrupt monsters be they democrats or republicans.

Does it matter if we have two parties or two hundred parties? The corruption occurs because we don't fight against it so no matter what form of government we choose or how many parties, if we turn out backs on human behavior, there is going to be corruption.

And if you don't think this is the case we just had the most corrupt administration in our history under Bush Jr and not one person was taken to task for that corruption...

It would good to see some threads on how we can fix our country instead of dopey cheer leading for ruinous felons.

Fix? That's easy. Put all the republicans on boats and send them back to the countries they came from...

[Name removed]

150. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

135. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.