Wow... Just WOW...

[WillyT]

For most of the president's tenure, he, his staffers and his devoted-but-dwindling army of sycophants have insisted that the political fallout from the crushing recession reflects unrealistic expectations of Obama in the wake of George W. Bush's destructive reign. It is, dare I say, an audacious claim, especially coming from a candidate who asked us all to have the "audacity of hope" -- and it's more than a little insulting. After all, much of the complaints about the president have been about campaign promises that he didn't just fail to fulfill -- but that he refused to even try to fulfill.

Indeed, when a political candidate promises to try to pass a public option to compete with private insurers, attempt to crack down on Wall Street abuse, do what he can to stop unfair trade deals, oppose extending his predecessors tax cuts and avoid initiating initiate costly new wars sans congressional approval, and then once in office works to kill a public option, refuses to prosecute Wall Street crimes, presses the rigged trade deals he opposed, supports the extension of his predecessor's tax cuts and starts a new war in Libya with no congressional authorization -- whose fault is it that he ends up in reelection trouble?

I'd say the answer is obvious -- I'd say that if such a politician wasn't in reelection trouble, it would be a sign that our democracy is in a deeper crisis than it already is.

But, then, merely citing this record brings accusations of treason, at least from Democratic staffers, pundits and activists in Washington. In an age of politics that has melded politicians with celebrity and activism with starfucking, to be a rank-and-file progressive and honestly examine a candidate's record during a reelection campaign is to risk being portrayed as a dangerous, seditious, ideologically zealous revolutionary.

From Sirota's piece: http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/07/07/obama_social_security_cuts/index.html

:wow:

[Blecht]

1. Sirota nailed it

Nailed it!

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[Curmudgeoness]

3. Did this guy get his idea for this from reading DU? nt

[elleng]

87. Prolly

:(

[MrScorpio]

4. In my almost fifty years, I've NEVER seen this kind of reaction...

To unfulfilled campaign promises from ANY other politician.

It's pretty freaking eerie.

[rhett o rick]

8. It's just like "Damn Yankees". Obama made a deal w the devil to get elected. nm

[CoffeeCat]

16. Not only were promises unfulfilled...

...Obama did the opposite in many cases.

The health-insurance companies wrote the healthcare bill and now their profits
are up 26 percent--with costs still through the roof and the profit-centric model
still in place.

Obama widened the neocon wars. Now we're in freakin' Libya, still in Afghanistan
and still in Iraq--when he campaigned on being against Iraq from the beginning--leading
us all to believe that he was against (as he phrased it) "stupid wars".

He said he would reinstate Habeas Corpus. He had the chance and he upheld the horrendous
Bush policies.

He was Wall Street's best friend after leading us to believe that he would fiercely
advocate for reform. Nothing has changed. In fact, it's worse.

He said he would close Guantanamo.

He campaigned as someone who would do something about climate change and environmental
issues--while BP avoided accountability after polluting the Gulf during an unprecedented
oil disaster.

He made speech after speech to union audiences, advocating unions while taking their
campaign donations. He stood by practically opinionless as the unions have been
under assault, in situations like Wisconsin.

In his campaign literature, "Blueprint for America" he promised to be a proponent for teachers
and he criticized No Child Left Behind. NCLB is even more entrenched in our schools now, as
teachers are vilified and demonized, and Obama allows the march toward privatization to continue.

I've seen NO attempt at restoring jobs, as FDR did. A few gestures here and there
that have not helped--as unemployment is rising. He's the President and he has the
power to (and it is expected!!) that he will draft solutions and work hard to sell
them to the American public. I see no solutions. I see no effort to stand up and
fight for the American worker or for job creation.

I canvassed door to door for Obama. I read his "Blueprint for America" and echoed
the talking points to many people--face to face and on the phone. I don't see how
in the world I could do that again. His "CHANGE" campaign meant something to the
American people--that things would be different and better than they had been under
Bush. It didn't happen.

I just don't even know what to say about his candidacy or the pathetic direction of our country.

[AngryOldDem]

63. Excellent post.

Obama has done an about-face on almost everything he talked about so eloquently in 2008. In most cases it seems he has either ignored what he said, or hasn't even fought for the "hope and change" on which he built his campaign -- a concept that so many of us (quixotically or not) saw as salvation after eight years of George Bush and an even longer legacy of unfair policies dating back to (at least) Ronald Reagan. Now "hope and change" seems so much like a bad punchline to an even worse joke.

God knows I'm no economic or political braintrust, but I do know that what has happened over the past couple years was not what I voted for. For that matter, this man is not who I voted for, either. Obama shows that really there is no two-party system anymore: It's a corporatist cabal intent on permanently marginalizing (if not extinguishing) those who have so foolishly bought into the notion that things could be better -- the very people whom the Democratic Party has championed since its founding.

I sincerely hope that there is a primary challenger next year, although right now I can't think who that might be. If not, then right now I don't know what I'm going to do, not that my vote makes any difference anymore. That's the lesson I've learned from supporting Barack Obama.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

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

[Courtesy Flush]

241. +1

I can forgive a president for failing to fulfill promises... especially in the uber-partisan environment that makes it impossible to do so, but I can't forgive him for abandoning the ideals altogether. He doesn't seem to WANT to keep his promises.

[lumberjack_jeff]

91. +1000

[immoderate]

136. He NEVER does anything that will reverse wealth disparity.

--imm

[dotymed]

256. And unless Obama is

primaried or something else happens, we will not even have a candidate who acknowledges that America has the largest wealth disparity in the world.

[emilyg]

142. Good post.

[defendandprotect]

145. Great point ... Obama has not only not fulfilled promises -- but done the very OPPOSITE -- !!

[Myrina]

163. Well said.

Thank you.

[leveymg]

217. He has turned Hope to cynicism, Change to preserve the Status Quo at all costs

He is almost exactly the opposite of what many Democrats voted for. And I also wonder if that outcome wasn't intended from the beginning.

I don't see how he can be reelected if the GOP don't run a total raving lunatic against him.

[KoKo]

272. Cynicism and Apathy. People are feeling bad about themselves because

he's made it seem that somehow we were all complicit in what Wall Street Banksters did in their greed for themselves, along with those politicians who broke down the Regulations put in place during the Great Depression.

His speeches and addresses lately seem scornful of people.. He says we must "all share the pain." That's not a good thing for a President to run on to get re-elected.

[leveymg]

273. No, "Share the Pain" is probably not the best campaign slogan Obama can use in '12

But, at this point, it seems to be the most authentic.

From (2008):

To (2012):

[JDPriestly]

276. In my opinion, the only way we can be sure that the rich share

some of our pain is if the country goes into default.

The rest of us have already lost jobs, homes, educational opportunities, so much.

The plan to revamp the COLA system to cut the benefits for Social Security and to cut Medicare and Medicaied costs are forms of default on the most vulnerable and poorest Americans.

Why not just default on everyone and get it over with? That would be shared sacrifice. Anything less is not shared sacrifice.

[leveymg]

280. Default and losses in the bonds markets are about the only pain that this Admin. will not share out

That is the very raison d'etat for the Wall Street bailouts and Job #1 for Obama, Geithner, and Bernanke. Jobs, homes, etc. must be sacrificed to keep pumping public funds into Wall Street. That is what this Government does.

[JDPriestly]

283. Tea-Baggers and DUers agree that the Wall Street bailouts

should never have been made.

[leveymg]

284. We agree about the problem, but as to solutions - different, parallel universes.

We are here:



They are there:

[JDPriestly]

285. Funny that you would post the circles of Dante's inferno.

I was trying to figure out the other day into which of them Alan Simpson might go one of these days.

It's off topic, but what's your guess?

As for the Tea-Baggers, I concede your point!

[leveymg]

289. There's a 10th Circle for likeable old codgers who want a rerun of the 12th Century

Reagan and the Ayatollah Khomeini are in there. It may be like the Bohemian Grove, but without the single-malts and silly skits.



On edit: Where do you think Edwards might end up?

[JDPriestly]

297. No idea where Edwards might end up. I don't follow his current

story right now. I read on Huffington Post that they traced him to his rendez-vous with his mistress by his cell phone.

I was pretty shocked to know the extent to which they had gone to follow him. Seems to me that should have been illegal unless the police had a warrant. And I think it was private parties, news media following him. I'm not sure.

Anyway, I am very disappointed in his lack of judgment, and he was dishonest with his wife. But somehow Obama's dishonesty with the country and his voters disgusts me even more.

[leveymg]

306. Yes, even John still has some privacy rights. And, yes, there are breached of trust and then there

are crimes - and crimes are the business of us all. Yet, the rich and the powerful are so rarely ever brought to justice, particularly for the greatest crimes, the crimes of state that murder millions, such as the aggressive invasion, war, and ongoing occupation of Iraq.

This is when regular people start to bring justice to the world, themselves, when no one else will.

[JDPriestly]

314. Thanks. Agreed.

[Creideiki]

309. The rich won't share in the pain then

They'll benefit.

Defaulting even for a couple weeks will drive interest up. Since they're the ones collecting on Treasury bonds, the short default will only benefit them.

Meanwhile, it starts a period of inflation for everyone else.

The only solution is to implement the 14th Amendment.

[KoKo]

288. Your post says a lot! n/t

[chervilant]

287. Share the pain?!?!

As my late mother would have said, Obama can KISS my go-to-hell!

[mochajava666]

221. Well said

[Plucketeer]

230. Thanks!

for saving me the keystrokes. ;)

[customerserviceguy]

248. You said it simply and eloquently

and spoke for me. Thanks.

[KoKo]

271. +1

[JDPriestly]

275. I am with you, CoffeeCat.

How in the world can I go to the Farmer's Market or walk door-to-door in the neighborhoods in which I assured people that Obama would stand up to Wall Street -- that finally we had someone on our side?

I just cannot stand up for Obama. He has not stood up for ordinary Americans.

Obama can lie. He can select his crowds. He is protected from the disappointment of ordinary Americans by his political aides.

But when we go out and campaign, when we call people, when we hand out campaign literature, we can't lie. We are talking to our neighbors, to the people whose mortgages are under water and the government and banks have just stolen all the payments they made and not offered a hand to keep people in their homes. Not really.

And now Obama is about to cut Social Security benefits. He sold out to the insurance companies on health care. He is just a corporate tool.

The problem is that we have had enough of corporate tools after Reagan, Bush I, Clinton and Bush II. We are not receiving our share and we can't even get jobs.

Obama has failed. He needs to go back to Chicago and let a liberal lead the party.

[woo me with science]

286. Stellar post. nt

[bhikkhu]

22. Most of those promises were made when the economy was in decent shape

...early in the campaign, when Greenspan was called, simply, "Maestro", for guiding his self-regulated markets paradigm through every danger for so long. There was no expectation during most of the primaries that anything was really wrong, or that there would be any new challenges to meet, so one could plan and promise based on a "business as usual" model, without much worry over surprises.

Then just before the big election the global credit markets screeched to a halt, the biggest employers in the world teetered toward bankruptcy, banks and insurers threatened to crumple like Enron, and the world economy went into free-fall.

Promises and plans are good, but sometimes reality intervenes in even the best of plans.

[Jackpine Radical]

28. Oh, bullshit.

Anybody who couldn't figure out by early 2007 that the economy was about to do a reprise of the Titanic had their heads up their asses, or were conservative "free market" economists--but I repeat myself.

[aquart]

40. Precisely.

[bhikkhu]

61. "On balance, it is not likely that the United States will experience a recession in 2008"

"On balance, it is not likely that the United States will experience a recession in 2008. Most economic forecasters expect growth to continue in the 2.5 percent range. Employment and personal income have remained strong through October and November of 2007, so consumption spending should continue, buoying the economy. The weak U.S. dollar makes American exports more competitive, thereby fueling economic growth and employment. Even if the economy dips in 2008, its slowdown may not last the requisite “several months” to be designated a recession by the NBER."

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/december-12-07/the-great-recession-of-2008?du

....

And - anyone remember this? - http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/17/news/newsmakers/greenspan_sales/index.htm

[liberation]

67. Wow, reduced to quote the American Enterprise Institute to try to prove a feeble point?

Dems using the mouthpiece of the AEI, one of the most reactionary and pro-republican lobby groups, as a valid and factual historical reference. Is that what it was meant by "change we could believe in?"

LOL

[bhikkhu]

75. That was linked to a little down-thread, about what was being said at the time

I don't actually know what the American Enterprise Institute is -and don't care much, it sounds like your normal opinion-by-committee crap - but it does demonstrate how all the bad news and potential problems of the time were minimized and explained away before they had any chance of affecting policy.

The feeble point is just that Obama began his campaign, his plans and hopes and promises, when the global economy was in decent shape, and when its was generally assumed that the economists had things well in hand. Then things changed.

[liberation]

78. "I don't actually know what the American Enterprise Institute is"

LOL. Then why are you quoting them? It is the same as if I were to claim that Obama was a Kenyan Muslim Socialist, and use a quote from an online republican group to prove. Hey, it was said on the internet, so it must be true, right?

Dear lord, indeed you guys are grasping at straws.



"it sounds like your normal opinion-by-committee crap"

Oh noes! you using the online PR publication of a right wing lobbying group is so much more "mavericky" and stuff. You totally showed us! Sad...

[bhikkhu]

95. Who they are has nothing to do with the point made

the link was posted by someone in a response to my post downthread - my apologies for repeating it, I seriously don't know or care who they are. The article and the quote are more or less just standard regurgitated economic-talk, regardless of what else they have to say.

My only point - and this is one that most people don't seem to get at all - is that Obama's campaign was announced in February of 2007. There were no significant economic problems here until March of '08, when Bear-Stearns failed, and even then it was another 4 months before things really hit the fan.

The point then is that Obama campaigned, planned, hoped, and promised, for over a year before the global economy went into serious declined. That he had to adapt and respond to the crisis he inherited is obvious; that his feet are held to the fire for having planned for better is generally ignorance buying into RW spin.

[liberation]

105. The validity of the source you are trying to use as reference to make your point matters a lot

If your source of reference has zero credibility, or a specific bias, guess what? Your point also has little credibility and similar bias. That a is fairly basic concept honestly. I am actually surprised you would write something like that without grasping what you're implying.


You can't seriously claim with a straight face that most people in 2008 thought the economy was fine, when one of the major defining issues of the 08 election was the state of the economy. You are trying to rewrite history, and you have to use republican narrative to do so, fine so be it. That seems to be the point you are making, congratulations I guess.

Why don't you source actual metrics, rather than recourse to right wing narrative?

?&chart_type=line&graph_id=0&category_id=&recession_bars=On&width=630&height=378&bgcolor=%23B3CDE7&graph_bgcolor=%23FFFFFF&txtcolor=%23000000&preserve_ratio=true&id=UMCSENT,&transformation=lin,&scale=Left,&range=Max,&cosd=1934-01-01,&coed=2009-08-01,&line_color=%230000FF,&link_values=,&mark_type=NONE,&line_style=Solid,&vintage_date=2009-09-15,&revision_date=2009-09-15,&mma=0,&nd=,&ost=,&oet=,

[bhikkhu]

121. The collapse began in July, well before the election

Up to that point, and I can't think of where I might find any metric on it, most people would have probably said the economy was "decent". That's the word I would use, at least, and in retrospect it was that, more or less - there were 8 million more jobs, and so forth.

As far as metrics, here are the "hard numbers" on GDP growth and consumer spending, from 1929 to 2008, which underly most of the economic assumptions:

http://allfinancialmatters.com/2010/04/15/the-history-of-the-gdp-and-consumer-spending/

The growth rate and sums represent are about as "official" and officially expected as you can get; pretty much all government projections use the numbers here as a basis. So if you were running for president in 2008 you'd have to have a team working out a baseline budget based on this (and much more detailed information as well), and then from there seeing what you might be able to accomplish toward specific programs. Economists expected 2009 to be a repeat of 2008, +3% or so.

My whole point, again, is that Obama announced his candidacy in February of 2007; it was a year and a half before the economy collapsed. At some point you could see it coming, or say that it was months or a year or two away, but Obama campaigned for a full year under decent economic conditions. By the time he was sworn in things were a complete wreck.

A campaign run for a year of decent economic conditions will have a set of plans and hopes corresponding to what can be accomplished when economic conditions are decent. When, instead, a completely wrecked economy is what must be managed, plans and hopes have to change accordingly.

Its a simple point.

[ejpoeta]

218. people didn't really know about what was going on until lehman brothers happened.

the economy might have been tanking already, but that doesn't mean people were paying attention. people don't generally notice those things. like when the tsunami happened and people stood on the beach wondering what was going on because they had never seen it before. and i am referring to people like me who don't know much about that stuff. and the media doing their job of course to calm the masses if there are any questions or people starting to worry about anything post stuff like what the poster showed.... everything is ok nothing to worry about... the one with the questionable provenance. it's easy to say in hindsight certain things, but the fact is that at the time people didn't know what was going on really (until lehman brothers) and the media was in overdrive to make it seem like everything was just hunky dory. (and part of this is a response to that other poster sorry)

[eilen]

244. It was in July 2008 that Phil Gramm said we were a nation of whiners

McCain was already talking about the economy and facing a recession and at that point it was pretty much understood that we were facing a recession, foreclosures had started and the layoffs were in full throttle. Then McCain said: "I believe that the person here in Michigan who just lost his job isn't suffering from a 'mental recession,'" McCain said, citing Gramm's remarks published in the Washington Times. "I believe that the mother here in Michigan, around the country trying to get enough money to educate her children isn’t 'whining.'"

America, McCain made sure to note, "is in great difficulty."

He then said he was not considering Gramm for Treasury secretary.

At that point there was 1 million homes in foreclosure.

However, under the official definition of recession, we were not in one but headed there very quickly-- even before hints that the banking industry was blowing up.

[ThomThom]

128. well that only address part of the economic things that were

said in the campaign. What about what he should about the economy after it tanked? There were many other things mentioned in the op-ed piece like war, Guantanamo, jobs and others that this discussion of his economic positions leaves out. To take a small part and try to tear down the whole will not work and makes all the people trying to defend this administration look foolish.

[Chan790]

129. It has everything to do with the point being made...

but to know that would require you to know who AEI was...which might require you to not be talking out your fanny.

AEI is a far-RW think tank, literally the mouthpiece of mainstream conservatism. You might as well be quoting Newt Gingrich or John Cornyn or Mitch McConnell. Further, their role would not have been to publicize the upcoming crisis but to lay smoke screen and camouflage in order to keep the rest of America from seeing it and to try to forestall it long enough to insure it occurred on a Democrat's watch without warning.

[EclipseIDE]

183. lol

keep drinking the kool aid

[JDPriestly]

279. I have often told the story about how my neighbor, a psychologist and I

(no economist) were shocked when one of the smaller houses on our humble street in east side Los Angeles (a lower income area of the city although not the lowest) was selling for an asking and probable getting price of $700,000. We stood there, looked at each other and said, "Wages have not gone up. Where are people going to get the money to pay that price for that house?" It sold soon after. Anybody intelligent who was watching what was going on on Main Street in America could see that the economy was in trouble.

The problem in our country is that the D.C. folks spend too much time with rich lobbyists and Wall Streeters and the rest of the top 10% in America.

It's the income disparity that is dividing the country. There are no two ways about it.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

81. " don't actually know what the American Enterprise Institute is -and don't care much"

That's YOUR problem. We'll file your opinion accordingly.:eyes:

[Hawkowl]

198. Just another front by the Koch brothers

You are just reinforcing Obama is bought and paid for.

[JDPriestly]

281. Obama has been bought and paid for. He has proved that many, many times.

So there, I said it proud and clear. Obama has been bought and paid for. If he doesn't agree to cuts to Social Security and Medicare (which was already cut in the health care bill), I will consider voting for him. But I cannot go out there and campaign for him because I would have to lie to my neighbors about how I feel about Obama. I can't do that. I've been wrong in the past about politics, but I have always told the truth. I'm certainly not going to go out and lie about what a wonderful job Obama is doing.

[JDPriestly]

278. The American Enterprise Institute is an extreme right-wing

free-market-faith-based propaganda organ. It just grinds out extreme right-wing propaganda day after day after day.

Their reports are untrustworthy, bogus, not worth the paper they are written on.

Sorry, but when you see or hear "American Enterprise Institute," just shut your eyes and close your ears. Do a little meditation or prayer whatever you want to call it and ask for wisdom. Ask to find a better source, something more knowledgeable and more honest.

You just can't trust the American Enterprise Institute. They do not know what they are talking about -- a bunch of paid shills.

[gtar100]

195. Just a cabal of "economists" led by their interests rather than facts.

Of course a conservative group would say such things.

[Doctor_J]

237. AEI put out this propaganda to try to get McPalin elected

is doesn't belong here.

[defendandprotect]

147. +1

[dixiegrrrrl]

54. Whoot!!!!!

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

[bhikkhu]

58. Well, I was expecting hyperinflation myself (and was completely wrong)

but you don't expect anyone to campaign on that, and the hindsight of a few contrarians on the internet (counting myself as one) is a hardly a consensus.

Nevertheless there was a steady confidence from Wall Street, and predictions of long-term stability from most economists. As before other disasters, they really thought that they has figured out the global economy at last, and that their models were fool-proof. Industry, media, governments, etc, tended to agree.

[Rosa Menti]

139. This is Democratic Underground.

You must have mistaken it for FreeRepublic. maybe you should go there and see how much weight your words carry...maybe someone there will care.

[bhikkhu]

141. Pffffft.

As my daughter would say.

[Dept of Beer]

177. This is Democratic Underground...

This is where Democrats and Progressives get together to talk issues. Throw yer hollow barbs elsewhere.

[Bluebear]

310. Buh bye.

[defendandprotect]

149. Rather, economists told Obama that the stimulus he was asking for was only 20% of what

was needed -- and then Obama settled for less --

but you're saying that the people who created the meltdown were "confident" ???

And since when do our "experts" have a clue what they are doing -- ?

From the MIC to nuclear reactor industry?

[bhikkhu]

188. Obama got much less than he asked for

I don't remember all the details, but the whole "infrastructure investment" we still here recommended was a part of the early '08 stimulus package designed to create jobs, which didn't make it through congress. What did make it through didn't work so well, as it generally eliminated spending toward job creation and small business initiatives.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/recession/3662063/Barack-Obama-unveils-1-trillion-economic-stimulus-package.html

- talks about the initial conditions and hopes, in January 2008.

[defendandprotect]

254. Obama asked for only 20% of what was needed -- and then settled for even less ....

and leaving the economy in FED hands isn't benefiting the nation --

it's benefiting the private banks and corporations --

We need our Congress to be setting economic policy -- deciding on what the

employment figures should be -- everything is being moved to back rooms and

panels because corporations can't afford to have these things discussed in the

open any longer!


Also, none of this seemed to be too upsetting to Koch Bros. DLC Rahm Emmanuel who

"crowed" that big business should be GRATEFUL for what OBAMA had done for them --

passing BILLIONS of the stimulus onto them in lucrative new contracts -- and

preserving the PRIVATE h/c industry!!


Here ....


Rahm .... crowing about preserving "private health care industry" ... business s/b grateful!

In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system; the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18FE-70B2-A835FE1E7FA8D74C


If that doesn't make you nauseous, I don't know what would . . .




posted 8/12/10 originally by another poster --

[bhikkhu]

293. I don't know - he asked for $1 trillion

No argument on needing congress to set economic policy, though it did as poor a job on the stimulus as it did on the banking reform bill - which is to say they took out some essential pieces.

[defendandprotect]

295. Corporate money buys a lot of cooperation ... and a lot of silence ...

and a lot of pro-corporate legislation -- !!


I'd advise you to read Al Gore's article in Rolling Stone on Global Warming --

7 pages and only one devoted to pollution of the planet -- but the rest of it

is a description of fascism in America without his actually using the word!

A Goebbels' style corporate-press --

And a Congress under the control of oil and coal industries -



http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/climate-of-denial-20110622

[JDPriestly]

282. Be patient. We may still have hyperinflation. Just wait.

[Greybnk48]

70. LOL!

:applause: :applause: :applause:

This is meant for JackpineRadical.

[Dept of Beer]

174. All you haad to do was peruse the daily DU stock market watch.

[JDPriestly]

277. Yes. The banks were already jittery.

Actually, we were in serious trouble in 2004. Bush and Greenspan did a sort of stimulus thing fooling with interest rates just to keep the housing boom going as long as possible.

It was the Bush and Greenspan push to stave off the recession that put so many unqualified buyers into houses, especially new houses. So anyone who was watching the housing markets at that time (as I always did around then) knew the economy was not what it appeared on the surface.

That is why some of the memos passed by some of the bankers about the true value of the derivatives they were selling to their customers were so shocking. Because it was obvious that the bankers knew that they were committing fraud when they represented derivatives in the housing market as reasonable investments.

[chervilant]

290. Well, now,

Anybody who hasn't figured out that the primary economic train wreck occurred during St. Ronnie's double reign of terror hasn't been awake these past twenty years. The wrecked engine of our economy is slowing it's inevitable slide into oblivion, but the end is nigh.

Sadly, most of the hoi polloi effects a glazed-over, nobody's home stare when confronted with news of the economy. Hell, most of us cannot develop or live by a budget.

And, the corporatists' VERY effective wealth carrot meme helps millions of hapless US citizens believe that they too can be filthy rich, if they work hard enough and live frugally. Tell them they are as likely to win the lottery, and they look at you like you're nuts!

BTW, Obama will not have my vote, even if his is the only "D" on the ballot.

[MadMaddie]

29. No one wants to accept the "Reality" part of it

No one wants to accept that President Obama has a House that is run by dysfunctional Republicans

I want to know from everyone here "Do you want a Dictatorship"? or "Do you want a Democracy"?

You didn't like it when Junior ignored every rule in the Constitution but there are more indications from this site and others that you indeed want President Obama to act like a Dictator.

We knew before the election that the economy was bad but did we really know how bad?

In your every day home life and work life, you make schedules, you make plans, you make agreements can anyone here tell me that all of their plans went accordingly?

I wonder for the Nov non-voters or supposed Democratic supporters who voted for Republicans to punish President Obama, you planning on doing the same thing in 2012? The reality is you punished the poor, the Unions and hard working people with your tantrum. You want to return to 1900 Robber Barron America? Do you want a Supreme Court that is 7-2?

All of you are focused on one aspect of what is happening in this country and your downstream candidates at the State and county level need your help. Your school boards and city councils need Progressives...not more Religious nuts.

Beware of what you wish for you might just get it.

[sabrina 1]

41. 'But did we really know how bad'?

You know who really knew?? Most of those Obama appointed as his economic team. Mainly because they were part of the reason for how bad it was.

the Nov non-voters were NOT progressives. They were mostly Independents. Most Progressive Dems held their seats. Who do you think voted for them? Republicans?

Most Blue Dogs who lost their seats deserved to lose them. You want to know why?

Here is why. When Dems held both houses and the WH, what were we constantly told when they 'couldn't get anything done'? 'It is the Blue Dogs fault'! Who told us that?

Explain how getting rid of those who were blamed by the Democratic Party Leadership for every failure to implement Progressive Policies, is a problem? If the Dem Leadership was not lying about 'not getting anything done because he has to deal with members of his own party', then no one should be complaining about the loss of those Dinos, should they? And if they were lying, then blame the Dem. Leadership who appear to want to have it both ways.

The conclusion most people have come to is that the Blue Dogs were doing exactly what the Leadership wanted, but they used them to try to explain why they wanted to implement non-progressive policies and shift the blame from the President.

We are not fools. But we are also not devious so it took a while to figure it out.

[dixiegrrrrl]

56. So the bad economy prevented closing of Gitmo???

and further eroding of The Bill of Rights?
And TSA intrusions?
And lack of transparency in lobbying?

Gimme a freaking break.

[bhikkhu]

59. Repugs in congress prevented the closing of Gitmo

very vocally, deliberately and publicly.

The blame on the rest can be shared around to many, Obama included for not speaking out, though they are all things needing legislative correction.

[FedUp_Queer]

143. It's called leadership first of all.

Second of all, there were town begging to have prisoners at Gitmo because it would them economically

[The Big Vetolski]

243. Poppycock. Obama could have closed Gitmo by executive order if

he wanted to. Just like Truman integrated the armed forces, and let the segregationists howl.

[dionysus]

301. not really. try again.

[MadMaddie]

294. President Obama did exactly what he said he would do

He signed orders to close Gitmo...
http://articles.cnn.com/2009-01-22/politics/guantanamo.order_1_detention-guantanamo-bay-torture?_s=PM:POLITICS

but guess what? The Republican House put a Rider in a budget deal that banned Obama from closing Guantanamo Bay. (Does anyone know that? That is the consequence of Republicans winning the house)


Read more:
http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/09/rider-in-deal-bans-obama-from-closing-guantanamo-bay/

TSA - I am not going to argue with you the U.S is a joke in the world

Transparancey in Lobbying...still needs work

[stuckinarut]

86. He already is acting like a dictator,

by perpetrating illegal wars, ignoring and flaunting both Federal and International law (numerous times).

This isn't hyperbole, it is fact.

[stuckinarut]

88. As some smart guy said,

At the risk of being discounted for using a Chomsky quote,

"If the Nuremberg laws were applied, then every post-war American president would have been hanged. By violation of the Nuremberg laws I mean the same kind of crimes for which people were hanged in Nuremberg. And Nuremberg means Nuremberg and Tokyo. So first of all you've got to think back as to what people were hanged for at Nuremberg and Tokyo. And once you think back, the question doesn't even require a moment's waste of time. For example, one general at the Tokyo trials, which were the worst, General Yamashita, was hanged on the grounds that troops in the Philippines, which were technically under his command (though it was so late in the war that he had no contact with them -- it was the very end of the war and there were some troops running around the Philippines who he had no contact with), had carried out atrocities, so he was hanged. Well, try that one out and you've already wiped out everybody."

Noam Chomsky, delivered around 1990

It is the same with Obama and his, sorry, NATO's (where do they get their budget again?) humanitarian cluster bombs landing on Libyan civilians weekly.

[xiamiam]

132. and women and children killed by drones in afghanistan..this week for example..

pathetic..

[LiberalAndProud]

101. I do accept that he is facing opposition.

But there are many things that he could do without the help of Congress. For example, the DOJ, rather than focusing on trying to bring states back into line on the medical marijuana issue, could have done some real work on prosecuting fraud and imprisoning fraudsters. Instead, we must be content that Bernie Maddoff (who ripped off the wealthy) is behind bars and Goldman Sachs has made token gestures toward reparation.

Let's say he can't regnotiate NAFTA, I'll give you that. But I can't explain this
http://thehill.com/blogs/transportation-report/automobiles/169019-obama-trade-agreements-would-boost-auto-imports-

I could go on about how congressional opposition can only be a partial explanation. If there is ever a doubt, my tendency is to try to give the benefit to Obama, but there are many things I can't explain away by "they just won't let him."

[xiamiam]

133. he had millions of americans in his back pocket..hoping for change

i would have done anything as im sure the rest of you would have..we still are willing and ready

[leeroysphitz]

122. I want health care. n/t

[joshcryer]

127. I assure you that a great number of leftists would prefer a dictatorship.

[Dept of Beer]

180. I find that fairly hard to believe.

[Sheepshank]

292. Seriously?

Growing a pair, using the bully pulpit, executive orders, etc etc etc....there are plenty just on this teerad that are upset that Obama hasn't implemented their worthy causes unilaterally.

[sulphurdunn]

250. When the right uses government

to further it agenda, that's democracy. When the left tries to do the same thing that's dictatorship?

[woo me with science]

302. No, we would like a representative republic,

with an emphasis on "representative."

[xiamiam]

131. I want an anti war candidate ..for starters..nt

[defendandprotect]

150. It's over .... !! When Dems are majority they lose, when GOP is minority, they win? It's over --!!

When Obama had a mandate he threw it away --

In 2008, GOP was in ashes -- and Obama resurrected them - -

You think Obama is working for a democracy?

Or do you think that Obama and DOJ have actually done anything about the Bush/Cheney

dictatorship -- like re torture?

Evidently, what you're really worried about is that Democrats who could be counted on

to vote for "the lesser evil" might actually go off and find a truly liberal candidate?

AND SAD TO HAVE TO TELL YOU BUT THE ONLY PERSON 'PUNISHING THE POOR, THE UNIONS AND

HARD WORKING PEOPLE' IS OBAMA!!

And I'd suggest you also put the "tantrum" in the attic with the "pink pony, the magic

wand and the chess game" -- !!

Guess you don't also realize that our towns, cities, states have also been taken over

by corporate money -- we've been calling it "pay for play" for almost 30 years now!


It's over --

[Lorien]

193. Well said!

:applause:

[defendandprotect]

194. And ....

will take the opportunity to say :hi: --

and thank you --

:)

[quakerboy]

151. Your question is a false dichotomy.

"Do you want dictatorship or democracy?". We have neither. Its an irrelevant question given "reality".

[Dept of Beer]

178. No I don't want a dictatorship. I just want a Democrat to win the Presidency,

but I'm not sure where we are going to find one.

[sad sally]

49. There were clues late in 2007 that all was not well.

Quote that should have hung on candidate Obama's door: It's the economy, stupid.

The Great Recession of 2008?
By Diana Furchtgott-Roth
Friday, December 21, 2007

The prospect of a 2008 recession is the talk of Washington. Alan Greenspan recently estimated the likelihood at 50 percent. Hundreds of financial experts and economists have weighed in with opinions ranging from “certain recession” to “definitely no recession.” Whose prediction is right?

The old saying goes that economic forecasters were invented to make meteorologists look accurate. When the weather reporter predicts rain, one can look outside to see if the forecast is correct. But when an economist predicts a recession, the only verification is the opinion of other economists.

http://www.american.com/archive/2007/december-12-07/the-great-recession-of-2008?du

[bhikkhu]

60. I remember that - it was high energy prices that were supposed to cause recession

They kept on climbing through 2008, and economists were talking about the wizardry of Greenspan and the amazing resilience of the American economy (in addition to plenty of worrying), right up until the beginning of the crash in June/July 08...

[liberation]

65. The economy was in "decent" shape in 2008 so that means Obama made it worse?

Wow, and I thought the republicans were the masters of pretzel logic and history rewriting. Glad to see some Dems can give a run for their money!

[bhikkhu]

85. Everyone should know the dates involved - glad you asked

Obama's campaign officially started in February of 2007. The economy was pretty decent, in spite of Bush. Generally the problem was that wealth was being steadily redistributed upward, but the economy as a whole was functional.

Through 2007 the price of oil rose, leading to rumblings of economic slowdown, They never quite materialized, Greenspan was considered a genius at the rudder, and things moved along. Officially the recession began in Dec, 2007, but those things are decided after the fact - at the time there was no shortage of optimistic forecasts.

In March 08 Bear-Stearns failed, and its rescue by JP Morgan was arranged for under government guarantees.

As the primaries were winding up, the price of oil spiked to almost $150 a barrel, spiking along with most other commodities, leading to something of a global shear point, and most of the world's developed countries slipped into recession, and economic activity began its long downward spiral.

In September, Lehman Bros went under, Merrill-Lynch was bought out for pennies on the dollar, AIG was about to fail, and a whole raft of huge US employers were teetering toward bankruptcy without access to credit in a crashing economy.

In October the big $700 billion bailout package passed through congress and was signed by President Bush. (how many people would get that one right on a test?)


On November 4 Obama was elected president.


Note that his campaign was well along, over a year into it, before any serious economic problems began, and that he inherited a busted-up economy with a half-assed repair job half done. I'm just saying that the national and global circumstances changed completely between when the campaign began, and when he took office. What are the odds that plans made before economic collapse could still be carried out on schedule, or even that they would be attainable in a single term? Or that they should be the highest priority, after 8 million jobs evaporated?

[liberation]

108. OK

so everyone thought the economy was doing fine, except for all the banks failing and the massive bailout, that is why the state of the economy was such a big deal by the 08 election, which is why the Obama campaign, apparently, ignored it.



:crazy:

[bhikkhu]

126. Again, the Obama campaign was announced in February 2007

There were no big failures until Bear Stearns in march '08 - a full year into the campaign. And even then it was another 4 months before anything else big really happened - then it was the whole floor gone all at once.

I don't think anyone thought the economy was fine during the year from Feb 07 to March 08 - energy prices were driving inflation, inequality was an issue, and housing prices were starting to look shaky - but there was economic growth, there were 8 million more jobs than now, everything was still chugging along, and it was a decent economy.

Obama didn't ignore it any more than the millions of bright investors, and Greenspan himself, who didn't see it coming until it was too late. What I am saying is that Obama's campaign ran for a year under decent economic condition, and - very reasonably - he had a set of plans and hopes based on what could be accomplished under decent economic conditions.

What he got was a complete wreck, and its only fair to understand that what you can accomplish with a wrecked economy is something less than what was originally planned.

[eilen]

247. Most people were not listening to what Obama had to say until after

Iowa. I know that my family were pretty dismissive over his chances given his name. At the time I think my mother was for Edwards. I was sure Hilary would get the nomination (thought she had it in the bag) all things being equal and the small difference in policy between the candidates (except for Kucinich who I liked).

[eilen]

246. There were one million in foreclosure in July 2008, nt

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

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

[The Big Vetolski]

245. The Director of the IMF agrees with you as far as the deficit...

is concerned. On ABC's This Week she was asked by Amanpour just what a default on the deficit would really mean. I was surprised by her candor. She said interest rates would go up, the stock market would tumble, and fewer jobs would be created.

Hah! Jobs are not being created, anyway, at least not living wage ones. I don't care if the stock market crashes; I own no stock. The only effect rising interest rates would have on me would be to increase the value of my savings account. Maybe I'd put more in it than my current $5.95. I have no credit cards, so that would be the only impact.

Maybe I should hope for a default.

[bhikkhu]

269. A default would mean long-term national poverty

A good estimate is that 30% of our "national wealth" is contingent on the dollar being the global reserve currency, and a great deal of government - meaning roads, infrastructure, education, medicare, local services, etc - depends upon the value of US Treasury bonds.

Interest rates going up means an immediate and large impact to the all government services, and this also projects forward into a steady erosion - a long-term decline into national poverty.

[defendandprotect]

146. Therefore, logically you would appoint the people who created the meltdown to your team ... ???

Whose head is screwed on right?

[bowens43]

213. keeping apologizing and making excuses.....

someday with a little luck you will see reality.

Obama LIED and MISLED those who worked so hard to get him elected. It's simple as that.

[Plucketeer]

235. Right

so - what did this supposedly optomistic, rose-colored glasses, pie in the sky prognostications have to do with blanket surviellance, public option, 2 unpopular wars and habeus corpus???

[eilen]

240. Every month there were huge layoffs. nt

[Arkana]

25. I've come to the conclusion that the hysteria over almost everything

that's happened in America in the last 100 years can be traced back to "A black man did *insert thing here*."

[hfojvt]

44. you have apparently forgotten then

all of the hysteria here over Pelosi after 2007

[defendandprotect]

154. And when people said that we called it racist propaganda ... didn't we?

[eleny]

26. Maybe you were too young to remember when we marched on D.C. during Johnson's administration

And on D.C. in August of '63 during JFK's admin.

During the Vietnam and Civil Rights era being a Dem didn't immunize presidents from having their feet held to the fire. It was a brutal time.

[Jackpine Radical]

30. Hey, Hey, LBJ

How many kids did you kill today?

(Like, remember WHAT, Eleny?)

[eleny]

34. That bit the old lying viper's ass deeply

[murielm99]

39. And yet he did many fine things during his Presidency.

He should have gone down in history as one of the great ones. Instead, he is reviled and tainted.

I remember how much I despised him for the war.

[aquart]

42. Me, too. But I still said Nixon would make us think better of Johnson.

Democracy is tough work.

[999998th word]

205. Why switch dicks in the middle of a screw

Vote for Nixon in '72
an oldie.

[Jackpine Radical]

46. Indeed. He rose far above his (quite sleazy and parochial) roots

and gave us the Civil Rights and Medicare Acts, among other things.

[bvar22]

52. I NEVER thought I would look back on LBJ...

...as the MOST LIBERAL President of our lifetime,
but he was.


That only goes to show how FAR to the Right the New Democrat Centrist Party has lurched.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone

[tishaLA]

253. On Thom Hartmann this week, Van Jones called Johnson

"our greatest President"

I have to admit, I was shocked to hear him say it.

[bemildred]

35. Gee, who could have predicted this?

:thumbsup:

[murielm99]

38. I agree.

I have been a political activist in this area for a long time. People know me, even if they hate my politics. I have die hard repubbies stopping me on the street and complaining about Medicare and Social Security. They know they can be hurt by the possible cuts, too.

I have never seen this level of anger. I am hearing from people who don't vote.

They will vote now. Some of them are asking me to register them to vote. My sense of things is that they will sweep out any incumbent possible, if Medicare and Social Security are changed. Party won't matter.

[WillyT]

50. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

That is EXACTLY what I'm hearing and seeing too.

:hi:

[Buns_of_Fire]

62. Oh, yes. I've had people (both Democrats and repubs) ask me how they can tell if a candidate

is an incumbant or not.

"You mean what party they are, right?"

"Nope, doesn't matter. Whether or not they're in office now is what I care about. If they're in, they gotta go. I don't care WHO it is."

[MissDeeds]

113. Yep,

And elderly voters tend to go to the polls, especially if there is an issue they feel strongly about. I expect AARP will be encouraging its members to make themselves heard on this issue.

[OwnedByFerrets]

138. I agree 100 %

[alcibiades_mystery]

77. Those other politicians weren't, ahem, "Negroes"

Some of these so-called progressives are just asking for a reason.

So are they all, all honorable men...:eyes:

[WillyT]

93. So... The White House Puts Out A Trial Balloon Threatening The Third Rail Of Politics...

the reaction comes swiftly and deafeningly negative... and that makes all of us who agree with the shoot-down of that balloon racists???

Or did I misinterpret what you are saying here?

:shrug:

[alcibiades_mystery]

96. Your record is clear

:hi:

I have no doubt that you're honorable...

[Marr]

94. I've never seen a politician work so blatantly against his own campaign promises. n/t

[defendandprotect]

155. Remember Pelosi saying .... "Obama was for a lot of things when he was campaigning that ....

he's no longer for -- "

Was certainly a message to be listened to -- !!

A warning --

[Dept of Beer]

181. After the 08 election, muy wife and I were enjoying breakfast

After the 09 inauguration, my wife and I were enjoying breakfast one fine Saturday and I started laughing. I hadn't laughed much lately due to 8 long years of Dubya.

She asked me what was so funny, and I told her that people really love this guy. President Obama. Sounds good. Looks good. Says everything that we all want to hear. (I voted and gave to his campaign.)

What if he is the anti-Christ? ...just my sense of humor. (I'm an atheist.)


We started laughing.



I never thought he might be what I was joking about.

:scared:

[Marr]

201. lol. I'm told I have an acute case of cynicism, but I have to say, Obama has

really surprised me by just how bad he is. I assumed he was another neoliberal Wall Street hack after the corporate media praised him en masse for his first national appearance (at the 2004 Democratic Convention). It had the smell of a sales pitch, and as I said, they all did it together. I mean, it was a fine speech-- but it was only a speech, and not much different from any other boilerplate political pablum that these guys dish out on cue.

Anyway, yeah-- he's really blown me away with how blatantly he thumbs his nose at the party's traditional constituencies, and how brazenly he outflanks his own party, coordinating with Republicans and pushing the congress to the right.

[Enthusiast]

104. Some of us cannot pretend it's not true.

I can't just overlook the truth because Obama has D beside his name.

[keopeli]

109. You weren't alive when GHW Bush broke his "no new taxes" promise?

He went from 90% approval to losing the election in just 16 months.

[robinlynne]

119. I dont think so. He was elected in a huge sweep to CHANGE what BUsh did. He

is maintinaing the very policies we all voted against. 8 years of it were more than enough.

[LaurenG]

125. No President has come into office with such a mess to clean up

and no President in my lifetime has ever inspired me to believe in them more than this President. I believed everything he said, I fell in love with him. Now I feel jilted, mislead and forgotten. I thought I was important to him, I thought he was going to stand up to what he said he would stand up to. He either couldn't or wouldn't but all I know for sure is that he didn't.

I feel like a woman scorned and we all know the old saying "hell hath no fury like a woman scorned." All of us who believed him are the woman scorned, it isn't freaky, its what he said he'd do and then he didn't. So yeah I'm mad at him. I'm tired of this shit, I want my fucking promises kept and I want them kept because I believed he was going to do what he said he'd do.

So do I just say silly me, what an idiot I am to have believed he could do what he said he'd do?


We believed him, fuck us right...

[defendandprotect]

156. OK -- but we're a huge liberal voting bloc -- stick together -- and let's get to Plan B ... !!!

[LaurenG]

184. What's plan b? nt

[defendandprotect]

185. The alternative to voting for "the lesser evil" ...

which only works to move the party and Congress to the right --


How about we draft Sen. Bernie Sanders to run in 2012 -- he could run on a Dem

ticket -- he's a better dem than most Democrats!


And, how about Tom Hayden for VP -- we need two strong anti-war candidates?


There are tons of democrats we can run on the Dem Party ticket -- we don't have

to vote for candidates pre-bribed and pre-owned by corporations --



Right ... ?

[defendandprotect]

144. Come on ... the issues have NEVER been this serious .... two ten year wars ....

drones over Pakistan -- wiretapping gone wild -- extending Fisa which is a violation

in itself of the Constitution -- extending Patriot Act -- failing to bring the criminals

Bush/Cheney to justice even for TORTURE -- "Cat food Commission" headed up by the

notorious Alan Simpson -- Obama stopping the COLA payments -- destroying public education,

teachers/unions -- betrayal of public on universal health care in back room deals --

extending $120 BILLION in tax cuts for the rich -- increasing the horrendous MIC budget --

A stimulus which was less than 20% of what was needed, with BILLIONS directed to corporations!


Day #1 with Obama eloping into White House with Koch Bros./DLC Rahm Emmanuel and setting

up a Wall Street team of the very people who caused the meltdown of the economy --

:eyes:


And, imo, failure to admit that his was from the first a depression - - has been a depression --

and is still a depression --

We may have as many as 21% of America unemployed -- not collecting benefits -- and/or engaged

in part time work vs full time -- and certainly many work at jobs which they are qualified

to do --

[Confusious]

153. Usually the promises aren't so critical

If he doesn't get ahold of wall street or the medical insurance industry, it'll sink us all.

Most politicians promised a pony, he said he would cure the pony of some nasty diseases, and had the drugs and skill to do it, but chickened out.

[bertman]

238. Nothing "eerie" about it at all. What's EERIE is the true believers who cannot face the

reality that President Obama is pushing an anti-Democratic agenda and has betrayed the ideals of the Democratic party. For someone who's supposedly politically aware, surely you must see that.

[The Doctor.]

242. 'Not standing against' something is far removed from 'pushing' for that something.

If you feel you are 'politically aware', can you give an example of how, when, or where Obama 'pushed' to get rid of the public option?

No, you can't. He was for it, but Congress couldn't (or wouldn't) deliver.

I wish it were as simple as 'Obama is the Hero/Villian!', but it isn't. People have to grow up and recognize that this shit is way more complicated than that.

I remain convinced that Obama is a good man who knows right from wrong and wishes to do good. Those that believe otherwise know very little about the man himself and where he came from.

[bertman]

296. Meeting with Insurance Execs and Big Pharma execs while excluding Public Option

advocates--who are professionals--from the table is "pushing" his agenda.

Appointing the perps like Geithner and Summers to be in charge of Treasury and Bernanke being re-appointed to the Fed Chairmanship could have been vigorously opposed by President Obama yet he is STILL saying what a great group they are.

As Commander-In-Chief, President Obama could ORDER the military to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan at a much faster rate than he has agreed to.

Apparently you cannot conceive of someone being deceitful enough to say one thing while actively engaging in another thing. That is called subterfuge and it is a very effective method of "pushing" one's agenda.

I'm sick and tired of the 'it's more complicated than that' excuse. The President of the United States has the bully pulpit. This man has NEVER used it during his Presidency.

[The Doctor.]

307. No,

it's the industry 'pushing' its agenda on Obama.

One more time; NO bill that harms corporate profits significantly in any way will pass, that's all that is needed to understand why there was so much garbage in it.

[The Doctor.]

239. It does tell part of a much more frightening story.

There are reasons to be concerned.

[KoKo]

270. Most don't make the kind of sweeping Campaign promises that Obama did.

They didn't fill stadiums, have an active online presence with songs dedicated to them by popular recording artists and hooplah and You Tubes and websites devoted to getting a ground breaking President elected.

If you think about it, Obama's campaign was unique in our Presidential history. And, he did promise what is listed in Sirota's article. That's why folks turned out in even my Red State to vote for this Democratic Candidate.

[JDPriestly]

274. That is because we all had such hope in Obama, such trust.

And he has just succumbed to the pressure of Wall Street. He was a pushover.

I don't think he was ever on our side. I think he just used his volunteers.

[dionysus]

299. it's called a huge grudge. it's been on a low simmer for 2 years now.

[polichick]

It's good that not everyone is easily conned by rhetoric...

Trust but verify isn't such a bad idea - here's a bit more of that quote, which seems appropriate to this op:

"It’s still trust but verify. It’s still play, but cut the cards. It’s still watch closely. And don’t be afraid to see what you see."

[defendandprotect]

157. It's still "follow the money" -- the corporate money ... !!

[CoffeeCat]

5. After all of the broken promises...

...I am really wondering how he can even launch a campaign. What would the messaging be, "Sorry, I'll
try harder next time" or "This time I really mean it!".

It's so bad I seriously wonder if he really will run.

Obama has no credibility. What on earth could he run on?

I was an in-the-tank precinct captain for Obama during the last campaign, and I feel like I have no options this time.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. How about "Yes we might?". n/t

[Jim Warren]

33. lol

nt

[liberation]

68. "Yes we can...

... tell you why we won't!"


If you add the second part, honestly, that slogan has described rather faithfully the actions of this administration and their supporters alike. Since this administration seems to have spent orders of magnitude more energy convincing their base as to why policies could not be implemented, than they have done trying to pass or implement those policies. It has been a suspicious set of priorities.


Maybe Obama's post WH memoirs will be titled "The Audacity of Nope"

[xiamiam]

134. that's what i'm hearing from everyong..no options..who we gonna vote for?

that is it in a nutshell..we want what we voted for..we didnt get it..we still want it..who and how?

[defendandprotect]

158. In a sense we are fighting slavery still -- a new enslavement of the people by corporations ....

but those who fought for abolition managed to do it --

Stay connected with liberals -- we are a huge voting bloc -- and we need

to be discussing a Plan B -- !!

[AmyDeLune]

203. or "yes we could...

but we probably won't."

[rhett o rick]

6. Rec. But what can we do? nm

[defendandprotect]

161. First, everyone needs to turn their BS meters up waaaaay higher -- !!

Liberals need to stick together and start talking about a Plan B --

we're a huge voting bloc and we should be using that power --

The right wing can only rise on violence --

deception, stolen elections --

I doubt there ever was a "Southern Strategy" -- rather I think it has

only be electronic computers --

I'd question every election back to Nixon/Humphrey which was also a squeaker!


Granted, we're not where the Founders were -- we have complications of the atomic era,

nuclear reactors, Global Warming --

but historically, people have managed to end government corruption -- even abolish

slavery -- and if we stick together we may surprise ourselves!

:)

[somone]

7. Great article

[Bluenorthwest]

9. Well he sure doesn't mince words

And it is so true about the Beltway Professionals, they are groupies far out of touch with reality. Badge Holders and Camp Followers.

[geek tragedy]

10. Sirota has been hating on Obama since 2006.

Big Edwards supporter during the primaries.

[defendandprotect]

162. Oh, that must be it ... has nothing to do with the issues, right?

:rofl:

[otohara]

192. He Was For Edwards?

WoW, just WoW!

The two America guy, with the 30,000 square foot mansion, the mansion that was to serve as the "Southern White House" cuz he was so sure he'd be the next POTUS, even after he tried to deny paternity to his girlfriend's baby.

Big ego, meet bigger ego.

[Hawkowl]

200. Right wing attack the messenger tactics, eh?

Doesn't change the validity of the message. FAIL!

[BigBearJohn]

206. I would have rather had Edwards.

[dionysus]

300. lol, a piece of shit who cheated on his dying spouse, and somehow got people to believe his phony

ass was about helping the poor man.

"ahm here participating in this hedge fund as research about poverty for mah campaign"

:rofl:

[Name removed]

222. Deleted message

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

[Jim Warren]

11. I think there has been over-reaction

on the recent debt ceiling issue, it simply has not been sorted yet.

However, I've have misgivings for some time with the Obama justice dept
not vigorously investigating Wall St fraudsters while seeming to pursue frivolous crap like going after medical MJ.

[Palmer Eldritch]

12. This hack's head will explode the day of Obama's Reelection

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[dbonds]

73. Attacking the messenger not the message.

[Palmer Eldritch]

74. His message is that Obama won't be reelected,

thus Obama's reelection is sure to put him in a tizzy.

[dbonds]

79. Think you misread it.

He is saying many of the promises broken by Obama has him in re-election trouble, but it not about him not getting re-elected as to what is causing the trouble.

[Palmer Eldritch]

90. Sirota misread it. Obama is not in reelection trouble.

[dbonds]

Whether he is or isn't, there are reason's he could be that he discusses.

[enough]

13. Sirota has the proper context for this:

another snip>

To appreciate this reality, go back and read every Democratic Party press release during President Bush's 2005 failed assault on Social Security. Those press releases reminded us that Social Security is one of the most fiscally sound programs in American history, projected to run surpluses for the foreseeable future. Additionally, what problems it does face can be easily solved -- as just one example of a solution, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that had President Obama refused to extend the Bush tax cuts and instead worked to repeal them, that move alone would generate revenues equal to two and one-half times the entire Social Security shortfall over the next 75 years (yes, 75 years!).

And yet now, like that gruesome scene at the end of "Fargo," Social Security -- a pay-as-you-go embodiment of fiscal responsibility -- is being rammed into the grisly woodchipper of cynical debt-reduction politics. Only instead of a glowering Peter Stormare (or Mitt Romney) doing the pushing, there's a cheery President Obama insisting that cuts are really just progressive efforts to "strengthen" -- the same Obama who chastised his 2008 Republican opponent for using the same pathetic spin to shroud cuts to the same program.

snip>

[defendandprotect]

164. And Obama has personnally and purposefully worked to do that -- !!

Without doubt, it is Obama who picked up Bush's little hatchet - !!

[Zen Democrat]

14. I love that Sirota expresses his opinions, but he's limiting his view.

The world needs idealists and skeptics and happy joy joys, but this is a pragmatic world and I'm a realist. The President has the most difficult job in the world, with the weight of the world on his back and a thousand voices whispering in his ears. I'm just happy that the person with this load is Barack Obama, because I think he may be one of a limited number who can handle it. The man is a gift.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[EFerrari]

24. It's more like 5 or 6 wars.

Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya, and I think I'm forgetting one or two.

[Wilms]

43. You are. There's the War on (those in) Poverty and the Middle Class.

The War on Whistle-blowers and Privacy Rights comes to mind.

[Riftaxe]

48. Somalia too

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/187978.html">US drone strikes kill dozens in Somalia - July 7, 2011

[Dept of Beer]

182. see post 43.

Sorry. You got there first.

[dionysus]

304. venezuela and lichtenstein!!11

[Zen Democrat]

31. Who are you supporting for the job?

[lumberjack_jeff]

92. "fate, destiny and providence" are sooo 2008.

[Name removed]

152. Deleted message

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

[defendandprotect]

165. True ... I always felt so sorry for W Bush when he would tell us what "hard work" presidency was- !!

:eyes:

:rofl:

[madamesilverspurs]

17. Sirota? Feh.

He used to be quite good. But that was before Sirota became so impressed with Sirota. He's pretty much sucked for the last few years. Massive ego, vindictive as all hell toward anyone who presumes to disagree with him.

Ick.


-

[StarburstClock]

21. Attack the messenger, oldest propaganda technique in history

ICK!

[madamesilverspurs]

53. Actually, he's local.

He's alienated whole communities, people he's known for years, people who had considered him to be a friend. It just is what it is.


-

[dionysus]

303. or sometimes, it's just calling a douchebag a douchebag....

:shrug:

[xphile]

37. Translation: He dares point out things that Obama does that he doesn't like so I don't like him

anymore.

[Marr]

99. Your comment reminds me of something Helen Keller said.

She was recalling her first meeting with infuential newspaper editor:

"At that time the compliments he paid me were so generous that I blush to remember them. But now that I have come out for socialism he reminds me and the public that I am blind and deaf and especially liable to error.”

Are you sure your opinion of Sirota didn't change because you became less tolerant of presidential critics once your guy got into the White House?

[madamesilverspurs]

118. Good quote, honest question.

But my unhappiness with Sirota began closer to home than DC. For what it's worth, he blew us off, not the other way around.


-

[Marr]

130. Fair enough. n/t

[otohara]

190. Outrage Overkill

everything sets him off, including how bin Laden was killed.

Personally, I'm glad he's dead....Sirtoa, wanted a nice tidy trial, like that was ever going to happen.

[otohara]

189. Radio Will Do That

He's doing well over there - and it went straight to his head and mouth.

Ick is right.

[Bluebear]

199. 'He used to be quite good.' - until he started criticizing Obama, right?

Feh yourself.

[_ed_]

223. Ad hominem

Would you care to address the substance of the piece rather than hurling insults like a little kid? Perhaps you could actually refute his specific points instead of accusing Sirota of insufficient adulation of your Dear Leader.

[slay]

20. At least somebody gets it

K&R

[Arkana]

23. David Sirota is energetically rewriting the history of the last two years, I see.

I guess when you're a beloved left-wing columnist who wants to bash the President, you get to completely ignore the role of Congress in policy making, the political makeup of the so-called "Democratic" majority, and the metric tons of money bankrolling the Republican agenda.

It's funny how fast DU became such fans of the unitary executive the minute Obama took the oath of office. After all, didn't we spend eight years railing about how Bush treated Congress as a rubber stamp? Oh, that's right--that's because he was implementing things we disagreed with. I guess it's OK to ignore the Constitution, just as long as it's for things we LIKE.

But hey--why let little things like "facts" and "critical thinking" and "analysis" get in the way of a good fairy tale, huh? After all, he got to use the word "sycophants"!

[hfojvt]

47. Obama really did not need Congress' help to let the Bush tax cuts expire

and Congress certainly did not make him lie about it either.

But like I said before, here is a video of a guy who is not gonna accept excuses for how "Washington is designed to resist change"

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/146

[bvar22]

57. Rewriting history??? ...Video is FOREVER.

NAFTA & "Free Trade":
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0&NR=1

EFCA (Employee Free Choice Act):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMNVIQqatyU

Cadillac Tax:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8wmN3wvhNM&feature=player_embedded


Public Option & Mandates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acc6Wn_BWlk


Restore America's Moral Highground
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8


I have more.
Would you like to see them?

[defendandprotect]

166. +1000% --- Thank you!

[liberation]

72. I always find these posts, with no facts, complaining about other people's lack of facts ironic...

... or is it hypocritical?

Don't matter, hilarious all the same.

[Arkana]

114. Please point out where I'm wrong.

Sirota's column was a series of over-the-top insults that had no regard for circumstance and he displayed no understanding of how policy is made.

[hlthe2b]

27. I'm guessing Sirota won't get to go to the....

White House Christmas party.....;)

Truth is painful... Politics often does bad things to "good intentions"....

[Divernan]

64. Or even get the VIP White House Christmas tour.

[AlabamaLibrul]

69. Who says you need invitations to get into the White House? n/t

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[chill_wind]

36. Sirota hasn't changed. He writes about Wall Street driven policy

and the tools who deliver it, and when he thinks it stinks, he says so.

He never sugarcoated his commentary during the Bush admin. He doesn't seem to feel obligated to begin doing it now.

[TheDebbieDee]

45. Out in the real world................

My co-workers, people I hear talking in the grocery store, the family members that attended my family reunion last weekend in Pacific, MO: nobody is talking about this! Nobody!

Nobody is talking about potential cuts to social security or Medicare. Nobody is talking about the lack of a public option in the healthcare program, the after effects of the BP disaster, the failure to close Gitmo, etc.

Face it people, the only people talking about these issues are posters here at DU and freeperland!

Everybody else is just too busy trying to eek out a living and keep the lifestyle they currently have, if it is a good one.

[mia]

80. People I know are talking about potential cuts to social security & Medicare.

Including family, friends and co-workers. We also share ideas about saving money, keeping healthy etc....

[liberation]

82. Arguments to popularity

always hilarious!

[TheDebbieDee]

100. By the same token, when we here at DU were calling *

a war criminal, the news was full of statistics about how many people wanted to have a beer with him........

Go figure!

[liberation]

110. .... that is why they are hilarious

Americans apparently, thought a supposedly recovering alcoholic makes a great drinking buddy.

In any case, this is a political discussion website, so it should not be that ironic that people here discuss... you know, politics.

[tpsbmam]

120. I know MANY people who are talking about Obama and

not in a good way. And these are all people who voted for Obama in 2008. They're talking about Medicare, Medicaid, SS, the many wars, the lack of transparency when he promised increased transparency, the crappy lobbyist-designed "healthcare" reform that enriches insurance companies and big Pharma, mandates, spying on us, and much more. ALL of my Dem and Ind friends who voted for him in '08 are royally pissed off. And talk about it....a lot.

YOUR experience isn't representative of "everybody."

[defendandprotect]

167. You mean our 3 million homeless, 15% or more unemployed ... maybe 21% .. when we count

those working part time rather than at full time jobs they want --

and those working at jobs they are over qualified to do -- ?

It effects EVERY GENERATION -- unless you want to support your parents?

[TheDebbieDee]

197. Read my post again. I didn't say these didn't affect the people

with which I come into contact. I simply said that these issues aren't foremost in their minds.

[defendandprotect]

252. True --

However, when it begins to hit their pocketbooks they will soon begin to talk

about it --

Which is why I agree with Al Gore in his Rolling Stone article that everyone

needs to be talking to everyone else about all of this before it gets any worse.

Gore is talking about Global Warming,* but it's true across the political arena.

Family and friends --

Gore's article is well worth the read -- not just about Global Warming -- it's

about our "dysfunction government" -- our Congress under control of oil and coal

industries -- setting Congress' schedule based on their daily need to run Fund

Raisers!

And most of all about our Goebbels' style corporate press --


We have a party and representatives whose SILENCE has been bought by corporate $$.

And our party and representatives are still beginning for even more of it -- even

from the slim Koch Bros. -- see the OP on Patty Murray asking for money from Koch

for the Senators organization -- !!!




If you do read the article -- keep in mind he's not mentioning the 50 year gap in GW

which means that we are only now beginning to feel the effects of human activity which

occurred up to about 1960!! Think of all we did after that time.

PLUS he's also not discussing that Glacier melts are increasing earthquake activity --

both in number and severity.

Earthquakes also generate volcanic activity.

[bvar22]

224. You really should stop hanging with the American Idol crowd,

and find some friends who are involved.

[TheDebbieDee]

255. So, you are saying that everyone you come into contact with

are discussing these issues, are you?

And when * was President, everyone YOU came into contact with said, "Hello. George Bush is a lousy President!" and , "The republicans are leaving quite a tax bill for our grandchldren." Is this what you are trying to tell me? }(

[BobbyBoring]

51. Here's the most important part of the article IMHO

Inherent in that ideology is the assumption that Americans -- and particularly Democratic voters -- are either too stupid to see the heist in process, or if they do see the heist, are too entranced by their president's power/fame/celebrity/charisma to want to do anything about it, even if what's being pilfered is Democrats' Social Security crown jewel.

The assumption, in other words, is that ignorance and fealty will permit a president to serve as an accomplice to the very grand larceny he was explicitly elected to office to oppose. Should the assumption prove true -- should Obama now be cheered on for doing to Social Security what no Republican president has ever been able to do -- the date on the calendar may say 2011, but it will really be 1984.

We have a combination of stupidity and blindness that now equals the republicans and it's all by design.

[inna]

97. thanks for the quote; and i completely agree with you on its importance nt

[defendandprotect]

169. Agree ... People relied once on the Dem Party -- FDR/New Deal earned their trust ---

the trust has continued, maybe because so many are still confident that

if there was anything really wrong with America the TV News Host would

definitely let them know?

Americans aren't stupid -- they've been lied to by our Goebbels' style

corporate press -- which by the way aided the 2000 steal simply by not

challenging it --

Americans have had their elections stolen by electronic computers -- and

corporate press isn't mentioning that either beyond a whisper -- and

certainly our Democratic Party has done ZIP about it all.

Americans aren't stupid -- beware when they actually do wake up --

[BigBearJohn]

207. darn it -- I was going to post the exact same thing. I agree 100%

[DeSwiss]

55. "....a sign that our democracy is in a deeper crisis than it already is."

It is. And it can't be fixed. It is a totally corrupt system.

- It'll have to be replaced.....

K&R

[Octafish]

66. I'd LOL, but there's nothing funny and Sirota is correct.

WTF happened? We had majorities everywhere. All he had to do was lead.

[slay]

84. I know right?

it's almost like this has been PLANNED or something.. i just don't see how someone could come into office with the country wanting CHANGE so badly and just fail so miserably.. :tinfoilhat:

[BigBearJohn]

208. Wow. You hit the nail on the head. It staggers the mind.

[Blue_In_AK]

71. K & R

That's a righteous rant from Sirota, and I think he speaks for a lot of us.

[Moosepoop]

76. What is the "reelection trouble" that Obama's in?

Sirota makes this reference twice, but I think President Obama's chances of being elected again are actually pretty good. Do you know what Sirota is referring to, or is it wishful thinking on his part?

[inna]

98. you completely missed the point of the article; it's not about Obama's chances of reelection

[Moosepoop]

102. No, I didn't miss the point of the article, but you missed my point.

My point is that Sirota mentions this supposed "reelection trouble" twice in his article. I'm asking why he says that? If it's true, I'd like to know more about it, since I'm not aware of any indicators that a second Obama term is unlikely. If Sirota's assertion is not based on actual fact, then how should the rest of his article be viewed?

Since you took the time to reply (in a way) to my question, perhaps you have the answer I was seeking.
Do you know how Sirota comes to judge Obama's chances of a second term as "in trouble?" Seriously, I'm asking.

[Jakes Progress]

107. I'll try to help you.

The point of the article is not really whether the president is or is not in danger of not being re-elected. The point is that if he isn't in danger after the dismal performance, poor attitude, and complete reversal of his stated goals, then the country really is in trouble. If a president can be this dismissive of his electorate, this dismal in his job and still be re-elected, we are truly lost.

[Moosepoop]

124. Thank you, Jake.

I understand the point of the article. I asked upon what Sirota based his assertions that Obama's reelection bid is "in trouble." He did make that assertion, twice. The first time, he asked "whose fault is it that {Obama} ends up in reelection trouble?" The second time, he stated that "if such a politician wasn't in reelection trouble, it would be a sign that our democracy is in a deeper crisis than it already is." Meaning that Obama IS currently in "reelection trouble," but if he weren't, well, then, that would be horrible for democracy.

I did finally find the answer myself, after having waded through Mr. Sirota's pontifications more closely. It's two paragraphs above the section quoted in the OP. Mr. Sirota bases his assertion that Obama's reelection chances are in trouble on the fact that his job approval numbers are generally in the 45-50% range, sometimes higher than that and sometimes (as in the most recent poll) a bit lower. The most recent poll has his job approval figure at 43%.

Sirota relies on Frank Newport's analysis for credibility, but he chose only one line from Mr. Newport's analysis of Obama's job approval ratings and their possible influence on the election in 2012. Mr. Newport's analysis was actually pretty even-handed, even acknowledging that the benchmark of 48% job approval rating for an incumbent as a predictor of reelection was "imprecise" as we only have 10 incumbent presidents on which to figure an average.

The number of cases for which we do have poll data is too small to estimate a precise mathematical relationship between an incumbent’s job approval rating and his chances of re-election. But, as noted above, the data can at least be instructive.

He also goes on to say that many factors other than the job approval numbers will have an impact on the election, and sums it up by stating that IF all those things were equal (they aren't), and IF Obama's approval numbers are below 45% or so next fall (remains to be seen), then he WILL BE in trouble AT THAT TIME, and if his numbers are above 50% AT THAT TIME, he WILL BE "looking good."

Sirota ignores all that and just uses one line of the whole analysis for the written equivalent of a sound bite, and from which to launch his assertions that Obama is currently in "reelection trouble," which does lead me to question his article as a whole.

I do thank you though, Jake, for your reply and attempt to help me understand the article.

[U4ikLefty]

173. The Whitehouse thanks you for your service.

[Moosepoop]

216. White. House. "White House." It's two words, U4ik.

While it is extremely unlikely that anyone in the White House is aware of my posts on this website questioning and critiquing an article, I do find it funny that you feel the need to imply it.

I must have touched a nerve of yours. I'm sure you'll find comfort for it somewhere. ;)

[BigBearJohn]

209. A-MEN!

[defendandprotect]

171. misplaced

[defendandprotect]

170. What was the election trouble that Obama was in in 2010-? A loss which he immediately responded ...

to by saying -- "I'M READY TO COMPROMISE EVEN MORE!!" -- !!


:rofl:


Further, you seem not to have learned anything from 2010 --

What Sirota is saying is that ... given Obama's record either we will find

a liberal challenger, or we are fools!

[Moosepoop]

214. Obama wasn't up for election in 2010.

You seem not to have learned anything, period.

:rofl:

Sirota seems to have gotten you half right.

[defendandprotect]

251. As they say ... "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" ---

[Moosepoop]

308. Well, YOU certainly say that a lot.

"you can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" defendandprotect

You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep - Democratic ...
May 24, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --- ... the model of a violent all male god for, defendandprotect, May-24-11 01:10 PM, #22 ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

Democratic Underground - Exactly ... "You can't wake up a man ...
Jun 28, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --, defendandprotect, Jun-28-11 12:29 PM, #8. Not all of them, karynnj, Jun-28-11 02:00 PM ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep - Democratic ...
Jun 7, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --- ! ... and what I see is you having a conversation with "ignored" --, defendandprotect ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

Democratic Underground - Here's the answer: "You can't wake up a ...
Apr 10, 2011 – Here's the answer: "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" -- !! defendandprotect, Apr-10-11 08:38 PM, #35 ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep - Democratic ...
Apr 4, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --, defendandprotect, Apr-04-11 12:07 AM, #80. What's amazing to me is that, xmas74 ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

Democratic Underground - As they say ... "You can't wake up a man ...
Dec 10, 2010 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" ... defendandprotect, Dec-10-10 03:20 AM, #133. Good. JTFrog, Dec-10-10 03:22 AM, #135 ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

Democratic Underground - As they say, "You can't wake up a man ...
Apr 16, 2011 – As they say, "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --, defendandprotect, Apr-16-11 10:39 PM, #99. "Anyone with a brain". ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

Democratic Underground - As they say ... "You can't wake up a man ...
Jul 10, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" --- ... but done the very OPPOSITE -- !! defendandprotect, Jul-09-11 10:44 PM, #145 ...
www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az...

It doesn't matter that not all Christians are extremists. THIS is ...
Jun 8, 2011 – "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" ---, defendandprotect, May-24-11 01:20 PM, #31. Actually, the Bible may be worse -- given ...
upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all...

12 killed in Gaza's deadliest 24 hours since 2008-9 war ...
Jun 8, 2011 – Here's the answer: "You can't wake up a man pretending to be asleep" -- !! defendandprotect, Apr-10-11 08:38 PM, #35 ...
upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next

It seems to be your default line when you can't think of anything else to say, since around 2007. Very pithy, and probably cute the first dozen times or so, but it's getting a bit stale. You might want to come up with something fresher. ;)

[woo me with science]

83. How brisk and shocking is the cold wind of truth,

when it enters the dank atmosphere to which we have become accustomed.

No, the chocolate ration has not been increased.

[Nevernose]

89. Which of these required Congress?

From the quoted text in the OP:

try to pass a public option to compete with private insurers -- He's the one that took it off the table, without even attempting to negotiate it.

attempt to crack down on Wall Street abuse -- he doesn't need congress to have the Justice Department make arrests of the many people we KNOW committed crimes, and are still committing crimes. There are a lot of regulations that he could still get through, not to mention push for a miniscule tax on financial instruments or, God forbid, making Wall Street reform as important as killing foeigners for no goddamned reason.

do what he can to stop unfair trade deals -- He doesn't need congress's approval to negotiate for fairness.

oppose extending his predecessors tax -- He didn't, and still doesn't, based on his lack of action.

avoid initiating initiate costly new wars sans congressional approval -- Started new ones and doubled down on wars with no goal.

Congress had nothing to do with those things. Here's a couple of other campaign promises he has actively done the OPPOSITE of:

Immigration reform. Hasn't tried to reform shit; instead, he's just rounding up three times the number of Mexicans that Bush did.
Medical marijuana. Despite the public opinion and the scientific evidence and his own promises, he's cracked down on pot smokers, costing us billions and ruining thousands of lives, all because some people like smoking from a bong and watching Cheech and Chong movies.
He still doesn't know about gay marriage. Gay kids are good enough to serve as cannon fodder for absolutely meaningless wars in foreign hellholes, but when a gay kid gets his fucking brains blown out and gets shipped back home in a box, Obama doesn't think that gay soldier's life mate should receive the folded flag or the survivors benefits, because gays are good enough to die for their country, but not good enough to get married in it. And no, he probably can't get congress to pass a law or policy on this, but he could at least speak up for those discriminated against.
He didn't need congressional approval to shut down Guantanamo Bay. He's the fucking commander-in-chief. He could have made one phone call at 8 o'clock at night and had the remaining prisoners in Ft. Leavenworth or a supermax facility before a single senator woke up the next morning. It was the right thing to do, but politically unpopular, and congress just provided a convenient cover story to get out of doing the right thing.
He promised to correct NCLB and to help the nation's educational system. Instead, he's trying to let public schools make as much money for private industry as possible, all the while destroying one of the world's great school systems in the name of "reform." And God forbid HIS kids go to a public school...
Did he have to cut a deal with BP to reimburse a pittance of what they destroyed? And did he stand strong against further oil exploration?
Does he have to let Ken Salazar give permission to shoot any goddamned animal people want to? (wolves, specifically)

[saras]

117. Good summary. Thank you.

[Enthusiast]

103. K&R!

I've been saying this for months now.

[I hate liars]

111. Obama has earned every bit of the emnity of his base

After all, if we don't reelect Obama, some big, bad Republican might:

- Increase the number of troops in Afghanistan
- Double-down on GWB's civil liberties attacks
- Fight for double-digit increases to the Defense budget
- Focus on deficit reduction instead of job creation policies
- Kill the chances for universal healthcare
- Make backroom deals to slowly strangle Social Security and Medicare
- Take restoration of upper-income tax rates off the table
- ...pick any other right-wing cause you can think of...

IMO, it's far worse to have a "Democrat" in the WH who says one thing and does another than to have a dyed in the wool regressive who is vulnerable to attacks from the left and the middle.

Obama needs to be primaried - big time.

[MissDeeds]

116. Agreed

And Obama does need to be primaried. I hope a true Dem will get sick to death of this crap and step forward. The stakes are too high. We need a change of leadership at the top.

[defendandprotect]

175. + 1 --

and, imo, that was the message voters delivered in 2010 --

[krabigirl]

112. The democratic party is a joke pretty much, just like the GOP.

[swilton]

115. Kickety Rickety

[Bonobo]

123. If America goes broke and fails as a country, it should...

do so in an effort to give everyone health care and out of poverty --not on war spending and making the staggeringly rich even more staggeringly rich.

[azul]

172. Maybe the trick is to make money something like Uranium.

So that when it is clumped together too much, some critical mass, it destroys itself. Poof, no more billionaires or too-big banks. Would keep inflation in check too.

Seems it would be simple thing to do with electronic data money and accounts.

[defendandprotect]

176. +1 --

Let's simply uninvent it --

Too easy for everything to be judged by the yardstick of a dollar bill --

even the worth of a human life!

Someday I have to find the actual words, but the Native American saw thru the

white European and their values and dollar bills and expressed it kinda this way --

What can you do with a dollar bill -- ? Can you eat it? Can you plant it?

If you stare at it will it show you a sunset?

[ejbr]

135. k & r n/t

[nc4bo]

140. I'm sorry but I have to agree with Mr. Sirota. K&R. nt

[Kaleva]

148. Do polls show Obama is in election trouble?

I mean, the latest Gallup Poll shows that 86% of liberal Dems approve of the job Obama is doing.

[totodeinhere]

159. Yes, and a similar percentage of Republicans will support their nominee.

The election will be won or lost with the independent vote.

[Kaleva]

186. I agree that Independents swinging to the Repub candidate may well cost Obama the election.

[totodeinhere]

187. I'm just hoping that the GOP nominee will be seen as so extreme that many independents cannot

stomach them so they vote for Obama in spite of the bad economy.

[Kaleva]

191. Romney, IMO, poses the biggest threat to President Obama.

The rest are too extreme or too little known.

[Doctor_J]

236. AS may liberals staying home

[defendandprotect]

179. What happened in 2010 ? It was a message from the voters about Obama--!!

Which Obama looked at and immediately responded ...

"I'm ready to compromise even more!"

[unkachuck]

160. K&R....n/t

[ClarkUSA]

168. Another shit-stirring Obama-bashing op-ed? Meanwhile: "Private payrolls rise by 157,000 in June"

FACT:

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — Private-sector employment rose 157,000 in June, according to Automatic Data Processing Inc.’s employment report released Thursday, in what could be a signal that the recent economic soft patch may not last long.

The headline number surprised Wall Street, coming in more than double the 70,000 increase expected by economists.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=705468&mesg_id=705468

Reality bites David Sirota's media whore ass. :rofl:

[Name removed]

212. Deleted message

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

[ClarkUSA]

257. Um, these are facts. Or can't you tell the difference anymore?

Go bitch to the economist which was quoted, not me. Sorry if the facts interfere with the Obama-bashing op-ed by media whore Sirota, who worked for DLC darling Gov. Schweitzer.

[nashville_brook]

226. your reality check bounced: payrolls only rose by 18,000.

[ClarkUSA]

258. June's private payrolls exceeded expectation by 70K. I provided a factual source quotes and a link.

[nashville_brook]

262. "US stocks dive after dismal June jobs report" - Business Week

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9OBH5EG0.htm

U.S. stocks opened sharply lower Friday after the government said businesses added the fewest jobs in June in more than a year. The unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent.

Employers created only 18,000 jobs last month, a fraction of what economists expected. The Labor Department also lowered its estimates for the number of jobs created in April and May.

The Standard & Poor's 500 index dropped 15 in morning trading, or 1.2 percent, to 1,338. That erased the index's gains from Thursday and left it flat for the week.

The Dow Jones industrial average fell 123 points, or 1 percent, to 12,597. The Nasdaq composite index fell 28, or 1 percent, to 2,844.

[nashville_brook]

263. "June Employment Report: 18,000 Jobs, 9.2% Unemployment Rate"

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2011/07/june-employment-report-18000-jobs-92.html


Nonfarm payroll employment was essentially unchanged in June (+18,000), and the unemployment rate was little changed at 9.2 percent, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment in most major private-sector industries changed little over the month. Government employment continued to trend down.
...
The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for April was revised from +232,000 to +217,000, and the change for May was revised from +54,000 to +25,000.
The following graph shows the employment population ratio, the participation rate, and the unemployment rate.

[nashville_brook]

264. "Only 18,000 Jobs Added In June, Jobless Rate Edged Up To 9.2 Percent" - NPR

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/07/08/137697628/only-18-000-jobs-added-in-june-jobless-rate-edges-up-to-9-2-percent


The nation's unemployment rate ticked up to 9.2 percent in June from 9.1 percent the month before as businesses and government agencies added only 18,000 jobs to their payrolls, the Bureau of Labor Statistics just reported.

Both figures are well below the already modest pre-report forecasts from economists.

[nashville_brook]

265. "June Job Growth Appalling: 18,000" - AFL-CIO

http://blog.aflcio.org/2011/07/08/june-job-growth-appalling-18000/

June Job Growth Appalling: 18,000




The nation gained a stunningly small number of jobs in June–18,000–while the U.S. unemployment rate rose from 9.1 percent in May to 9.2 percent last month, according to Department of Labor data released this morning. Analysts had predicted jobs would grow by 100,000 in June. This is the third consecutive month the unemployment rate has worsened and the worst unemployment rate of the year. Hiring by companies, which excludes government agencies, was the weakest since May 2010.

Employment was essentially flat in construction and manufacturing, while health care employment continued to grow (+14,000) as did employment in leisure and hospitality (+34,000).

Some 39,000 jobs were lost in the public sector, and Economic Policy Institute (EPI) economist Josh Bivens points out that the loss of public-sector jobs is a huge obstacle to growth. Nearly all of the 430,000 jobs that have been lost in the public sector during the current recovery have been lost at the local level. Local government employment is now 407,000 lower than it was at the beginning of the recovery, and almost half of those losses have been education workers.

[nashville_brook]

266. "With only 18,000 jobs created fears of double-dip escalate" - MarketWatch

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hiring-weak-in-june-with-only-18000-jobs-created-2011-07-08


WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) — The U.S. economy added jobs at an even slower pace in June than in May, suggesting that the sudden slowdown in the economy might be long-lasting and more severe than feared.

Nonfarm payrolls rose by only 18,000 in June, the Labor Department reported Friday, well below the 125,000 gain expected by economists surveyed by MarketWatch.

Job gains in May were revised down to 25,000 in May from the initial estimate of 54,000.

The nation's unemployment rate ticked up to 9.2% in June, with only 18,000 nonfarm payrolls added to the economy.

[nashville_brook]

267. "U.S. Adds 18,000 Jobs In June As Jobless Rate Climbs To 9.2 %" - HuffPo

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/08/jobs-report-unemployment-rate_n_893059.html

The unemployment rate rose and the economy added far fewer jobs than anticipated in June, confirming fears that an economic slump has taken hold and further dashing hopes that a powerful recovery will be soon forthcoming.

Only 18,000 jobs were added to the American economy in June -- a blow to Wall Street expectations, which had estimated between 90,000 and 140,000 added jobs -- and the unemployment rate rose to 9.2 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics monthly employment report.

"Clearly it's a disappointing number," said Bernard Baumohl, chief global economist at The Economic Outlook Group. "There are just too many factors that are really creating downward pressure on new job growth, among which is the simple fact that the U.S. economy has slowed markedly from late last year."


________________

Have a nice day.

:evilgrin:

[ClarkUSA]

268. None of your claims contradict the facts I posted. The private sector is hiring beyond expectations.

[Creideiki]

312. To everything, spin, spin, spin, there is a liar, spin, spin, spin

and a sycophant to spread the Party line.

[ClarkUSA]

259. dupe

[Name removed]

232. Deleted message

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

[johnaries]

196. Wow, what lies! Sirota needs to do his homework. He is spinning

pure bullshit.

[7wo7rees]

202. Hurricane season is underway...

We'll see if he can get water to New Orleans or Tampa or wherever in under five days.
Then we'll see what we got.

[blkmusclmachine]

204. And yet you get a free Media pass if, as Gov. of TX, you want to seceed from the USA

and run for the WH 2 years later. Tells you all you really need to know about the bought-and-paid-for Media's allegences. "Liberal" Media my ass! Bald-faced liars is more like it.

[BigBearJohn]

210. There is no way in hell I will vote for Obama in 2012. End of story.

Say what you want. I'm done. This liberal
will NOT vote for Obama.

[slay]

211. I hear ya

i can't either - i don't approve of his actions (or lack there of) since becoming president at all - much less giving him 4 more years - good lord no - i can not vote for that. now i understand why people vote for Nader.

[Pooka Fey]

215. + 1 I try to align my actions with my beliefs.

So I can't vote for Obama again in 2012.

However, at the local level I will continue to support the democratic candidate, until the time comes when the progressive left has a viable 3rd Party alternative.

[dogmoma56]

231. not voting for a democrat for whatever is a vote for a Dominionist president

see post #56

[Le Taz Hot]

219. K & R

[mother earth]

220. Why worry about any GOP 2012 candidate? Obama is not

a progressive by any stretch of the imagination....TPTB got exactly what they wanted in him, now we the people once again have been sidelined and will continue to be. When having the audacity of hope and change we can believe in just never comes out swinging or aiming high, it's no wonder everyone is beginning to see through the charade. Does it really matter who is in the WH? Does the vote really matter? I think everyone hoped he was different, sure there's been crumbs of change....and it can all be overturned and probably will, but look at the vastness and audacity of what has been taken and gutted out of this country? And nary a pillager held accountable....

[nashville_brook]

225. mmm seditiolicious!

:evilgrin:

[smiley33]

227. The typical voter is sick of the party system

Hence the growing influence of the Tea Party. If Democrats and Republicans were not seen in the same negative light (rightly so!), disenchanted Republican voters would have turned to the other side. But due to the undeniable corruption of most Democrats (except Bernie Sanders and a few others?), many voters fell into the trap of a few right-wing radicals, set up by the clever rich.

The Koch bros. and their buddies seized the opportunity to swing a significant minority of the uninformed public into their grasp, giving the rich not just money, but essentially a new, more radical, albeit smaller, Republican Party. Voters who are ready to stand and march for less Medicare and SS, less regulation of industry, lower taxes, and the discarding of anything else the government had done for them.

Now, many of us Progressives are upset with the Democratic Party. Our anger is justified. Typical Democrats stand by President Obama, happy with his bipartisan efforts. However, the more liberal people with or without party affiliation see danger in the trend of giving up more and more ground to the right. If voters jumped for another party that went against their every interest, what would they think of one that was solely for them?

Perhaps the time is ripe for another party. A party representing labor and the workers first. A party ready to protect the interests of the unheard, non-rich, and unarmed. Maybe it's my imagination, but I see now as the time for a true Progressive Party.

[dogmoma56]

228. here are some links that explain why Obama is totally impotent to change anything >Links>>

THIS IS WHY POLITICIANS LIE
http://dictionary.infoplease.com/machiavellian

http://www.globalismnews.com/dominiondeception.htm

read about Strauss and Machiavellism
http://doggo.tripod.com/doggchrisdomin.html

"Leo Strauss and the American Right" -- Thom Hartmann's Independent Thinker Review
http://blog.buzzflash.com/hartmann/10016

if you don't read this book you have no idea what is happening in our government..
it will answer EVERY :wtf: moment you ever had about politics.
this will answer why Obama CAN'T do ANYTHING about changing the Oligarchy's grip on YOUR LIFE
http://www.amazon.com/Family-Secret-Fundamentalism-Heart-American/dp/0060560053/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1310310089&sr=1-1

Doug Coe's secret Religious Cult of Nazi Abraham Vereide's insanity, voices from god in 1934 destroy America in 2011,
http://www.theocracywatch.org/secret_theocrats.html

who really runs the theocratic shift of politics
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVrQkunIZXo&feature=player_embedded

Controlling the Planned Collapse
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article18897.htm

The Despoiling of America
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/TheDespoilingOfAmerica.htm

[loveandlight]

229. vote for a more progressive Congress

Whether or not Obama has been a disappointment to the progressive community, I think the most important thing to do this coming election is vote in more progressive candidates into Congress. We need that kind of support in Congress, I think, first and foremost. I also believe that I have to vote for Obama 2012 because I don't want the whole country to become like a Wisconsin or New Jersey (where I live.) It is friggin' scary, I will tell you, when you your own Democratic party members, as in NJ, turn against the working people because they are afraid the person in charge (as with Christie) will only do worse things. The current GOP crowd in DC is just like Christie in that regard, they will go for broke, they don't care who gets tossed to the side. You can't reason with them. But we have to over power them with enough progressive votes on our side.

For me I will do my best to get more progressive people elected in local, state and Congressional seats. Then our voting block will be something to contend with and we can override them. We need to get veto proof numbers in place. It is a serious struggle, but I think to focus on one person at the top, like an Obama, is just not getting us anywhere. Bottom up, that is where the organizing begins. That is where it counts. The Repubs have done that and look where it has gotten them, in control of so much. It looks like it just all of a sudden happened, but it didn't, they've been organizing for years. We focused too much on the shiny ball in front of our faces (Obama)and left behind the hard work of local organizing. I said this to all of my peace organizing friends during the Obama campaign, when they stopped working on the peace campaigns and all threw in behind Obama. And we got just what I expected. You cannot put all your hope on one person promising you the world.

I will still vote for Obama, but my heart is in organizing for local and state progressives to counteract the Repub take over that has happened all around the country. We should all focus on that and stop being distracted into throwing all of our energy into being for or against one person like Obama. He is not the whole show. And if our energy gets wasted on him, for or against, instead of building up from the bottom, we will never be able to influence the presidential candidates or officeholders in any meaningful way.

[lovuian]

233. Democrats better be ready to put up another candidate

Obama is obviously in major reelection trouble

and it better be someone the Liberals trust or its a bon voyage party for Dems

[FreeBillClinton]

260. Democrats are too weak to even offer one candidate against a President who wants to hand over Soc. S

[Doctor_J]

234. And those are just the promises he broke

Of course if he'd said during the campaign that he would help destroy Medicare, SS, and public schools, he wouldn't have been elected.

[whatchamacallit]

249. Fuck Yeah! K&R!!!

:applause:

[ClarkUSA]

261. lol! Sirota is a shit-stirring media whore who was a senior aide to DLC darling Gov. Schweitzer.

David Sirota's whole grandstanding media whore schtick is to attack President Obama from the left, no matter what the president does or says. He's very much like a PUMA that way (ditto with Jane 'Grover Norquist and teabaggers are my "Kill The Bill" allies' Hamsher, who supports and helps Republicans via her media company).

[KoKo]

291. Another Kick for this...it's just too REAL to let go to archives, here.

for so many of us who tried to point out that "something was and is very wrong."

[dionysus]

298. need a kleenex willy?

[WillyT]

313. No... But Thank You For Your Kindness...

:hi:

[amborin]

305. kicking, too late to recommend

[Youth Uprising]

311. That was a satisfying read and extremely accurate.

I wonder how much hatemail he's going to get for that?