Can we establish "Rules of Engagement From Below" about discussing The New Administration?

[Ken Burch]

I don't want to bother the mods about this.

Seems like we could find some way to establish ways among ourselves to discuss what Our Prez is doing and to push from below for other ideas when we need to. Seems like we could also find ways to accept that those who do are friends and NOT enemies.

There needs to be some way we can change the way we deal with this...because the sniping is getting ridiculous.

We ARE all on the same side, in the end.

Looking for any ideas on this that anybody has.

[FrenchieCat]

1. I don't have any real suggestions that wouldn't get shot down

in a hot second!

I will say that we should want President Obama to have an upper hand, especially during the budget discussion....but it appears that the media ramped it up just right, and it will only make it harder for this President to give us what we voted for.

Budget approval lost 5 points since last months. That's not helpful to anyone who voted for Barack Obama.

Here the story on that: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8300110&mesg_id=8300110

[Political Heretic]

2. Why is that? Part of it has to do with multi billion dollar handouts to Wall street

... kind of puts people in a sour mood about trusting the government with huge budgets.

Still, I'm all for this budget. Coalition on Human needs is my primary source of information on this. I love those guys.

[FrenchieCat]

4. Bush I believe is the one that asked for 700 Billion.

Meanwhile this is Obama's budget that he proposed after winning the presidency,
and yes, after the 700 billion had already been signed, sealed and pretty much delivered.

The money was already mostly gone, and nationalization was not a done deal
as congress has yet to approve it for some of the worse offenders in the scheme
of things.

Have you read this? http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5350682&mesg_id=5350682

[Political Heretic]

8. The money wasn't almost all already gone.

About half of the 700 billion was spent by this administration. Second the recent proposed Bailout II is another multi billion dollar plan that some will see as a wall street hand out - right or wrong.

For the purposes of this one exchange right here, my only point is to say that these major amounts of money going to Wall Street, whether they are appropriate or not, are not popular, and they make passing a huge budget much more difficult.




On the other thing, I have read the other link, as well as other summaries of the requests for this new power. I said the other night that it sounds interesting and I wasn't sure what to think about it. But the more I read about it, the less I like it. Some really powerful concerns have been raised by more than a few people about how this authority could actually end up forever solidifying the merging of corporate and state institutions. On the other hand, I'm not sure that I agree with that concern. So I'm familiar with what's being requested, I'm not sure how I feel about it.


By the way I'm having some problem with my internet tonight so its taking me forever to get pages loaded and respond.. :(

[Ken Burch]

3. We all want President Obama to have the upper hand against the Right in Congress

(including the "Blue Dog" Dems that are working as relentlessly against him now as the conservative Dems who opposed LBJ worked to sabotage the War on Poverty and the Great Society were then).

The question is, is pushing from the progressive side really going to harm him?

And can we agree on ways to make that push that won't automatically make half the posters here accuse the other half of disloyalty?

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Depends on what you mean by "push"...

amazing as it might seem, the President does not look to DU for advice. Neither does Congress. And none of them care to hear constant bitching from the peanut gallery. As with most people with real jobs, they tend to tune it out and get pissed when the noise gets too loud too ignore. (Although one could legitimately ask if anyone in Congress has a real job...)

They do, however, listen to organized lobbying. Lobbyists have a bad name, but there are plenty of them that do take up our causes.

I have very little money to spare for political finagling, and what little I have at the moment goes to the ACLU and the Friends Committee for National Legislation. If I had more money, I would start giving to environmental lobbyists, and go on from there. There are plenty of progressive lobbyists out there, and they need every bit of support they can get.

The few bucks I send them, followed up by organized contacts on particular issues or legislation, multiplies enormously anything I could do on my own. And it is infinitely more productive than whining on a message board.

[Ken Burch]

7. I didn't mean just DU...I meant the whole of Progressive America

And well, sometimes the insiders don't like to listen to those who elected them(btw, "people with real jobs" is Republican rhetoric. I HAVE a real job, as do most other people to the left of the Admin, and those who don't largely don't due to status quo economic policies), well tough. Those who don't like to listen to us are the ones who need to be made to HEAR us.
You might want to review your post, there's a rather ugly elitist undertone to it that I'm not sure you meant to include. I mean "constant bitching from the peanut gallery"? That's the kind of thing Rush or Bill-O would say. Democrats aren't supposed to question the legitimacy of other Democrats' place in the discussion.

[laugle]

5. Thanks for the post! I did a K & R and hope we can

get some feedback tomorrow. Right now, I'm too tired and have to get some ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ's......

Nighty, Night!