Obama had some serious capital...

[Bonobo]

Of the 8 previous presidential elections I have seen, I cannot remember ever seeing one so energized, so full of the promise and possibilities of dramatic change.

Few of us, even a few years ago, ever believed it was possible to elect a black man as president of the Untied States.

It felt like we were really breaking new ground and achieving a grass roots victory through our contributions of time and money and enthusiasm.

It all seemed possible. A true repudiation of the last 8 years, no, more -it seemed a repudiation of the very idea that we could not accomplish big things.

The man had capital. The man had millions of hard workers ready to dig in and support that change. He had email lists, he had momentum. Hell, he had both houses.

It. Was. Historic

And now, it is a historic opportunity squandered.

I was a huge Obama supporter. Everyone that remembers correctly knows that.

Now I, along with millions others, has lost hope, lost enthusiasm.

You can rage against that sentiment all you want.
You can say I was unrealistic.
You can say I am pouting or "manufacturing outrage".
You can say I am not patient enough.
You can call even call me a disloyal Democrat.

But you can not wipe away the reality that millions of others feel like me.

[uppityperson]

1. What can he do to get that back? What can he do to get the minority party

to not block everything since even though"he had both houses" they block most everything? Serious questions for you, not snarkability ones.

I agree that a lot of people have lost hope, wondering what the reason is and what to do about it.

[Cronus Protagonist]

2. How about being the man he represented himself as in the election?

That would go a long way towards repairing the damage.

[uppityperson]

5. What can he do to get the minority party to not block everything since even though"he had both house

What can he do to get the minority party to not block everything since even though "he had both houses" they block most everything?

How do you mean "being the man he represented himself as"? Again, I am sure plenty of people would love to snark, I am being serious, wondering what people think.

[Cronus Protagonist]

8. The minority part, us, was not able to stop Bush, how come they stop Obama?

In any case, pandering to the right wing, kissing their asses, giving them just about all they want and then getting no votes from them has to stop.

[uppityperson]

11. That is a good question. I wish I could get an answer from them as it is extremely frustrating

I agree with what you write, am very frustrated with Dems in Congress.

[Usrename]

159. The minority has not really stopped any liberal legislation...

... since none has ever been proposed. To the contrary, they've just made sure that the Democrats are the ones who are getting blamed for the right-wing policies that Obama has placed into law, such as health insurance mandates. Every person I talk to about that particular law believes that the liberals are way out of control. They believe that the mandates are a liberal policy, when in reality this was the Newt Gingrich policy that was used to shoot down Hillary-care back in the day, only now it has been passed into law by a Democrat.

Obama was dealt aces and he folded his hand under the guise of being bipartisan. I certainly don't know why he did that, and I can only guess. I think he is modeling himself after Reagan. If this is true he will overhaul his administration after losing big in the midterm elections. We'll see. How it is possible for the Dems to lose big in the midterms involves some real slight-of-hand.

[alarimer]

316. Congressional Democrats are in trouble precisely because they are too cautious.

They will lose because of it. Obama is in trouble for exactly the same reason. I guarantee if they all had at least FOUGHT to do the right thing (a public option, strict financial regulation) they would be higher in the polls than they are right now.

[phleshdef]

41. Dems in the Senate didn't try very hard to stop Bush. The Republicans ARE trying their damndest to..

...stop Obama.

Aside from that, most of the major comprimises haven't been to Republicans, they have been to Democrats. The senate isn't progressive. Thats reality.

[Usrename]

164. Obama could have easily drummed the Senate into shape.

There isn't a single Democrat that could stand up to Obama politically and keep their job.

NOT ONE!

Obama has said many times publicly that he wants to work with the Republicans. It's a conscious choice the president is making.

[uppityperson]

169. Rather amusing, you say no Dem could stand up to Obama politcally & keep their job, while

next post below (another poster) says "Blue Dogs ... they voted with the GOP regularly."

You write he is modeling himself after Reagan, and has proposed no liberal legislation.

I know there is a lot of frustration about what is going on politically, and can see many people putting the blame in the place that will lead back to at least as bad as what happened during the bush years.

[Usrename]

244. You misunderstand what I am saying.

Nobody has had to stand up to Obama. He's fine with letting all the Blue Dogs off the reservation. I defy you to give us any evidence at all to the contrary.

I believe that if he wanted to stop it, he could. That's just my opinion, but it's based on observable facts. The other poster you mention has no facts to back up his claim that the Blue Dogs are behaving in any manner that is disagreeable to Obama.

Remember when Obama supported Lieberman over Lamont? That should give you a clue here. Obama doesn't see anything wrong at all with the Blue Dogs, at least Obama has NEVER said anything like that publicly, although he has said the opposite many times which does support my perception.

[phleshdef]

291. Thats some of the most naive bunch of horse shit I've ever read.

For one, a lot of them aren't up for re-election for awhile and don't have to worry about "keeping their jobs". Others, like Lieberman, may not even care at this point. He has been shooting for a new gig since he got shafted by Conn. Democrats. You think someone like Nelson couldn't still carry conservative Nebraska and be as un-liberal as he damn well pleases? If you think that, you probably can't find Nebraska on a map. All it took was 1 single caucus member to join a united GOP on a filibuster and no bills make it to a vote, EVER, PERIOD. Thats reality and I don't need to produce any proof for that. Its common knowledge.

[Usrename]

292. This is total and complete insanity.

You are arguing that Democratic senators should filibuster the president's agenda with the president's approval. It's insanity, pure and simple.

You're making an insane argument.

[phleshdef]

294. Only if you completely lack comprehension skills, as you just illustrated.

Thats not even remotely close to what I said. You just made the idiotic claim that no Democrats could stand up to the President (ie join a filibuster) and keep their job and I'm just explaining exactly why that is naive bullshit and exactly how there are a few that could get away with that easily, which a few could, and would, and 1 or 2 is all it takes to completely kill a bill. Its fucking basic COUNTING skills.

[Usrename]

298. There is no evidence to support what you believe.

You are making some assumptions which have no facts to back them up. When has the president ever mentioned any of the senators you're talking about? I don't think you can produce any evidence at all to support what you are saying. Obama has never mentioned ANY of them by name AFAIK.

If you can show any proof at all of what you are claiming, then I would be wrong, wouldn't I? But since I don't think you can, then I think your living in a false reality, ie. you're insane.

[phleshdef]

302. There is no evidence to support that Lieberman or Nelson would vote against the President?

Except all the times both have threatened to. Lieberman campaigned against Obama in the general election. Nelson is a conservative Senator from a very conservative state. I need no more evidence. I have common sense and an iota of political instinct, both are items which you are obviously lacking.

[treestar]

308. Insanity. They are elected in their States.

They can be re-elected in those States without Obama's support.

[JoePhilly]

129. Blue Dogs ... they voted with the GOP regularly.

In addition, the GOP has closed ranks against Obama.

[bvar22]

192. I was willing to give some points for that excuse...

until the White House went out and campaigned FOR those conservative Anti-Working Class Blue Dog Senators in the Democratic Primaries.(SEE: Blanche Lincoln, Arkansas)

For me, THAT was the final Pulling Back of the curtain.

[JoePhilly]

207. Two points ....

1) If the administration attacked the blue dogs ... and they still won, they would become even more vindictive than they are now ... a few might even change parties.

2) In most cases, you can't win in the places where the blue dogs are found. They tend to represent political oddities. They have been able to carve out a niche in which a person who votes as a Dem "sometimes" can win in very conservative areas.

My issue with the blue dogs is NOT that they don't always vote with the Dems. But .. in the current environment, when the GOP will do NOTHING but vote in lock step ... the B-dogs need to come home ... and the administration invited them to do so.

We on the left SUCK at closing ranks. The GOP is quick to close ranks ... meanwhile, we on the left won't do it out of principle, even when its necessary.

[bvar22]

211. "Invited them to come home"....LOL

I remember Obama praising them...a la Senator Max Baucus who was the first to torpedo the Public Option in the Senate, and substitute a Republican Health Care Plan.

OTOH, when members of the Progressive Caucus held out FOR a Public Option, Obama himself went to their (his) Home Districts and ran very public negative campaigns against them.

[JoePhilly]

222. BS ...

The HCR plan is not Republican ... that is total BS. Is it everything we want?? ...no ... but it is much better then what existed before. And definitely better than nothing.

While I would agree that the Fox News taking point that the US is a "center-right" country is a LIE, the fact is that it is not "liberal" either.

As things stand ... the country is a little left of center on SOCIAL issues (abortion, gay rights, etc). Right of center on foreign policy (fight first) and then right of center on government spending (outside the military).

That last item is important ... see ... when a person on the right gets unemployment, or disability, they think they EARNED it, when OTHERS get it ... those people are SPONGES.

As for the public option, the rules created for the exchanges include about 80% of the protections of the "public option" ... most of what we lost was the NAME ... not the details.

You want insurance that is like what COngress gets, this bill does that. Sadly, to get it passed the full provisions are delayed ... still better than nothing.

And then ... with HCR passed ... it is far easier to build on that framework.

And again ... your claim that this is a Republican HC plan is simply wrong ...

[bvar22]

246. Well, lets take a look at it:

Mandates...Republican

Cadillac Tax....Republican

Defund Medicare....Republican

Budget Neutral...Republican

No Public Option...Republican

Community Health Care Centers...Republican
(At the beginning of the HCR fiasco, the Republicans cited CHC as THE reason to kill the Public Option)

WAKE UP.
Do the Homework!
Aside from a few regulatory crumbs that didn't make the Republicans too uncomfortable, the WHOLE FRAMEWORK is a Republican Proposal (National Romney Care), DESIGNED to protect the "private" delivery system that caused the problem in the first place.


Aside from your own opinions about where the "Center" of the country is, you offered NOTHING of substance.
Here is what the MAJORITY of Americans (Democrats AND Republicans) want from OUR government!

In recent polls by the Pew Research Group (2005!), the Opinion Research Corporation, the Wall Street Journal, and CBS News, the American majority has made clear how it feels. Look at how the majority feels about some of the issues that you'd think would be gospel to a real Democratic Party:

1. 65 percent (of ALL Americans, Democrats AND Republicans) say the government should guarantee health insurance for everyone -- even if it means raising taxes.

2. 86 percent favor raising the minimum wage (including 79 percent of selfdescribed "social conservatives").

3. 60 percent favor repealing either all of Bush's tax cuts or at least those cuts that went to the rich.

4. 66 percent would reduce the deficit not by cutting domestic spending but by reducing Pentagon spending or raising taxes.

5. 77 percent believe the country should do "whatever it takes" to protect the environment.

6. 87 percent think big oil corporations are gouging consumers, and 80 percent (including 76 percent of Republicans) would support a windfall profits tax on the oil giants if the revenues went for more research on alternative fuels.

7. 69 percent agree that corporate offshoring of jobs is bad for the U.S. economy (78 percent of "disaffected" voters think this), and only 22% believe offshoring is good because "it keeps costs down."

http://alternet.org/story/29788/

"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[dflprincess]

267. Insurance for more, not healthcare for all

strikes me as a very Republican plan.

[phleshdef]

295. He never went to anyone's home district and ran negative campaigns against them.

Now you're just making shit up.

[bvar22]

296. You really should be better informed if you are going to post on DU...

..otherwise, you end up ruining your credibility.

"President Obama just finished enthralling a crowd in Ohio in one of the last acts (one hopes) of his push to pass health-care reform. Rolling up his shirtsleeves, Obama began his speech with a little public arm-twisting, calling out a few of the local notables assembled; and way up at the top of his list was Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D), in whose district Obama was speaking."

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/03/obama_softly_threatens_dennis.html

"As the president introduced the congressman to the audience, a voice in the crowd yelled, "Vote yes!"

"Did you hear that, Dennis? Go ahead, say that again," Obama said over the loudspeaker.

"Vote yes!" the voice yelled again.
Later in his speech, Obama singled Kucinich out again. "I was talking to Dennis Kucinich on the way over here about this. I said, you know what? It's been such a long time since we made government on the side of ordinary working folks."

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/03/15/obama-tells-congress-to-have-courage-leans-on-kucinich-to-vot/

A local political activist later stated that it was an Obama campaign plant in the Ohio crowd that made the initial shout out.

I'm not in the mood to accept an apology this morning,
so don't bother.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans."
---Paul Wellstone


"By their works you will know them."

[phleshdef]

299. LOL.Like I said, JUST MAKING SHIT UP.

The exchange with Kucinich was light hearted and was a result of the fact that he and Dennis had just sat together on airforce one and talked about the pending healthcare vote. Thats not "going to their district and running a negative campaign against them", not even close. There was nothing negative about it. You sound like a fucking idiot even hinting at suggesting as much. Sheesh, the lack of common sense and the lack of ability to properly interpret social exchanges is astounding. I can only hope you aren't so socially inept at interpreting communication with people in real life. If so, I feel bad for you.

You've now officially embarassed yourself and lost all credibility. Good job.

[Usrename]

300. Ok then genius, when has he ever joked with Sen Ben Nelson?

This is some pathelogical rhetoric you're coming up with here. I don't think you can see what is right in front of your face.

[phleshdef]

301. LOL, pathological rhetoric. You just throw words out there and hope something sticks.

Seriously, you call a completely inoffensive exchange with a fellow congressman who he just had a long heart to heart talk with about voting for a bill that Kucinich was leaning against a "negative campaign" against him. I don't care what you say from here on out. That alone exposes just how poor your efforts at constructing an argument are. A "negative campaign", LOL. The fact that Kucinich came out after and said a lot of good things about the President and how he was disgusted at the attempts to delegitimize the President and how he would vote for the bill because it was the right thing to do make you look even more pathetic.

[pocoloco]

186. I am sure glad someone else noticed that also!!

May have something to do with ball size?

[DonCoquixote]

204. Because

The Southern Blue Dogs, and for that matter, many of the so called liberals (like Reid and pelosi) were much happier with Bush than they were with anyone that would force them to actually DO anything. It's and ugly fact, but it is true. The Democrats in congress want a GOP person back so they can go back to collecting a paycheck for saying "y'all know I canna do nuttin"

[rury]

261. That's because many conservative Democrats vote with

Republicans and that helped Bush.
On the other hand, ALL OF THE REPUBLICANS VOTE AGAINST PRESIDENT OBAMA AND THOSE SAME CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRATS WHO HELPED BUSH OPPOSE OBAMA.
AND SINCE 60 F------G VOTES ARE REQUIRED TO MOVE LEGISLATION, IF ONE CONSERVATIVE DEM JUMPS SHIP THAT'S IT....WE LOSE!
THE SYSTEM IS STACKED AGAINST THE AVERAGE PERSON AND TOO MANY CONGRESSCRITTERS, MANY OF THEM WITH A "D" AFTER THEIR NAME, ARE IN THE POCKET OF BIG BUSINESS, THE WEALTHY, POWERFUL, ETC.
CHANGE IS HARD AND WE HAVE TO KEEP SLUGGING AWAY AND MOVING IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION THAT PRESIDENT OBAMA HAS BEGUN!
Oh, BTW, the all-caps are intentional because this message needs to be shouted.
Too many liberals/progressives are either unaware of that dynamic or choose to ignore it and it completely baffles me, especially when it comes from people who seem to be politically aware.

[treestar]

307. It is unprecedented for the minority party to use the filibuster on

every. single. bill.

That's why.

So instead of beating up on the Republicans for the errors of their ways . . .

[obxhead]

133. He can stop giving away the farm on every issue while

still not getting a single thing in return.

I can stand by Obama explaining to me why we couldn't get a law for us passed.

I can not stand by Obama signing a repub written bill when the repubs still vote against it.

I'm sick and tired of giving everything away to the minority party, while not getting a single damn thing in return from them.

[uppityperson]

173. Which bill do you mean? sometimes 1 party writes legislation they intend to vote against

They write it So they can say "see, I voted against this". They write a bill they don't want, and vote against it to score points at home, with their party, etc. Sometimes each party will insert something irrelevant into a bill, which turns the overall bill and amendments into something very different which cannot be signed. It is a stupid and complicated game they play, the political game. I wish it were more straightforward.

I have no problem with Pres Obama signing "a repub written bill when the repubs still vote against it", if it is a decent bill.

Do you have a specific bill in mind.

[Spheric]

206. Passing a bill that you allow the other side to write and vote against anyway is suicide.

Their hands are now clean when people find out what a piece of crap it is. They will blame the ones who voted for it.

It is the most insane political move I have ever personally seen or heard about in history.

It's change alright. But, it is certainly not the change I was looking for or expecting.

[uppityperson]

208. What bill do you mean? I'm glad for any decent bill to be passed, no matter who writes it

Do you have a specific bill in mind, or are you talking in general?

I am not about to recommend voting against a good bill simply because it is written by "the other side" who also vote against it.

[Sebastian Doyle]

266. What he should have done is plant a boot in Spineless Harry Reid's wrinkled old ass

There is NO excuse for a Senate with 60 Democrats not to be able to pass whatever the fuck they wanted. Granted, you had Byrd and Teddy missing a lot of votes for obvious reasons, but 50 Democrats, a Democratic vice president and a Majority Leader who knows what those two words mean, would have been sufficient. Obama seems to have copied the wrong thing from LBJ. Should have been the "Keeping the Senate in line thing" not the "Longest unnecessary illegal war in history thing" :evilfrown:

[Cronus Protagonist]

283. I wish I could recommend posts

Yours is a winner. :P

[MichiganVote]

19. Amen to that.

[AllyCat]

226. I don't think he represented himself as anything other than a corporatist.

However, it was a bit misleading some of the stuff he said. We had to hope and that is what he capitalized on. And won. And now we have lost. We would have lost with either of those candidates.

We have to change our focus to the whole political process, not the POTUS which is a sham of a debacle.

[Stinky The Clown]

3. He could lead in the *CORRECT* direction

[uppityperson]

7. Lead how? How can he get repubs to not block him so he can do stuff?

What can he do to get the minority party to not block everything since even though "he had both houses" they block most everything?

[tavalon]

81. By pointing out what they are doing

He has the bully pulpit and if he will just stop listening to the other side, we will have his back. It seems like he prefers pandering to the right, over helping all of us.

[AllyCat]

228. I think sometimes they DO point out what they are doing, but the M$M

won't report anything correctly or in context. Part of changing this is getting corporations out of or political process (at somewhat).

[Bluenorthwest]

125. He seeks out the input of Republicans- calls them 'honest

brokers' and the like. Pleads for their ideas to be brought to the table. If they are blocking, why doesn't he say that, instead of heaping on the praise? You say they block him, he says they are his partners, and right there is the crux of the problem. The Republicans are NOT our partners. And when Obama pushes that shit, I reject both him and the shit he is pushing. I am a Democrat, opposed to Republicans.

[uppityperson]

170. You have never heard him say the repubs block things? Thank you for that input

People hear what they want to.

[newspeak]

187. The executive branch does influence his congress constituents to introduce

certain bills. I've said this before-if a progressive job creation bill, health care bill, financial regulatory bill had been introduced and the people saw who was blocking those bills-bills that affect them-to my mind, then, the voters would make sure that congress would change to get those bills passed. If the people see that there are roadblocks in the way, and as more people are losing their homes and jobs, then they'd attempt to vote for those changes-voting people in who would stand by those progressive bills. A bi-partisan bill that the party of "no" will still not vote for, yet, have influenced only harms more people on main street rather than help.

Better no bill at all, instead, of a half assed attempt that does more damage than good. Do you think that the people are going to vote for the party of no when their losing their safety net?

Anyway, that's what I would do--if I saw that major bills to help the people who are hurting were being roadblocked, I'd vote for those who are ready and willing to vote bills to help in this time of need.

[Bonobo]

6. I think he needs to show that he is on our side more.

Something dramatic. Stop playing footsies with them. Stop appointing middle-of-the-roader appointees from the big banks/corporations.

He needs to show he is of the people. THEN, he will get us back.

He needs to break dramatically from the policies that are destroying us. No slow withdrawals. no more money for war when we are dying here. No slick management of DADT policy, etc.

People are turning off because they feel it is just more of the same. THAT is why his capital is ebbing away.

Generally, you do not regain the political capital that first existed after an election anyway. He squandered what was there in such large quantities and I don't think it is coming back.

[uppityperson]

9. Thanks bonobo, and I agree. Many see him as being too cautious, and as congress

as being too fearful to risk much,what with minority party still having the ability to slow things down.

I hate politics, hate the playing games to get so little done, while so many suffer and are hurting.

Thanks for the answer.

[DJ13]

12. I think its too late

Right after the election theres that narrow window of opportunity to go bold while the public sentiment is at its highest, and Congress would look petty and/or overly partisan if they tried to stop it.

That chance is over, Congress no longer fears opposing Obama (even within our own party) because someone advising Obama decided to play the conciliatory bipartisan approach from the start instead of pushing his major campaign proposals forward while his chances were best.

[uppityperson]

14. I fear it may be too late, but don't want to believe that.

I agree that right after the election was a great time to go bold, etc, like you said. If it is too late, should he try or not now? I would like to see him do something bold now. I would like to see the Congressional Dems get off their fearful hind ends and tell the minority party to take a leap and take some risks in getting things done.

[JDPriestly]

131. He can fire the DLCers -- Rahm Emmanuel, Geithner, Summers

even Hillary. He can end the rush toward charter schools. He can support unions and workers in general. He can cut the military budget, not Social Security and Medicare. He can prosecute those who ordered torture -- especially the torture that ended in the deaths of the torture victims. He can stand up for the rights of gay and lesbian citizens loudly and clearly. He can end the violations of the Fourth Amendment.

He can increase taxes on the very, very wealthy and decrease them on the middle and working classes. If the very, very wealthy want to leave the country, let them try to find a place to live that is safe, clean and has lower tax rates for them. Just let them try. And they will find that living in such a place is extremely expensive. They may have to settle for Singapore, Switzerland or the Middle East -- not the greatest choices for people who probably never don't learn languages all that easily.

[pattmarty]

140. But he won't. After two years, what you see is what you get.

[slipslidingaway]

153. Did the minority party make a deal with Billy Tauzin or silence...

advocates for a not for profit HC system?

There are certain things you cannot blame on the republicans.

:(

From a speech just before the election - "Enough is Enough..."

"And we are tired of watching as year after year, candidates offer up detailed health care plans with great fanfare and promise only to see them crushed under the weight of Washington politics and drug and insurance lobbying once the campaign is over.

That is not who we are, that is not who we have to be, enough is enough, it time for us to change."

Newport News - October 2008


What happened to the Obama/Biden HC plan???
9 pages
http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/HealthCareFullPlan.pdf

[Steely_Dan]

168. It's Called LEADERSHIP

We believed that he possessed the kind of rare leadership that would overcome the huge hurdles including both Houses. He made us believe. Believe in what you ask? In change.

[uppityperson]

174. I hoped but doubted he could overcome the huge hurdles. But then I am a cynic

I am pragmatic and a cynic and doubted he could. I hoped he could at least slow down all the awful things that have happened and changed since 2000.

I doubted he could get the 2 sides working together much at all since most of those people have been so involved with making that gap between them. Simply because there was a new president and some new congressional members didn't mean they would work together.

The gap between the right and left is huge, in congress and without. I don't know the answer and seriously am afraid of how and what will happen. I see people having put their faith in Obama to be able to close that gap, yet not putting the same pressure on the congress people. Someone can lead, but if those he/she is trying to lead are not able to put their bipartisan bickerings and hatred aside, nothing will happen.

[Steely_Dan]

I Agree...

The kind of leadership that would have been required is rare. It is ability to tell someone to go to Hell and they can't wait for the trip.

[GOTV]

171. First, stop sacrificing his queen to the bipartisan fairies

because the bipartisan fairies don't exist.

[ladywnch]

175. well, how was it then that the Rethugs were able to get al their

shit through without the minority party blocking everything. I mean hell, rethugs prevented dems from even scheduling meeting rooms in the Capitol and the minority party couldn't do shit about it. How it is that rethugs still wheel so much power over the majority party that we were unable to do when we were the minority?

I hate to say it, but dems just don't really know how to fight.....rethugs- it's a way of life. Until dems decide to do what they know is right regardless of rethugs or bipartisanship.....force it all through just like they did......just get it done already!

[Tesha]

256. They got their shit through because about ten "Democratic" Senators aren't actually Democrats.

That's why we couldn't quell filibusters when we had "sixty" Democrats
in the Senate and why we couldn't sustain filibusters when we had
"forty nice" (or so) Democrats in the Senate.

But after November, many of these de-facto Republicans will be replaced
by actual Republicans and maybe we can stop pretending that they were
Democrats at all.

Tesha

[AllyCat]

224. In the short term, remember that we don't need 60 votes, we need 50 + 1

Expose the idiot Repukes who filibuster more than any other session of Congress. Work with Reid and the actual Democrats in Congress and the not-so-Democratic Democrats in Congress to end this stupid filibuster rule.

And frankly, not one of these things will happen because of corporate slime in politics. And the fact that Obama is a corporatist and was during the election (one of the reasons he was my second to last choice of all the candidates) is exactly what has caused so many of us who worked for him anyway to realize we could smell a rat in 2008. And now we're stuck with it.

I don't think he can or wants to get it back. What we need is to stop trying to save Obama and work on saving our democracy by getting rid of corporate filth in our seat of government.

[DallasNE]

231. In The First Year Obama

Only had 36% of his judicial appointments confirmed by the Senate. During his first year Reagan had 91% of his judicial appointments confirmed by the Senate. Reagan even had a Senate with a Democratic majority. Point out this ridiculous fact and Republicans screem stop whinning and MSM says Democrats are whinning. Changes in Senate practices has made this country ungovernable and I don't see that about to change.

[Art_from_Ark]

286. Reagan had a Republican majority in the Senate for his first 6 years

The Democrats lost control of the Senate in 1980 (81) and did not regain control until 1986 (87).

[JHB]

257. He could go on the attack (or let others do so and play "reasonable guy" himself)

We've see a little of that in recent days, but not nearly enough and it's something that could have been done since he won the election.

We knew the Republicans vote in a lockstep block. we knew they'd be obstructionist (they didn't even bother to hide it).

So what's the strategy for busting up their block? Was there one? Is there one now?

In 2008 http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2008/01/30/bipartisanship">Glenn Greenwald wrote a column showing the Republicans' Politburo-grade conformity in voting. I'd think politicians with actual staff could take something like this and run with it: update the numbers, get the House numbers, develop a media strategy for it (talking points, "leaks", tv ads, etc.) to make an issue of it. Republican voters may not care about "obstruction" of a Democratic administration, but it might bother them that they guy who's supposed to be looking after their interests is marching in a lockstep that rivals Soviet soldiers goose-stepping through Red Square on the May Day parade. It should be mentioned any time a Democrat gets face time on camera or gets interviewed.

And then there's investigating Bush corruption and anti-constitutional acts. Start small and build up, which not only prepares the ground for big-ticket charges but also provides a constant drumbeat of connecting Bush and the Republicans and naked, grasping corruption on the taxpayers' tab. And Democrats can then go after them explicitly when they inevitably pull the "I didn't do it, nobody saw me do it" routine.

But you can't push the terms of the debate unless you push.

Bill Clinton tried "bipartisanship" and "looking forward, not back" even if he didn't use those words for it (I think the Clintonese version of "looking forward, not back" was "that's not on our radar screen"). And look how much cooperation that got him.

Part of the "lost hope" comes from that fact that none of this was a surprise, except apparently to the administration, yet they haven't had a plan to deal with it, and it's not clear if they have one now.

[unkachuck]

4. in the beginning, Obama had a choice....

....he could be the first black president or he could be the new FDR, who happens to be black....

....he chose to be the first black president....

[Lost4words]

10. You have captured my feelings 100% Great Post!

I have said much the same here today as a matter of fact. In all my life I have never seen such opportunity squandered.

:kick:

[peace frog]

109. +Infinity

Perfect!

[Raine]

13. So much promise

and all thrown away and squandered, such a waste. :yoiks: I'm so disallusioned. :-(

[disillusioned73]

113. Need I say that I am disillusioned as well??

[SargeUNN]

15. are you going to tell me

he has done nothing good at all? Are you going to tell me he hasn't done several good things and that we are not better off from his work, and we are exactly where we would have been with John McCain? If so then maybe you should go back and do some homework, because Obama has improved things, maybe not as fast or the the level some wanted, but he has improved things with a senate that has been extremely hard to work with.

[Bonobo]

16. Nope, I am not saying that.

He has made tiny changes to a country that is in tremendous need of tremendous changes.

he had te power to make BIG changes. He squandered it.

Now the bar has been reset. He is branded with venomous attacks ANYWAY despite his middle-of-the-roadness.

He might as well have gone for it. The opposition would not have gained any more of an upper hand than they have anyway despite his mild-mannered bipartisanship.

[cameozalaznick]

24. Yep, if you're going to do the time, may as well commit the crime...

I"m not suggesting that he commit any crimes, but if he's going to be branded a socialist anyway, then be a socialist. Or at least a Democrat who upholds Democratic principles. His problem is that he capitulates even before the bargaining starts.

[tavalon]

83. Exactly!!!!

Well said and painfully true.

[newspeak]

189. Right on!!!!

If you're going to be labeled a socialist (even when you definitely are not) then, go ahead and act like a socialist. Of course, we know that won't happen since he is a "new Democrat", which is code word for pro-corporate Clintonite.

When I saw some of his appointments, I knew it was "oh shite" time. I even wrote him and asked him to at least adhere to other economists' advise-like Krugman and Galbraith. I feel like main street is held hostage by wall street-and wall street is no friend of this country. I just feel that they'd see this country go down just to make an extra buck and keep the plebes in line.

[tilsammans]

165. Very Bill Clinton-esque . . .

. . . pander and placate to those who are intent on destroying you. :rant:

[Bluebear]

21. Lily Ledbetter Act!

:bounce:

[pattmarty]

145. You should have used the sarcasm "thingie" as some here will...........

.........think, "oh, yeah another super accomplishment we can add to the list". Like I said, I am tired of the "better than Bush" bullshit. My one eyed Pug is better than Bush and fucking smarter too.

[walldude]

25. No one is saying he hasn't done anything...

People who are angry at Obama are angry that he has had chances to change or even reverse certain Bush policies, and he hasn't. He's made it a point to continue some of the worst things the Bush administration put into effect. Rendition, Torture, Illegal Wars, The Patriot Act, Nuclear Power and Offshore Drilling to name a few. Not to mention he's added a few himself including Death Squads and Drone Attacks.

I'm not angry at Obama for going to slow or for "not getting me my pony" I'm angry at things he has already done and continues to do, wrong decisions that push us in the wrong direction.

[tavalon]

84. Well said

We get lambasted here for not being 100% behind Obama but he hasn't been 100% behind the American people. He's doing a much better job for the money elite and corporate culture.

[MissDeeds]

115. "...he hasn't been 100% behind the American people."

Exactly right.

[dana_b]

250. 100% right!

That is what is so frustrating with the conversations here. It's not that we don't recognize any good things that have been done, but it's the BIG things (like Wall Street and jobs creation) where the administration seems to be working in the opposite direction of the American people.

[tavalon]

82. Sure, he's done some good things

But the thing is, he had the political clout to do some great things and he has consistently missed the mark. He's tentative and cautious and all to willing to accept and even embrace the status quo. That's what I mean when I discuss him having squandered his opportunity. Is he awful like Bush the Lesser was? No, but that is a mighty low bar, isn't it? He once had the support to lead us to pivotal changes the likes of which haven't been seen since FDR but these days he reminds me of Bill Clinton on the good days and Ronald Reagan on the bad days. That isn't a resounding approval.

Honestly, it seems that he doesn't need my support. As long as he continues on the path he is on now, he will get plenty of support from the powers that be. He is behaving like a corporate tool and they will support him. He pandered to me when he wanted my vote, but he governs to the right. It appears that this administration thinks we have no where else to go (and the maddening thing, is they are right).

[pattmarty]

No he hasn't improved things, he has stopped the bleeding of the last 10 yrs...

......I am goddamn sick and tired of the "better than" bullshit. Sure he's better than McCain would have been, but he is NOT as good as LBJ or even Clinton who I didn't have much use for. Is he better than Hillary or Kucinich or Dean? I would hazard a guess that everyone that posts at DU voted for Obama and are fucking disappointed with him. Even the diehards have to feel SOME disappoint.

[uppityperson]

176. I am sucking disappointed in Congress and those who continue the rabid bipartisan-ness.

I am also fucking disappointed in those who are not fucking disappointed in Congress and those who continue the rabid bipartisan-ness.

I am not surprised by the inability to get them working together though as the rabid bipartisan-ness has taken many yrs to develop and those who got it that way are still very much in Congress.

[katandmoon]

17. K&R

[NRaleighLiberal]

18. K&R. I agree completely.

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

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

[Bonobo]

22. Undoubtedly Obama got votes from some of them too.

Are their votes worth less because of the label you apply to them?

:shrug:

[enlightenment]

Really?

I don't think you can rely on polling to support that - poll questions are usually phrased in such a way as to present either/or choices (sort of like the rhetoric of some folks around here).

A democrat, faced with such an either/or choice might very well put their check in the 'support' column for the President, because they do support him - or at least they support the belief in a Democratic presidency. That doesn't mean they aren't terribly disillusioned, disappointed, and upset with the less than laudable performance they've seen so far.

Can I prove that supposition? No - but can you prove your assertion that there aren't millions who are unhappy?

[Donnachaidh]

30. and you're forgetting the millions who voted for him now standing in unemployment lines

THOSE people who were sold on HOPE and got BUPKISS for their efforts. Those folks are the ones who WILL have a voice in November. And those are the voices he SHOULD have championed six months ago, rather than dither about with watered down photo-op *financial reform*.

THOSE are the folks who WILL matter in November.

[uppityperson]

60. I'll vote Dem in Nov, no way will Repubs help at all.

I am unemployed not due to Pres Obama, but to the previous disastrous 8 yrs bs.

[pattmarty]

150. I going to vote too. The Greens made it on to the ballot (again) in my........

...........state and I will probably vote Green for the most part for the second time in my life. Say what you want about third parties, but if you want REAL change you have to start somewhere. It's the same thing you hear around here about Obama, that you have to be incremental. Well, in November I am going to start my incremental step by voting Green.

[uppityperson]

177. I well understand the appeal and have done so in the past myself

Perhaps things have to get a lot worse before they can change for the better.

[pattmarty]

218. That is where my thinking is at now. I am 63 and took early SS............

..........and have a modest pension. My wife is on SS disability w/Medicare. Our total healthcare insurance costs are around 9K/yr, I owe 15K on a modest home and have a 9 yr old vehicle that is paid for. We will make it until we die barring some really crazy thing happening. What I worry about is our kids and all the other people making under 100k per year (that's the VAST majority, folks) that have 20 or 50 yrs to live yet. The good days are over in the USA and I want to live as long as I can, but I am happy I am at the later stage of life the way things are going to be here in the future.

[scarletwoman]

23. Very well said. I think back to that scene in the park after he won the election,

all those people weeping for joy, the feeling of excitement that now we were going turn things around and put the country on a new track.

I wonder how many of those people have lost their homes or jobs since then. I wonder how many of the college kids who worked to get out the vote haven't been able to find a job at all since then.

He could have rallied all of us to get behind him in pursuing a truly visionary progressive agenda -- any Republicans trying to obstruct it would have been despised and roundly hooted into silence. The momentum of the people would have FORCED them to back down. We had a full 60 votes in the Senate, the Dems would have had the full support of the people to do whatever Obama asked of them -- they would have been shamed into getting with the program if they balked.

But "Hope and Change" turned out to be nothing more than a marketing slogan for a politician with no overarching vision and no core values whatsoever.

And I don't give a damn how many "pragmatists" want to flog their talking points about how "he never said this, he never said that". It's not relevant. He sold "Hope and Change" to millions of people who were so desperately hungry for those things that they BELIEVED it meant what THEY thought it meant. They weren't reading the fine print and the codiciles and the disclaimers -- nor were they ever encouraged to do so.

His campaign DELIBERATELY charged them up on an EMOTIONAL level. And if truly major, systemic change was never intended, then it was one of the most cynical, cold-hearted, manipulative campaign strategies ever.

Those millions of hopeful people may have been deluded, but they were actively encouraged to harbor that delusion.

To me, that is a betrayal of the lowest order. I will never excuse or forgive it.

sw

[Bonobo]

26. As usual, you said it better than me :)

It was a magic moment.

What a high.

What a letdown.

We were manipulated since the 2008 Democratic Convention. In retrospect, I see that now.

[scarletwoman]

34. It was your OP that provided the inspiration.

I've been thinking about this for awhile and wondering if I should dare make an OP out of it. So I really must salute your courage and forthrightness that gave me the opening to say what I wanted to say.

Many thanks,
sw

[Donnachaidh]

32. BRAVA!

"And if truly major, systemic change was never intended, then it was one of the most cynical, cold-hearted, manipulative campaign strategies ever."

AMEN.

And those who feel betrayed will make their way to the voting booths in November. Hell, they'll have plenty of time on their hands. Karma. Maybe not instant, but Karma nonetheless.

[Lilith Velkor]

39. LOL

One thing I've noticed since I started lurking here around March 2001, is that when someone replies, "BRAVA!" it is usually to scarletwoman. She is a true DU treasure.

[Bonobo]

40. Yes, I agree completely. nt

[myrna minx]

152. She really is a treasure.

:hi:

[Smashcut]

59. +1000

[Hannah Bell]

68. agreed.

[tavalon]

86. Yep, we were a market demographic, nothing more

And that is just wrong. He sold himself and we bought it and I, for one, am having buyers remorse. And no, I don't think McCain would have been better. That is so missing the point as to be absurd.

[tavalon]

87. I have a friend who voted for Cynthia McKinney

He said he felt Obama was selling a movement and he didn't buy it. He hasn't been particularly disappointed because he never bought the product. I did and the letdown has been hard.

[piratefish08]

103. agreed!

[tomp]

108. agreed. real explanations from obama are called for. nt

[closeupready]

127. Wish I could K&R this post, too.

+1000

[leftstreet]

146. +100000

Well said

[pattmarty]

151. Wholeheartedly agree.

[Steely_Dan]

172. Outstanding Post SW

Perfectly put...

And remember: It wasn't that long ago that the Republican Party was on the ropes and even considered dead. What happened???

Obama lost control of the message. The RW started framing the arguments. Once that was allowed to happen, all was lost.

[Raster]

185. I wonder how many of those college kids who worked day and night for Obama...

..have now ended up in the military because there are no other jobs?

I wonder how many military men and women who voted for Obama/Biden because they wanted a Commanding Officer they could believe in, have now become disillusioned?

I wonder how many average working men and women who voted for Obama/Biden because they believed in change now find no change to believe in?

[bvar22]

199. You know, if Obama had called those Millions to the Capitol Steps...

..during Tea Bagger Summer to STAND WITH HIM for REAL Health Care Reform (or ANY other piece of "Progressive" (Working Class) legislation...
we would have gotten it.

Obama either Blew It,
or never really wanted it.

Campaigning FOR Anti-LABOR Blue Dogs in the Democratic Primaries was the final straw for me.

"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

[hootinholler]

282. He could still get it if he called for it

But he won't. Look at his staff.

Maybe we can get Michelle to give that boy a talking to.

-Hoot

[Joe Fields]

234. Very well said. A man , or woman is judged by not only what they say,

but as to whether what they say matches their actions. Also, they are judged by the company they keep. For me, he has failed on these three counts. He held, in the palm of his hand the one great opportunity of my lifetime to dramatically change the course of human events for the actual good of the people he was charged to govern. He blew it. Emanuel, Geithner, Paulson, Axelrod, et al...

Wall Street isn't Main Street. Obama's presidency only serves to cement my opinion that our democracy is just a farce, and that multinational corporations hold a vise-like grip on every piece of legislation that passes through the halls of Congress.

[dana_b]

251. exactly how many

of us are feeling. Thank you!! Brilliant post.

[grahamhgreen]

254. Well said.

[madamesilverspurs]

27. One Hell of a Job

Economists and historians probably have names for the kind of times we're living in. For my money, the best term would be "aftermath". To be sure previous presidents have had to deal with problems and crises of almost every description. But no president has ever faced the kind of task that awaited the post-Bush nation. Unlike his predecessor, Obama does not regard the Constitution as a barrier to his ambition, "just a damned piece of paper" that is to be subverted and circumvented. Unlike his predecessor, this President understands the reasons for and the enduring purpose behind the concept of balance of powers between the branches of government. Unlike his predecessor, Obama values those principles that lie at the foundation of our system of governance, and because he values those principles he doesn't cheapen them by turning them into trite sales pitches that quickly become cloying and pathetic. There's something to be said for any man whose dedication to the country is measured by so much more than whether or not he wears a made-in-China flag pin on his lapel.

The depredations of the previous administration are still being uncovered, the breadth of the civil vandalism is still stunning in its extensiveness. We are only now beginning to see a wider understanding of how dangerously close we were brought to the precipice, that we were very nearly pitched headlong into a fascist non-paradise. We were damned near undone by an inside job run by people whose lack of care for others was already legendary, and I look forward to the day when their actions can be laid bare and exposed unequivocally for the treasons they were. There was no precedent, thank God, for dealing with that kind of thing, no guide book detailing the processes required - because no President in our history has had to wade through such leftover slime.

Obama's moment in history is extraordinary, not because of the color of his skin but because he is treading on unexplored terrain. Crises born of both nature and human corruption have compounded the already daunting task of captaining the ship of state, all this while the "loyal" opposition continues to declare its intent to destroy his presidency. And each and every one of US has ideas about which need holds highest priority and we don't hesitate to bitch at him at every opportunity.

Have there been disappointments? Yes. Surprises? Those, too. And through it all has been the sound of the work required to clean up the mess so that rebuilding can commence. Eight long years of destruction left of pile of debris that is simply going to require a long damn time to sort through and deal with. The petulant foot-stomping impatience that characterized the last president is delightfully absent in the current executive. This President thinks and listens and studies and considers.

There may well be millions who choose to wallow in their disappointment. But there are millions more who support this President. Our country deserves nothing less than a job done right instead of a quick fix. The promises of the energized electorate reside in us, you and me. The slogan was "Yes We Can" not "Yes He Can", and we need to be about the business of remembering that.

[Bonobo]

29. "The depredations of the previous administration are still being uncovered,"

Really?
So why was prosecution of war crimes taken off the table from the beginning?

Why do detainments, torture and assassination programs continue?

Why do we increase our drone attacks daily?

Why no repudiation of illegal surveillance?

Etc.

[suzie]

258. Are you a prosecutor?

Have you ever waited for a jury to come back?

Have you ever asked any professional prosecutors if they thought that it was possible to prosecute the members of the Bush administration?

[Amonester]

268. Read "The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder" by Vincent Bugliosi

"...whether I'm giving a final summation to the jury or writing one of my true crime books, credibility has always meant everything to me. Therefore, my only master and my only mistress are the facts and objectivity." - Vincent Bugliosi

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/vincent-bugliosi/the-prosecution-of-george_b_102427.html

Vincent Bugliosi (born August 18, 1934, in Hibbing, Minnesota) is an American attorney and author, best known for prosecuting Charles Manson and other defendants accused of the Tate-LaBianca murders. His most recent books are Reclaiming History: The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (2007), and The Prosecution of George W. Bush for Murder (2008).
====================================================================
The answer is, not only it was possible but I should have been done.

But, I think the PTB managed to get the few heads of the fascist shadow govenment (Al-CIAda) a private meeting with the newly President-elect back in early Dec. 2008 and they 'showed' him a couple of clips from JFK's last moments in Dallas, quickly followed with a few beautiful pictures of Michelle and their daughters.

To me, there's no other rationale for the selling-out.

[tavalon]

92. Obama talks a good game. Actually, he talks a fabulous game

But cover your ears for a bit and just watch. It's the watching that is telling. He's not governing a country, he is playing the CEO and in many ways is just a kinder, gentler face of oppression. He's a corporate puppetmaster with kick ass speeches.

[closeupready]

128. Oh, bullshit.

If he cared about the Constitution, Gitmo would have been closed from Day One.

As it is, it continues to play the same role today as it did in Bush's era. :mad:

Wiretapping, and all the rest of the garbage.

[Bluenorthwest]

130. Except the man himself virtually demanded that we turn the page

and 'look forward not backward' and thus this newly discovered need to look backward, thumb that page back to the Bush chapter can not work. We can not put the blame where it belongs if Obama keeps claiming that is the wrong thing to do. He is the one who said Bush and Cheney did nothing worth so much as pointing out as flawed.
I have seen Obama, more than one time, wag a finger at crowds who booed mention of the Republicans. "Oh, no, we don't do that" he says. I mean, what the hell is that?
Anyone telling me the GOP are 'honest brokers' is selling me a lie, and I do not buy it. The end. I'm a Democrat. Not half Republican, not Democratic out of convenience.

[Surya Gayatri]

141. Wish you'd start a new thread with this post, madame... n/t

[uppityperson]

178. Thank you sincerely. "yes WE can" indeed.

I think I am done replying elsewhere in this thread, wanted to tell you thank you again for what you write.

[OmahaBlueDog]

28. This is a great post, and I fear my response, because I feel a book coming on..

Let me say first that I stand with our President.

I think, in the final analysis, getting the 60th vote when Specter defected was a curse, not a blessing.

Political capital issue #1 is mostly falsely attributed to the President. He is blamed for the bailouts - which were started in the waning Bush days. However, he probably would have been better off opposing the TARK and urging fellow Dems to do the same, and simply had the Treasury take over the failed banks upon taking power. He was getting a lot of what I now consider bad advice not to do that.

Political capital issue #2 was the stimulus. At a time when many Americans lives were being ruined by mortgage debt, medical debt, and credit card debt, what does the President say is the answer? More debt. It was counterintuitive for a lot of people. These people thought they'd elected a really smart guy, and now he seemed really dumb.


Political capital issue #3 was HCR. Many of us voted for the President because of health care. However, we all had different ideas what that looked like. The President's opponents hated the idea of government intervention into health care, and showed no fear about calling it communism, socialism, anti-Americanism, isn't he really Kenyanism, and whatever other damn nonsense they could think up. They were funded and egged on by the rabid talkers and the health insurers. But we had 60 votes, didn't we? We had a chance to solve a 110 year old problem, yes? Well, sort of. By the time public option was done away with, the Cornhusker kickback was exposed, and the right started screaming about the cuts to Medicare (a socialist program they apparently embrace), what we came up with was, essentially, Romneycare. To make matters worse, it doesn't go into effect until 2013. The GOP will have this as a rallying cry to get everyone to vote out every Democrat for the next 2 1/2 years to ensure this bastard is stillborn.

Political capital issue #4 is and was the wars. We are ostensibly leaving Iraq, albeit very, very, slowly. We're doing something in Afghanistan which looks more like a police action without clear cut goals and less like a war with a clearly desired outcome. Conservatives were probably correct - he probably should have turned down the peace prize.

Political capital issue #5 I won't label because whatever I call it, I get attacked for being politically incorrect. On the day when President Obama was elected, marriage equality went down to defeat in California. People, many of whom worked hard to elect Obama and get marriage equality, got really, really pissed off. They got more pissed off when a new President, eager not to immediately alienate the military establishment the way Bill Clinton did, failed to act on DADT or take a clearly defined stand on this issue.

However, it is always darkest before the dawn. Clinton was at a similar low point at this time in his administration. There are several things the President can do now, while he still has a congress backing him, and several things he can do with a hostile congress.

He could immediately end DADT. It will piss off the right. So what?

He could offer Tim Kaine a new gig where he does less harm and bring back Howard Dean as DNC chair, or bring in Alan Grayson.

He could replace Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel and begin setting a new tone between now and November.

He could give Petraus a clear goal and a clear deadline (like the end of October). After that, we go. It will piss off the right. So what?

He could start having DOL rigidly enforce overtime laws. Lots of companies (especially call centers and others with entry level "professional" employments) regularly skate these laws and force workers to work 50+ hours per week. Force these employers to hire on some more.

He could Mexico that if they can't keep the drug war on their side of the border, we're going to pull out of NAFTA.

He could immediately fire Arne Duncan and being in someone friendly to public schools and the NEA.

I'm sure there's more, but you get the idea.

[tavalon]

94. Damn, I wish we could replace Rahm with you!

[me b zola]

154. I'd like to add one thing to your list

He should have routed out {b]all of remnants of the shadow government in federal civil servant jobs.

[OmahaBlueDog]

255. Yes - that would have been smart

The Bush apointees you couldn't fire based on civil service laws could certainly be transferred to important jobs north of the Brooks Range in Alaska or in Minot, ND.

[KonaKane]

31. 119 Kept Promises, to 19 Broken. That's a great average for any president.

Just a quick look at the facts:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/

But please, don't let me get in the way of a Bash Obama thread, which NEVER happens at D(emocratic)U.

[Donnachaidh]

33. numbers don't mean shit to the guy watching his family being evicted

All those politifacts don't mean shit when you're homeless with no benefits because Congress went on vacation. Blast all the numbers you want -- they mean NOTHING in real life.

[KonaKane]

43. Excuse me, they mean everything.

Because they show an overwhelming success in his agenda, not defeat. He never campaigned on the promise to fix everyone's problems. He had a plan to fix the nation from the crap that 14 years of GOP rule had brought about, and overall its been successfull. I havent gotten everything I wanted either, but I recognize an overall picture when I see it.

Do you?

[JDPriestly]

132. Sorry, but the overall picture I see is a man running scared

at a time when we need a fearless leader. Obama is afraid of offending the far right. That is what I see.

He has utterly no fear of offending those of us who have been centrist Democrats all our lives and suddenly find ourselves depicted as being on the extreme left.

Obama is running scared. I believe he is capable of better things. But he has surrounded himself with DLCers who have been running scared ever since Reagan came on the scene.

It's time to get down to the difficult work. Obama has been padding his resume with easy stuff. That's why you can count a lot of trivial things that he has "accomplished." He just gives up before he even starts on the tough stuff.

[KonaKane]

227. Then I suggest you take a bigger view.

Because he has actually accomplished more than most presidents have in their first year and a half. That keeps getting lost in the continual, dreary rain of condemnation and negativity.

[Name removed]

144. Deleted message

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

[pscot]

182. We're being given change at the margins

but the corruption goes deep into the heart of our system and is not being attacked. The government doesn't serve the people any more. We're being robbed blind. Our institutions have been corrupted and crimes are being committed in our name. Accountability has no advocates in this administration, any more than under Bush.

[Bonobo]

35. Your fluffy list is filled with trifling nothings. nt

[KonaKane]

44. Trifling nothings?

Tell that to all the people who DO have jobs thanks to stimulus spending.

Tell that to all the people who can finally obtain some health insurance where they couldnt before the HCR law.

Tell that to all the people in the military who can now get PTSD treatment for life with no questions asked.


Trifling? You sir, need to take a step back and measure your words.

[Bonobo]

47. The list is inflated and unweighted. Don't play semantic games.

You are not on stage, sir, so save the exhortations for someone else.

The list is inflated with fluff and is only a list of things done, not things not done.

The enormity of the missed opportunity is seemingly lost on you and THAT was the point of the OP.

[KonaKane]

53. You're seriously dismissing millions who have benefitted from Obama's reforms?

Just to appease your personal anger? Wow, that is just - incredible.

[Bonobo]

55. No, you are now having an argument with a man made of straw.

Enjoy it, but it has little to do with my OP.

[Grinchie]

75. The earth is dying -- Millions will be inconsequential soon enough

Yes, I am dismissing millions, simply because Billions are going to suffer from the BS Corporate ass licking this administration is giving them.

[mdmc]

85. I'm fully insured but still lack access to affordable medical treatment

However, I was not a hope junkie. I helped Clinton get elected in hopes that he would reverse, not complete, the ray-gun revolution. I always thought Obama would be better then Palin. I held little hope of anything more.

[JDPriestly]

134. Mostly Wall Street brokers and wealthy people have benefited from

Obama's administration. Charter schools are an insult to the American tradition of public education. Obama is too willing to sign half-measures. Every time he signs something, we are all told that, "It's a good start." Well, when is Obama every going to say, "That's done very well"?

Obama has no difficulty telling someone like Kucinich -- get with my game or get out of the game. Why can't he do the same with Ben Nelson and some of the other Blue Dogs?

Traditional Democrats should have at least some representation on Obama's team == but we have none -- zero. There is not one liberal among the people close to Obama. They are all relatively conservative Democrats.

That is wrong.

[Bluenorthwest]

135. Personally, I am dismissing those who claim to have seen

RESULTS of a survey that is still in progress.

[KonaKane]

229. That was my bad, it was a CBS poll. I read it on the DKOS article

and didnt scrutinize the source. I find the results heartening though, dont you?

[Grinchie]

74. Maybe you need to step back and take a breath

Because you seem to be delerious from your breathless accolades of a few people that have a job because the government threw a few million bucks at a grantwriter, who only have a temporary job until the grant money runs out. Or maybe the thousands at Blackwater/Xe for their new yearlong contract protecting a couple of consulates in Afganistan..

Tell that to the people now forced to get health Insurance in Name only at double the cost. Mandatory insurance at that.

Tell it to the PTSD sufferers that are still being created daily in Iraq and Iran..

You cheerleaders are such cold hearted, calculating politihacks that it is chilling. When exactly did you lose your soul?

Hurray! we now take care of the millions of PTSD sufferers! Give me a break you heartless drone.

[Yuugal]

179. +1

[pattmarty]

156. I also see that he really, really had a lot to say to Republicans over........

.........extending the unemployment too. Yeah, he really went around the country bashing greedy Republicans for standing in the way of unemployment for millions of people. Rose colored glasses much? For fucks sake, he IS worse than Clinton was. He is a nice guy that gives great speeches and has NO BALLS. We need the unemployment extension and he can't even bully Congress to pass that.

[OmahaBlueDog]

46. He's done a lot of good things and he has my support, but...

...there's been a learning curve, mistakes have been made, and some political capital was squandered. I'm think Barack Obama himself would agree with that.

The administration must, must, must do a better job promoting their successes, and they need much better, more forceful rapid response to righty attacks. His core constituency hasn't had the biggest items on their wish list fulfilled (ending the wars).

[GOTV]

184. But look at what some of those boken promises were. Some pretty big ones.

No. 24: End income tax for seniors making less than $50,000
No. 30: End no-bid contracts above $25,000
No. 71: Allow imported prescription drugs
No. 234: Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
No. 292: Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws
No. 313: Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage
No. 515: No family making less than $250,000 will see "any form of tax increase."
No. 517: Negotiate health care reform in public sessions televised on C-SPAN
No. 518: Create a public option health plan for a new National Health Insurance Exchange.

[Radical Activist]

36. That's the inevitable result

of every compromise being touted as the end of the world and every progressive accomplishment being ignored. The only thing the left knows how to do after the last 30 years is to always attack the President no matter what. That strategy is no longer serving us well.

We've made a lot of progress in just 1 1/2 years and we still have a ways to go.

[Bonobo]

37. How "Radical"! You activist you!

A real rule breaker!

[Radical Activist]

49. Yep.

Progress is progress. Why would I be sad about progress and forward momentum? Waiting for a calamitous event to bring about rapid change isn't radical after 9/11 and the right's mastery of manipulating such events. It's just moronic.

[Bonobo]

50. Shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic was also progress.

But it didn't prevent them from hitting the iceberg.

So no, progress sometimes "isn't" progress.

[Radical Activist]

54. If you think the entire world is sinking

then I doubt anything Obama can do will change your mind. I've seen Obama do things that are/will have a positive impact on me and my community. He's trying to do more and I look forward to pushing Congress.

[Bonobo]

56. My OP is about squandered political capital. Can we actually keep to the point?

Do you not agree that he squandered political capital by taking baby steps and still suffering from the inevitable character assassination that would have been the same whether he took large or small strides?

[Radical Activist]

63. You made an abstract analogy that didn't seem relevant.

I believe he has taken large steps. The largest investment in clean energy the nation has ever made. A major health care bill after 60 years of trying that lays the groundwork for more. Regulating a whole series of industries that have been getting deregulation since 1981. The tide is turning.
The reality of the current US Senate is that larger steps are unlikely to pass. There's only one quasi-socialist Senator and a whole lot of conservatives.

[Bonobo]

65. Well argued.

I agree that those are important steps.

[Grinchie]

77. Yep, 38 Billion in Clean Nuclear Power.. How apro pos

Investment in Obsolete solar cell manufacturing.... Investment in centralized Concentrating Solar, using outsourced Corporate contractors... Yep, that's change we can vomit on.

[tavalon]

97. The entire world is sinking

I thought I should just get that strawman out of the way.

The complaint on the table is whether Obama has been as strong as his mandate allowed him. My answer is no. He could have been an FDR but instead, he's just another Clinton. Not horrible, but not stellar. We needed more and we've gotten "incremental".

[pattmarty]

162. Did Che say that?

"Bullshit is bullshit"

Marty

[TransitJohn]

264. Treading water while the room keeps filling up is not progress.

:eyes:

[Bluebear]

69. lol

He's ignored but I get the drift ;)

[Cherchez la Femme]

200. LMAO

My thoughts exactly. Che is rolling right now :D

[pattmarty]

158. You DO KNOW that your avatar is a pic of Che Guevera don't you?...........

........Let me clue you in on something; a picture of Che does not make you a fucking revolutionary.

[Radical Activist]

210. And making pointless comments

about my avatar isn't a response to my post.

[pattmarty]

221. I think it says plenty. Pic of Che and "Radical Activist". According........

.........to the posts I've seen by you, you wouldn't know a radical activist if he kicked your ass. You can have the "name" and the "pic" but what I have seen of your posts you ain't no fucking radical. Have a nice fucking day.

[Radical Activist]

249. You sound like a very nasty person.

Being radical is a lot more than the simple-minded habit of always complaining about Obama no matter what he does. That's radicalism for dummies and armchair pundits who don't know how to take meaningful action in their own community.

I have had a nice day and I'll be fucking someone later. Thank you for your interest.

[Canuckistanian]

38. He could have been a contender

[Overseas]

42. I'm hoping Van Jones can convince you.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JLE22iLJHk

He exhorts his audience of environmentalists, feeling heartbroken and losing hope.

[Bonobo]

48. Watching now. It is a long plea for us to keep hope alive.

Nice words, very well said with great emotional appeal.

It changes not one bit of how deflated I and others are.

It changes not one bit the fact that Obama squandered his mandate.

We gave him a mandate. He squandered it.

Now the bar has been reset and his middle of the road approach has been reset as the new left.

As a result, the real left is off the radar and drowning in the weeds.

[creon]

119. disappointment

Politicians are, almost all the time, disappointing to the party faithful. I am not disappointed. Obama is doing exactly what I expected him to do. Congress is doing exactly what I expected them to do. There is no mandate for radical change in this country. It is a mistake to think that there is such a mandate. If there is, the WH and Congress do not know it. Piecemeal reform is as good as you are going to get. Which is exactly what you are going to get from any Democratic Party President.

Democrats won in 2008 largely because Republicans were mostly unelectable, except in their safe seats.

[newspeak]

193. maybe, but any repug president

as what has been lived and seen for the past eight years, with a repug congress for six years, will get you more royally screwed. But, hey, since repugs are such great Americans, we can vote them in and let them finish the job of adding us to the list of banana republics--We'll love our new corporate overlords. One party rapes and pillages and the other at least uses KY.

Historically, seeing the damage repugs, like Reagan, have done to labor and to businesses-I wouldn't touch a repug candidate with a ten foot pole. "Voodoo economics" and "trickle on" economics doesn't work, has never worked-but has sure redistributed the wealth in this country. And don't get me started on privatizing and deregulation. The american people have paid for all of it-we've been enronized to the nth degree, and it seems those who still have some form of job, will still being seeing the screws (those who don't, are probably screwed). Unless there is some dramatic, for the people, legislation. Of course, it won't be coming from some self-interested, anti-labor, deregulating corporate whore repug.

[blindpig]

110. By being bound to Capital hand and foot....

the Environmental Movement conspires to destroy that which it purports to defend.

Capitalism or nature, ya can't have both.

[MannyGoldstein]

45. Captures my feelings perfectly

An epic squander.

[treestar]

51. "Millions of others" simply asserted on a message board

is no proof at all.

[Bonobo]

52. You got me there.

You failed to address any substance and managed to point out the obvious.
Sorry you don't have more to add.

[Hydra]

62. There is no more to add

And the funny thing is, when the votes for the Dems disappear on election day, it will be OUR fault for not getting more vote out for someone who took us all for granted.

[Grinchie]

78. I'll be happy to take full responsibility. The DLC Dems have screwed the pooch.

[RBInMaine]

96. DLC DLC DLC DLC DLC snooooooozzzzzze. Try another meme will you.

[Grinchie]

225. OK, how about Corporocrat? Nah, DLC is so much more descriptive.

Just another synonym for DLC Blue Dog Centrists that hand over more legal protections to the Corporations of the world.

What's the matter? All the DLC hacks in this administration want to have their name taken off the DLC website like Obama demanded in the Primaries? The DLC brand so tainted that you have to disparage anyone that uses it because it reinforces everyothing that's wrong with the Democratic Party that has been hijacked by Corporations and the lack of accountability and cover it provides for the fatcats that write the laws that screw you and me?

No, I think the DLC is to poster child for GMO Promoting, Nafta enabling, Doubletalk Dealing, corrupted hacks that are ruining the country. I'n not about to start calling DLC something new. Thats what Big corporations do when they want to escape their sordid past.. Like Philip Morris/Altria or Blackwater/Xe.

After a while, people forget about the old name, and research hides all the dirty dealing, toxic business practices, and corruption simply because people forget about the first brand name that was destroyed by taint.

[ooglymoogly]

289. +1; well said. nt

[ooglymoogly]

284. Have you taken your Adderall today?

DLC has become a dirty word, or more precisely acronym; Because it encompasses and is run by crooked minds who are at war with us (progressives and folks who still believe in democratic principles); Promoting the Idea that we must be pug light to win elections and forego our principles to win elections. Can anyone tell me where those dots lead? I'll give you some time to take your meds. Anyone...anyone...RBInMaine...Bueler...anyone

[Grinchie]

312. Perfect Executive Summary of my Long winded post..

Whenever we see our Country being sold off, or we get laws passed that have loopholes big enough for Monsanto, GE or Viacom to pass through unscathed, it's the DLC or a DLC Stooge that is sitting at the table.

We were much more Naieve when Bill Clinton started the screwing America with a smile, and most Democrats weren't paying attention. I certainly wasn't, and I actually like what he did, but mostl;y because there was so much clutter and BS with Lewinsky and the Repugs that all all seemed like it was partisan bickering.

However, as time passed, and the country fell deeper and deeper into the funk, I woke up and started looking at the so called "Golden Years" of Bill Clinton and the DLC.

Imagine my surprise when I same Politicization of the DOJ, Massive deregulation of GMO, a little War here and there, Unsavory campaign money, Opaque, lawyeresque language coming from the president, and for the Coup d etat, the repeal of Glass Steagal. Bill Clinton basically paved the way for the Dubya steamroller, and now Obama is cruising down a new roadway in a souped up DLC roadster, with all the trusted Pit crew waiting to fix any problems with spin, money and a bevy of deep pocketed Corporate sponsors.

[Hawkowl]

66. By the time there is proof for you....

It Will Be Too Late.

[DatManFromNawlins]

57. That simply isn't true

A President starts out with a political capital balance of zero. He earns capital by the things that he accomplishes and how those accomplishments resonate with voters. They usually get their way in the first few months, effectively borrowing against the balance. His problems are that (1) the one thing that trumps all others with respect to the voters is the economy, and (2) most of the support he got was because he was largely against the war and war spending.

A strong and accomplished leader is one who knows how to pick his victories and his losses carefully so that when it comes time to make a difference on things that matter most, he can have enough support to get the job done. I simply do not see this from him. People can trumpet the healthcare issue if they wish, the the fact of the matter is that he campaigned against mandates before signing a bill that implemented them. He decried commissions as political tools for weak politicians, and then created commissions. He hasn't made any significant strides in Iraq, Afghanistan, or Guantanamo Bay.

Right now, I don't have sufficient evidence to decide whether he was simply naive, in that he really felt he could accomplish what he claimed to set out to do, or that he felt that by simply rallying against the status quo, that he'd get elected and that his job performance would make those former claims moot. Right now, he just seems to be a modern day Sisyphus.

[Bonobo]

61. I think you are entirely wrong. What do you think a mandate is?

It is the mission charged to you as President and backed up with the force of the people's vote.

It is a powerful weapon that is never stronger than when one first gains office.

[DatManFromNawlins]

160. Mandates are complete bullshit, that's what

The Presidential political cycle is 4 years long and the first year of a Presidency rarely effects re-election efforts in either a positive or negative manner. The bases of an opposition party are never more inclined to wholeheartedly support opposition to a President at the very beginning of a new President's term and at the end right before an election.

The only people who ever squawk about Presidential mandates are the hardcore supporters of said President. Most people know better. Why don't you?

[Bonobo]

166. That's crazy talk.

And your sentence is undecipherable:

"The bases of an opposition party are never more inclined to wholeheartedly support opposition to a President at the very beginning of a new President's term and at the end right before an election."

But clearly mandates carry force. They indicate the mood and will of the electorate and, as such, are an implied threat to anyone that goes against the president and the people's will. The threat is: Do not impede this man we elected or derail his policies or you will be next.

To imply that a mandate carries no force is to deny that the people wield any influence at all.

Your claim that "the only people who ever squawk about Presidential mandates are the hardcore supporters" is utter 100% bonafide bullshit. It sure as hell isn't true and it sure as hell doesn't impress me that you say so with conviction.

Furthermore, it wouldn't take me more than a minute to bring up talk about mandates from every Washington insider from George Will to George Stephanoupolous -thus putting the lie to your ridiculous claim.

Most people know that. Why don't you?

[DatManFromNawlins]

274. You're being nonsensical

If a President had a mandate, then it would seem that the opposition party would go along with his whims.

That is never the case. The one who pushes back the hardest is the sore loser.

Suppose that in 2008, it is Bush who is going for and gets his 2nd term. How hunky dory are you with him just enacting whatever policy he wants? Because of his "mandate." I seem to explicitly recall people here throwing 7 layer shitfits and vowing to snuff out his initiatives at every turn in 2004, angry as hell because they could not believe he had won again. Not much of a mandate. Oh, he got most of what he wanted, but that wasn't because of a mandate. That's because he could count on his opposition to fold like a cheap suit.

And as soon as Obama became President, Republicans en masse declared that they were going to oppose his "liberal" direction. And they have been extremely successful, despite their low numbers in the House and Senate. Exactly what kind of mandate does one have if he can't even manage to rally a filibuster-proof majority?

Presidents have NO mandates. They simply have the power of the Presidency. All that bullshit about mandates is crazy talk meant to fill the airwaves of the 24/7 news cycle. It is an expression, nothing more.

[Bonobo]

285. Bush didn't have a mandate. Many electoral victors do.

Obviously the entrenched in the opposition party will oppose and those on the fence will sway one way or the other depending on how they read the political tea leaves.

You are being obtuse to the point of silliness.

I can't believe I am having an argument about whether or not electoral mandates are real or fictive.

Believe what you want, but your statement that they exist only in the mind of true believers is nonsense.

[ooglymoogly]

290. Yes, I think Sisyphus is just about right.

Though I am not down with your conclusions on the capital of a president...
One need only look at the legislation passed in the last two years, forget the rhetoric and ask to whom does it truly benefit. For instance Health insurance stocks soared after the passing of the Wealth care bill; When the overwhelming rhetoric was, that it was we who were the beneficiaries. But then there is the bank bailouts, the deleterious and unlimited war funding for idiotic wars and the list goes on. The legislation getting passed is overwhelmingly for corporate America, with a few meatless bones thrown to the rabble, like flashy rhinestones on those bills; Dividing up the treasury for the rich. And now they are drooling over our savings held in trust for us in SS, our money, that belongs incontrovertibly to us being connived after, they are going after the trillions that belong to you and me, and which "our" government has borrowed from SS, to pay for wars and tax cuts for the rich (that would be our nest egg) and are now poised to legislated themselves out of paying back those IOU's, ipso facto robbing us of our nest egg, with a bunch of gobblede goop, robbing the middle class and the poor and disenfranchised of what little safety net they have left with an out and out, bold faced, cynical theft to keep the Military-Industrial complex and the fraudulent bailees well funded with hundred dollar bills to light their cigars and with 600 dollar bottles of champagne and caviar all round and their 10th or 11th mansion, Hummer or Yacht.
Mad as hell I tells ya and if I can raze some hackles so be it.
If you think this hyperbole, watch the Cenk video on the catfood commission and their Idea of how to steal the trillions in SS, with Allan Simpson, a real true to life vampire; It is also on firedoglake... and it is horrifying...you can actually see the blood dripping from his malevolent fangs.

[tekisui]

58. A series of missed opportunities and a lack of leadership.

He has been more of a facilitator than a leader. He has shown too much deference to conservatives and given too much respect to their positions. I am disappointed. I feel that we missed a real opportunity for real change.

I will be curious to see if the first-time voting youth are motivated to re-elect Obama in '12.

[scarletwoman]

64. More immediately, I wonder how many of them will show up in 2010. nt

[Tesha]

262. The answer is likely to approximate "None". (NT)

[Greyhound]

67. And therein lies the greatest tragedy of all. K&R

He's not a bad man, he's not an evil man, and he's certainly not a stupid man.

It is inconceivable that he was unaware of the opportunity he inherited with this maelstrom of crisis, so that leaves only a few options regarding why he didn't seize it.

[Poboy]

275. Yes sir. What is more, is that this outcome was PLANNED

Its also astonishing that all the right wing policies he is pushing, going in the OPPOSITE direction of the popular sentiment, and FOR our abusers, thanks to the 'New Democrats"(DLC) team he personally picked out.

[readmoreoften]

70. Wow, you were such a tireless champion that I put you on ignore! I'm glad you had the courage

to analyze the situation as it unfolded and really challenge your own understandings. No one could ever call you disloyal. You, as with many others, are just among the mislead. It was painful to watch. But it gives me hope that people are waking up.

[cwydro]

71. Ditto.

I don't see a leader.

[BzaDem]

72. Actually, you are in a tiny minority. Obama's approval among liberal dems is 87%, which is very high

http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Approval-Center.aspx

His approval rating among Democrats rivals or exceeds Clinton, Carter, and Johnson. It is approximately equal to (or very slightly lower than) Kennedy, and much higher than Truman.

In other words, you are part of a small minority that ALWAYS exists whenever we have a Democratic president. This particular minority happens to be smaller than for basically all previous post-WW2 Democratic presidents. Whatever Obama is doing to keep the bash-from-the-left minority so small compared to previous presidents, he should keep it up.

Maybe instead of having certain expectations and being constantly disappointed, you should try to determine why your expectations were so wrong (and are always so wrong) in the first place. Maybe you should try to recalibrate your expectations to reality (or at the very least history). You should try to figure out why so few Democrats agree with you (fewer than basically any Democratic president at any point in their tenure going back to the late 40s).

[AtomicKitten]

73. +1

[Grinchie]

79. Hah Hah Hah Hah Hah -- Cough Cough....

I have more respect for Carter than I do for Obama these days.

[Name removed]

90. Deleted message

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

[pattmarty]

167. Stop with the purist shit, will ya? Some fucking people are just...........

...intent on dividing people. Has anybody on this post today called you a "conservadem" or DLC or shit, I can't even think of these stupid fucking names. This name calling among supposedly Dems is bullshit and sounds more like Worldnut daily.

[xiamiam]

120. california here..i dont know anyone who is not disappointed

one acquaintance recently told me that he cant even stand to look at obama..and he was in the trenches during the election

i dont trust these polling numbers..

[JDPriestly]

136. Don't be fooled by those numbers.

I sometimes am polled. I always say I support Obama when I am polled.

The reality is that I only support him because I have no other choice. I'm hoping that in 2012, we will have another choice. I will vote for Obama, but I will not work for him ever again. He has let me down too much. I have been an active Democrat for a long time. I am very good at talking to people. I usually do tabling, canvassing, GOTV, precinct walking, the works. I will not be doing it for Obama in 2012, not unless he completely changes his policies, his cabinet, the works. It simply is not worth the effort.

And that is where Democrats will suffer.

But frankly, on the issues that are important to me like human rights, Social Security, Medicare, health insurance, the economy, Obama is really not that different from the Republicans. How many times did he say he was for the public option? I remember very clearly that he said that in a meeting with his campaign workers which I was invited to view on the internet. It was a huge lie. He had already bargained away the public option in his deals with the hospitals and big pharma.

He is prosecuting whistle blowers just as fervently, maybe even more so, than Bush. He keeps stuff secret that should not be kept secret. Look at the limitations on press coverage of the BP spill in the Gulf. That is a shameful violation of freedom of the press -- occurring on Obama's watch.

The list of things that Obama is doing wrong is so long, I can't even begin to finish it.

[ooglymoogly]

212. +1 And therein lies the truth of the matter; except you forgot

his obliviousness to the constitution and the upholding of it; Just like Bush.

[TransitJohn]

265. You need a new talking point.

This one you keep harping on is played out here. I'm sure if you email the people who feed you these talking points, they'll provide another.

[Senator]

76. Serious Capital, Yes. Historic Levels Even.

But Obama never gave an indication of the will to use it.

Guess I'm just saying you were unrealistic. But when you get past the bad feelings, do try reassess. What Obama really represents -- and has all along -- is a continuing force within our party and (once-great) nation.

---

[quinnox]

80. Obama has bombed, end of story

I'm glad to see one Obama supporter has woken up, the way many of them act on here, it seems like a lost cause.

He has failed and not been a good leader and president, instead he has turned out to be a wimpy and weak president who will do anything to prove that he is not a "scary, big and bad" liberal.

Half the time I almost forget he is the president, he is either hiding or makes written statements about what he thinks and phones them in to the press.

What is so freakin wrong with saying you are a liberal and governing like one? That would be a huge change, and then after the inevitable success the liberal policies would be for the nation who cares what the republicans would say about liberals any longer, everyone would be voting for them.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

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

[RBInMaine]

88. If the unemployment rate was below 9% and headed to 8%, this would be a moot post.

But at least we have added 600,000 private sector jobs, and most economists are continuing to project modest growth going forward. Sorry it isn't enough, but Obama can have only so much of an impact. He's one man working in a system, not Superman.

[Name removed]

91. Deleted message

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

[Dr.Phool]

117. Boring

Ignoring....

[Vinca]

93. I have to agree with the OP. I've never been more disappointed.

It's not that I expect all of my "demon liberal" agenda to pass - I just want it floated as an option. Throw a crumb every so often. I feel as if the left has been dumped in favor of the eternal quest for bipartisanship.

[RBInMaine]

95. Non-reality whining. He's done more than virtually any President in such a short time. Get real.

[Name removed]

98. Deleted message

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

[Vinca]

100. It's not the amount that counts. It's the end result.

Take health care, for example. The end result is a giant welfare plan for big insurance with a few feel good items thrown in. I love the man as a person, but he doesn't walk on water. He's done some good things, of course, but from a liberal viewpoint, he's done some things that really piss me off. Democrats, in general, tend to walk on eggshells so they won't do anything to offend the other side and Obama has become the Eggshell Walker in Chief. Funny how, during the horrible Bush years, just about every wrong and usually illegal policy made it into law. Now we start out with a good bill on something and it's watered down and watered down and watered down in order to get a Republican vote or 2 and then, in the end, they don't vote on it and the Dems have enacted yet another spineless, half-baked law.

[TBF]

112. Yes, he has done all kinds of things.

From bailing out bankers to escalating Afghanistan, all kinds of activity. But as Hemingway would say "never mistake activity for action", and we are not seeing the progressive actions we had hoped to see. Not at all.

[newspeak]

201. the thing is "drastic times call for drastic measures"

bailing out the too big to fail banks without strong requirements--opening up more funds to businesses-does nothing to stimulate the economy. The banks are out for themselves-and they've aided and abetted to the problems. To me, what was needed is major change to bolster main street, not cutting the social safety net and harming public education system. And our defense spending is an embarrassment.

[MyNameGoesHere]

101. Yes we now have tons of mediocre bills passed.

Did you vote for lots of mediocrity? Did you vote for allowing the right to define our president, and then offer up your back to get stabbed some more? Did you vote for spineless representatives that quivered and shit their pants every time the SMALL opposition party said something?

Well if you did then you got what you deserved.

[jp11]

99. Well said, mostly, through this thread.

The initiative was lost, I don't see it, haven't seen it since. That 'failing' has made democrats appear weak, going back to being bipartisan when constantly told no and being demanded of to give that up or abandon that for little or nothing doesn't help either. When you are afraid of losing, people catch on, the initiative could have rolled through on many things the success of those things could have gotten more done instead it was lost and 'stumbling' ensued.

[sendero]

102. Millions and one...

... and the my-president-no-matter-what crowd are no better than BushBots.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

104. He campaigned on "no back door deals", negotiating Medicare drug prices & drug re-importation

and then "negotiated" a crappy deal with Pharma (80 billion over 10 years - which they could find by vacuuming out their cars for spare change) ignores negotiating Medicare drug prices, and lobbies intensely AGAINST Dorgan's drug re-importation bill which would have saved 100 Billion all by itself.

Those actions were all I needed to know that the fix was in to maintain the status quo as much as possible while iving the appearance of "reform".

Rahm confirmed it when he touted as an accomplishment "preserving the private delivery system" of healthcare.

It's all been just an act. Pretend to care for the little, excuse me, "lesser" people while all the time protecting the agendas and profits of the connected.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/07/white-house-confirms-deal_n_254408.html

[limit18]

105. This Flame Warrior

agrees...I was an Obama supporter.

Now I, along with millions others, has lost hope, lost enthusiasm.

WAKE UP AMERICA

[customerserviceguy]

106. It's inevitable that political capital has a short shelf life

By the time campaigns for the off-year elections begin, that capital had better be fully spent, or it becomes worthless. President Obama spent it on two things, the stimulus, and this thing they call health care reform. If they are widely accepted, he might get more capital to spend after his re-election in 2012.

[creon]

107. Not all that historic

The Republicans were going to lose in 2008. That is why McCain was nominated; no one else wanted the job. For the Democrats, the choice was, essentially, Obama and Clinton. The others were not going to be nominated. No president is responsible for the hopes that are fastened upon him by the party faithful. Obama was, and is, a pragmatic politician who will take what he can get. he is, also, not foolish. He is aware that this country is, consistently, one that regularly elects Republicans. No one can be elected president with nothing more than the votes of his party faithful.
The issue with Obama lies with the principle of calculated risk. is he willing to push the limits, to the point of shoving ? No, he is not. Obama will calculate, at the outset, what is politically possible. It is quite logical to critique him on those grounds: he is unwilling to push the limits to the breaking point. GWB did just that. See where e are now as a result of that.

There is a context to all that. 1968.

Political courage is a very rare commodity. Physical courage is, more likely than not, seen more often.

[TBF]

111. K&R nt

[Javaman]

114. So...

You are angry that he turned out to be a politician?

I fell for the hope and change crap too.

However, I learned early on in his presidency that I will never again put a candidate ahead of ideals.

[Unvanguard]

116. True. He also had a lot of high, contradictory expectations.

You're right, many people feel disappointed in Obama. But as many or more feel disappointed because he ended up being a partisan, big-government, deficit-spending far-leftist as because he sold out to Wall Street and the health insurance companies. (I do not mean to suggest that I agree with either characterization--I do not.)

What political capital he did have, he used, on the largest fiscal stimulus and the largest expansion of domestic social policy expansion in decades. Obama is not even remotely a do-nothing president. In objective terms, to say Obama has squandered what opportunities he had makes no sense. The disappointment he has undoubtedly brought about is a strange phenomenon; in part, it may be attributable to the fact that his campaign inspired a variety of people who ultimately do not agree on very much.

[xiamiam]

121. we agreed on one thing...change...we havent got it..nt

[Unvanguard]

123. "Change" is a mostly-meaningless platitude in politics.

Always has been.

The question is always, change what to what? Obama has brought certain kinds of change. He has not brought others. People are disappointed because they have not brought the change they themselves are interested in. But even ignoring the numerous limits on Obama's capacity to bring about policy change, there is no conceivable set of changes that would please everyone, or even come close.

On DU, most of us are disappointed by the same things. But we are a small microcosm of the US public. The simple fact of the matter is that far more people dislike Obama for being too liberal than for being too conservative.

[xiamiam]

138. obama is liberal in the same way that msm is liberal..which is not at all

its a talking point that those sitting in front of their tvs have been spoon fed..the same msm that ignores hundreds of thousands protesting against the war yet focuses on a handful of teabaggers..

[Unvanguard]

143. That's your view, and there's a good deal of truth to it.

Obama is by no means a radical; certainly his policies in office have been nothing of the sort, and, indeed, especially when combined with the reluctance of conservative members of the Democratic caucus, have been far to the right of what would be ideal for the country.

But both your view and mine are the views of a fairly small minority of the public. And as long as that's true, it makes no sense to claim that Obama has somehow betrayed us. Obama is a politician, not a tenured academic; his success depends on elections, and elections involve assembling majorities. We may not like the realities of what this means given the views of the American public, but it is what it is.

[xiamiam]

157. two things

assembling a majority was easier in 2008. I'll admit I was hopeful after the previous administration and the Hope and Change packaging presented to us... was.. and still is perfect. Packaging..that's what happened. WE bought the shiny new car and it doesn't go quite fast enough. I'm angry with myself for being sold and purchasing.

I knew by April 2009..when Obama abandoned the bankruptcy bill which would have forced lenders to cramdown mortgages. That bill was Durbins baby, his mentor. A defining moment and I think downhill from there. The speech re the escalation of the Afghanistan war, however still has me shaking my head. I heard that speech before from Bush..almost word for word.

People are watching. I live in a very liberal part of the country. We don't want war. Period. Doesn't matter who is peddling it. I think we are more united nationwide on that issue than anything else.

[MissDeeds]

118. K&R n/t

[waronbanks]

122. Im afraid Obama represents the Corporate Party

This we might as well accept. has he done some good? Sure. Has he delivered what his whole campaign was about...changing the corporate ruled culture of Washington? Of course not and I dont believe he or anyone can at this point. But he has not at any time stood up to the corporates. Never. In fact every move I see in trying to get deals through is playing right into the corporate agenda. Putting banksters in charge, health care give aways,BP allowed to cover the crimes with nary a word and in fact are being supported by the government.

You see the corporates know they have to throw a bone our way to keep the awful truth from getting to people. They arent stupid. They'll give a little to keep the status quo. and from where Im at I see Obama capitulating at every push by the corporates so they dont even have to give up much at all. the Corporate Party is in control. Fox news is not so much republican as it is corporate. if you really pay attention they are there to fight for the corporate agenda. They cover it up by pretending to be republicans since we all know republicans are as heartless as the corps so it seems to fit just right. but they are really shilling for the corporate class.

Yes Obama had serious fucking capital. And why he chose to squander it on half assed legislation is a question that will be asked for many years to come. But only if you consider him a democrat. After 1.5 years of his actions its quite clear to me hes really the Corporate Party. When you adjust your view to one that based more on reality and actions rather than words and labels it becomes painfully obvious.

Once we accept that we can begin the hard work of figuring out how to free ourselves, our government and our media from the grips of the many vampire squids sucking the life from us.

[Jakes Progress]

124. He spent it alll trying to date the republicans.

He went through the whole wad when all along the republicans were just not that into him.

[closeupready]

126. Bonobo, I DO recall your unwavering enthusiastic support here.

I considered you a full-fledged Cult of Obama member.

I must say that your willingness to publicly do a 180 on that wins my complete respect and awe.

[pattmarty]

137. It's personality. Bush had balls but no brains, Obama has brains........

...........but no balls. FDR HAD BOTH.

[newtothegame]

139. I think part of the problem is that it was false capital, unearned.

1st, people had convinced themselves that some huge barrier had been overcome with the election of Barrack Obama; namely, that we had elected a black President. I, for one, question just how "historic" this was. He blew away his competition in the primary, and blew away his competition in the general election. It wasn't some long, hard struggle that finally overcame America's prejudices; people OVERWHELMINGLY supported his campaign from the beginning.

2nd, we had HUGE expectations for what President Obama could/would do, but we didn't have any REASON to believe that. Nothing in the track record, personality, or history should have convinced us of this. I think we partly overestimated the anger at Bush (sometimes it seemed half of DU posts were about Bush's poll #'s), and assumed that that meant that America was going to go in a completely opposite direction. The problem with this is two-fold: 1) America rarely moves that quickly or radically, and 2) again, there was nothing in Candidate Obama's record that should have given us the impression he was going to turn a huge corner from Bush's policy.

It's OUR fault for being disappointed, not his.

[Surya Gayatri]

142. Please start a new thread with this post, newtothegame...

excellent, excellent observations. SG

[newtothegame]

147. Alright, just did. Thanks :) nt

[slipslidingaway]

163. Link - False Capital ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8731338&mesg_id=8731338

[newspeak]

214. actually I had lived through Clinton

watched him sign NAFTA-GATT, after voting for him to keep it from being passed. I knew who Hillary represented-you might say, Obama was the choice over her. I was disturbed by some of the things he was saying-especially business related. But had hopes he'd be better. I wasn't an enthusiastic Obama voter, but I thought he wouldn't pander as much to the corporations-and after the health insurance bill, I see the writing on the wall.

My friend was very enthusiastic about Obama-she's very active in the Democratic party. Now, when we get together and talk politics, she's very, very disappointed. She expected more.

If we keep getting screwed by both parties, if our party keeps selling us out to the corporations, if we keep footing the bill because of deregulation and these corporations keep ripping us off, then where is our future, our children's' future? There will be nothing left of us.

[BootinUp]

148. In case you missed it, Axelrod on this yesterday

http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/07/11/obama.democrats/index.html?hpt=Sbin

[valerief]

149. We still have our Congress and SCOTUS working against America. nt

[me b zola]

155. Outstanding OP and thread

Recommended.

[Enrique]

161. Obama doesn't trust his rank and file supporters

his faith is with the big money people.

[Kermitt Gribble]

180. Excellent post, Bonobo!

I am one of the millions of others who feel like you.

K&R!

[Balderdash]

181. The last thing I ever thought I would do is recommend a Bonobo post

but I did and I feel your pain. I'm still going to vote straight Dem though and
I'll spend money (if I still have job) and I'll volunteer and do what needs to
be done to keep Republicans out.

Our President tries too hard to include the other side and they've done nothing
to earn that. President Obama should have spent his capital when he had it on
what Democrats want, now I'm afraid we're screwed.

[onenote]

183. Obama didn't have as much capital as you might think

If you closely analyze the 2008 election results, one thing that you will find is that victorious Democratic congressional candidates more often than not did better in their districts than Obama did. Rightly or wrongly, that means that elected Democrats did not feel indebted to Obama or afraid of the millions of hard workers that supported Obama.

And to the extent Obama had capital, he spent an enormous amount of it at the very start of his term working on the economic stimulus.

[Steely_Dan]

188. I Would Like To Send This...

...to our President and to the so-called "New" Democrats.

But if by a "Liberal" they mean someone who looks ahead and not behind, someone who welcomes new ideas without rigid reactions, someone who cares about the welfare of the people -- their health, their housing, their schools, their jobs, their civil rights, and their civil liberties -- someone who believes we can break through the stalemate and suspicions that grip us in our policies abroad, if that is what they mean by a "Liberal," then I'm proud to say I'm a "Liberal."

JFK - September 14, 1960

The Entire Speech Here:

http://www.liberalparty.org/JFKLPAcceptance.html

[libmom74]

190. I'm with you

I was a PCO, I started supporting Obama during the primaries. My precinct has over a thousand houses and I went to all of them and helped in other precincts, I doorbelled, phonebanked, registered new voters an I even took a week off the week before the election to GOTV for Obama. Now I seriously doubt I will vote for him in 2012, I hope there is a true progressive challenger that I can support. I may even sit the election out or write in Howard Dean or Dennis Kucinich (I know this is going to get flamed). The thing is almost all of my friends and family feel the same way, we all look at the campaigner Obama and the President Obama and the huge disconnect and feel really betrayed. It's one thing to fudge a little on a small campaign promise but he's pretty much lied about everything from Iraq to Guantanamo to DADT to DOMA to the Public Option (which was a big deal for me because I work in health care) and recently his dealings with BP and this bullshit SS commission. I'm done.

[Name removed]

191. Deleted message

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

[Little Star]

196. Did she say she blamed it ALL on Obama? NO.......

It sounded like she was speaking of the parts he has played/not played in this mess. You seem to be misrepresenting what she said.

[Balderdash]

197. You are all the proof anyone needs...

Maybe your foot wouldn't be crammed so far into your mouth if you actually read what these
people are saying. Too much work?

[Bluebear]

241. Nobody is as smart as you, we know.

[ooglymoogly]

247. Gee, Just came back from figuring....Hey maybe

those millions are just smarter than the rest.

[NJmaverick]

194. The President used that capital to pass historic reform and improvements

but when you start in the deepest hole in history, that fact is not always easy to recognize.

[ooglymoogly]

248. If you are in the deepest hole in history, you do

not start digging to the right of the folks who put us in that hole by their crooked hypocrisy and greed. You climb out of it using the bodies of those who put us in that hole.

[Lorien]

195. True. nt

[TPaine7]

198. Obama is a pragmatist to a fault.

He doesn't have many core, fundamental beliefs--beliefs he would go to the mat for. He see's almost everything in gray.

His students said he could argue both sides of an issue--and make you defend either side--so completely that they couldn't tell what he believed. That's good in a teacher. In a president--not so much.

That is not the type of leader who takes risks and sticks his neck out and encourages passion and changes the world. I worried about that before and after I voted for the man; I hoped he had at least a little fire in his belly, fire he hid from his students. I fear he's a "what's the best we can do without ruffling too many feathers or being too partisan" type of president.

Too bad for us.

[ooglymoogly]

202. It is hard to believe the dumbfounding blindness

of some on this site. Defending obvious wrongheadedness to their own destruction. As Obama clearly said to the wingers..."I am not who you think I am", when they were calling him a liberal and so far his record has born that out in spades. He traded all that capital and good will from us for thirty pieces of silver from the pugs. Anyone who has not gotten this is not playing with a full deck. Just imagine if the present situation were reversed, what Herr. Bush would have done with all that capital...Hell look what he did with just the pretend capital the press heaped on him and even with a dem congress. Look at any number of treasonous acts he pulled...Pugs get their crooked agenda through, Democrats don't or even seem to want to get their pretend democratic agenda through. And for those who want to see...it is all right there on the internet for anyone firing synapses to see. Who votes for what...who is making token votes to keep his democratic creds ; Who is just grandstanding for votes and who is a true friend to democrats and I mean democrats who follow democratic principles. The wool pullers are depending on sheer sophistry to carry their lame arguments based on "oh woe is me". The saying goes "If it is too hot in the Kitchen get out"; Not if it gets too hot in the kitchen light yourself on fire and become part of the heat. We are back to the days of the campaign when whispering sweet nothings and weeping excuses for failed policy are meant to carry the day.

[Diane R]

203. So I take it that you're going to be leading the GOP resurgence in 2012?

Read Jonathan Alter's book 'The Promise', then report back.

[mike_c]

205. failed presidency....

eom

[kjackson227]

209. And...

there are millions of Americans who DON'T feel like you.

"You can rage against that sentiment all you want.
You can say I was unrealistic.
You can say I am pouting or "manufacturing outrage".
You can say I am not patient enough.
You can call even call me a disloyal Democrat".

You said it, I didn't.

[Q3JR4]

213. According to Naomi Klein in "No Logo"

Obama did something that large multinational coporations do every single day. He branded himself as THE candidate for change.

So what happens when you, the consumer, get a peak beneath the branded mask? It's the same thing that's happening to Obama's campaign right now.

Q3JR4.

[Name removed]

215. Deleted message

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

[havbrush]

216. Minority Against Obama

The dems, save the few progressive ones, during Bush's administration were totally cowed by the repugs and went along with all the war funding, and patriot act crap and tax cuts for the rich votes and on and on. In other words, they weren't really the loyal opposition. They had no cohones and opposed very little. With Obama, many of the dems are really repugs, thanks to all the bluedogs Rahm Emanuel helped get elected, so the minority is able to count on the bluedogs voting with them as they block most things. For some reason the administration and the dems don't want to go the reconciliation route. I don't get it since the rhepugs did during bush's time.

[Aramchek]

217. you vastly overexaggerate the number of people who feel like you

this is a coping mechanism.

[opihimoimoi]

220. + a whole bunch...

amazing rolls eyes:

[ooglymoogly]

233. All and I mean all the many democrats I worked with to

get O elected NO longer feel the same, though like me; If polled would be in the support column, because there is no other choice. Believe me if a poll came out asking who would you support in the primary, Grayson, Dean or Obama, I think the applecart would crash and burn. It has to do with the constitution and protecting it and not gutting FDR the greatest president the world has known; The one who brought us to and solidified our greatness.

[inna]

277. projection. apply to self.

[smiley_glad_hands]

219. It hasn't been two years since he was elected. As you have stated, you are unrealistic. n/t

[ooglymoogly]

240. If in two year you can abrogate and uphold the abrogation of important parts of the constitution

following many more by his predecessor, and let treason and war crimes flower and metastasize; Pull the country decidedly to the right. Hand over billions to banksters; Hand over even many more billions to unwinnable wars; There is much danger ahead. Danger, I think, the public at large, is well into the throws of and beginning to see and feel the effects of in ever increasing numbers; A wasted treasury expected to be refortified on the backs of the middle class, the poor and defenseless in large measure by not paying the SS IOU's worth trillions, belonging by inscrutable law, to those very same middle and poor classes with an out and out robbery of their safety net. Obama has somebodies back but it ain't ours; And if he continues this for 2 more years we are up shit creek.

[RufusTFirefly]

223. I bought a six-pack of Bud Light, and I'm STILL not surrounded by bikini-clad beauties!!

I don't feel cheated though. Because I know how to recognize advertising when I see it.

Obama wins Marketer of the Year

[ooglymoogly]

242. But don't you get it? You are supposed to just pretend, like others on this site dutifully do...nt

[bobburgster]

230. Envision this: President Palin

Quit complaining, give him at least 4 years before you jump off the boat.

[ooglymoogly]

232. How bout president Grayson or president Dean.

If either gathers enough steam I will jump ship, I am sure, along with millions of others. If there is no competition O is in the clear. I will hold my nose and vote for him, but I will not spend every waking hour trying to get him elected nor will I spend a penny. I too have been polled and always say I support O, but, in my own mind, that is conditional on somebody I really believe, has our back comes along,...then,...soo long, not been great noin ya...and maybe now we can get our constitution back prosecute some treason and war crimes and bring back some of a real democrats policies...and I speak of a god FDR.

[bobburgster]

243. I respect your opinion.

You show a well thought out disagreement with Obama, and his presidency to date. I find no fault in democrats that are disillusioned, and will vote for someone else in the realms of the process. It is the people who will sabotage him knowing full well that we will get another republican run government. That mindset to me is insane.

[ooglymoogly]

245. I cannot disagree with that. nt

[suzie]

260. Are you a prosecutor?

Have you ever waited for a jury to come back?

Have you ever asked any professional prosecutors what the likelihood of getting convictions against members of the Bush administration is?

[ooglymoogly]

269. Under the RICO laws and with the commitment we had at Nuremberg....100%; Many have already

admitted their guilt. The mere prosecution would bring these thugs down and open a kaleidescope of treachery, deceit and treason; That would have the populous marching with pitchforks and screaming for blood; Can you imagine acquittal in those circumstances. We now have crooked courts, and crooked justice, heavily packed with dishonest pugs, so prosecution would be an uphill battle; But one that needs to be fought with all guns blazing and all the citizenry on board and shouting for blood. One only needs look at the trials at Nuremberg to see that this must be done, but then, we had honor as a country then. The excuse that honor and justice are just too hard, and law and order is just to keep the "lesser" people in line, will be the downfall of this country. In the eyes of the world we are already greedy, self aggrandizing hypocrites because of these thugs. But if you had gone anywhere beyond our borders, you would know that. When somebody does not want to do something, the excuse is always, "it can't be done", no matter the piles of evidence, the gazillion witnesses to the atrocities, the treason, the lies and deceit...The charge of torture alone should put these bastards in prisons so deep they will never see the light of day. We never even investigated the possibility, which is in itself a crime. Believe me if we were as committed to justice now, as we were at Nuremberg, this would have been over a long time ago and a lot of Neocons, pugs and a lot of dino's would be rotting in prison where they belong. With a dedicated and honest justice system and an angry populace, this becomes a far easier task; And all it would take for that to happen, would be to just let the truth be known; Put it all on the table. But then transparency has become anathema to this administration. The inaction by our government, on this matter is an affront to our constitution and an affront to our democracy and an affront to our place in the civilized world.

[suzie]

293. So, the answer is "No".

You don't know anything really know anything about it, but it's a great talking point for the Anti-Obama crowd.

[ooglymoogly]

304. The answer is adamantly NOT, "no".

Anything that is attempted, to uphold the constitution and the laws of the land and the world for that matter, require effort. The cynical mantra that, "it can't be done" is so ridiculous it reaches new heights of credulity and new depths of criminal propaganda. Just imagine for a moment the powerful interests the framers were up against, yet they rose to the occasion and made us proud; They did not say "it can't be done" They dug in and did it because their lives depended on it, as does ours in this case. And what they did was truly near the impossible. If this administration were committed to upholding the constitution, the laws of a civilized world and just plain naked justice and decency, even over powerful interests, this prez could keep running on a platform of honor, decency and righteousness and he would have my undying loyalty and I would weep with pride, at the sight of him, as my mother did at the sight of FDR. This admin has not exerted even minimal effort to explore the crimes, or prosecution there of; Heinous crimes against humanity, that will most likely put this experiment in democracy to an end; Run it into the dustbin of history. Heinous crimes we all know took place, pretending they did not happen; With the unbelievably naive and stupid platitude, that an ape siting at a typewriter for a few thousand years, might have come up with, "we are looking forward" as if that ends the matter of clear cut treason, treachery and war crimes; But there are those, like me, and we are legion, who honor the constitution and honest law and order and common decency, who will forever be haunted by those mass murders committed in our names; Under the banner of an illegal war, for the enrichment of a few; And we can never forget, until the honor of this country is restored by prosecuting the war crimes committed in our names; And that lack of effort, that roll over approach to just about everything that has a D after its name, is the very reasons for the "anti", this administration; And I am not alone. The only effort that this admin seems capable of, is heralding democratic principles only to move the argument into closed back rooms reconstituting those ideals with pug clap trap to fatten the bloated corporations, hiding under the most convoluted and transparent arguments to mollify us, for the stab in the back; Arguments so juvenile, they should make a third grader blush. Only if this Prez can manage to keep challenges, in the primary, at bay, will I be forced to vote for this marionette; however, he no longer has my support; But put Grayson or Dean in the equation and all bets are off; Oh wait, all bets on, but for a different horse for whom I will work my heart out, as I did for O.

[suzie]

311. Ah yes, we come to talking point #2 in the anti-Obama zealot sphere, "If only Obama were more like

FDR."

Do you really think that rounding up native born Americans and putting them in confinement camps was what the Founding Fathers ever had in mind? Or trying to pack the SCOTUS with extra justices to get favorable rulings?

And please, invoking the Founding Fathers? The guys who said that it was simply impossible to create a new nation without enshrining slavery directly in the Constitution. Those cynical guys are the ones that you want to use such high flown language about?

I voted for Obama because I didn't want the use of the Justice Dept. as a political arm of the established party. And I believe the Founding Fathers were pretty much in agreement with that, or else we'd not have had the Bill of Rights and the other guarantees of individual rights.

And I wanted prosecutors who were rather more like Patrick Fitzgerald, a guy that seemed pretty good at it, than the various US Attorneys that were willing to do the bidding of our previous administration. But all that due process stuff slows everything down and creates all kinds of problems when you have folks on the other side who will just lie. I think we got a feeling in the Libby trial of just how difficult it was to make a case against people who were willing to lie and take the fall for their superiors.

I have sat and waited for juries and although I'm not a prosecutor, I've hung out with them and have asked frankly if they thought convictions were likely against the previous administration officials. The answer was "No."

Now you may want prosecutors to take cases to court for the reason of inconveniencing or bankrupting the lower level officials that would be the only ones that a prosecution would get to. I don't believe that follows the spirit of the Constitution, no matter what high flown language about "platforms of honor, decency and righteousness" you want to bandy about.

However, I don't believe that I read stuff about "heinous crimes against humanity" in the Constitution--or else the Founding Fathers would have found the courage, that you find so lacking in the Obama administration, to outlaw slavery at the signing.

Sorry, but I'll settle for people with a big commitment to due process, which I believe was envisioned in the writing of the Constitution (if not for all U.S. residents of the time).

[ooglymoogly]

313. Is the Prez following due process by not prosecuting treason...

and war crimes compound by the laws of the civilized world? Is he adhering to due process when he shreds parts of the Constitution, he, like Bush, finds inconvenient; And is he doing it by due process?

Your arguments are based on the worship of this Prez and not remotely connected to fact, except in a form that is pure sophistry. The Constitution is the law of the land...It cannot be manipulated or changed without DUE PROCESS; The constitution is a work in progress, as it was meant to be and encompasses all its amendments including the 13th; It cannot be changed without due process and particularly not on the whims of a prez, or, for an unholy convenience with a sighning statement or the upholding of one.

The preamble was meant as a sum of its many parts (which also had its representatives from the south) of what the constitution stands for and which eventually overrode those calumnies from southern interests, in the form of that omission, even after it was conceived; And that spirit and meaning of the Constitution, eventually brought about the 13Th amendment and many others and no doubt more will follow....BUT WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF DUE PROCESS.

Your post embodies the main crux of why some of us have realized that O is not presidential material; That some of us value the Constitution and what it has done for this country, more than we value any one prez, particularly one who also does not think he is bound by it or needs to uphold it;

Your disrespect of the constitution makes you one of the many best examples of why many of us will work toward a new beginning with a different Dem in the Whitehouse.

What a crock it is that the best thing that can be said about this prez. "Would you rather have Mc Cain or worse Sarah Palin"? There are other options which each of us must work toward in our own way to get a Dem in the white house.

A government spying on its citizens, is in direct contravention to the main concepts, spirit and meaning of the Constitution....as is a president holding that he has the right to assassinate any one in the world he deems a "terrorist"; Is that the big commitment to due process of which you speak? Sophistry cannot hide these facts.

Without the checks and balances and protections of the Constitution, we are finished as a country imbued with democratic principles that our Constitution, given to us at great cost, guarantees and has, until the last few decades, made us a beacon of freedom to the world.

A prez who governs, even in part, by his own concept of a particular religion and injects it into government in ever more subtle ways: Is and always was, anathema to the concepts, spirit and meaning of the Constitution; And for the most obvious reasons; Yet these are just a few of those transgressions on the constitution and the people of our country and an affront to due process. Your idea of due process is a crock, inviting nothing less than fascism.

[suzie]

314. Confinement in camps of natural born citizens was "a beacon to freedom"?

Please explain the part of the Constitution that allowed that as "due process", because I think I missed that one in Constitutional History class.

Trying to pack the SCOTUS to protect your own legislation was "upholding due process" under the Constitution? The Senate itself called the proposed FDR law--not a constitutional amendment-- "a needless, futile and utterly dangerous abandonment of constitutional principle … without precedent or justification."

You're the one that brought up FDR, which seems to be one of the mantras of the anti-Obama zealotry here on DU--"If only Obama were more like FDR".

And yet, now you want to consider that we have constitutional guarantees that--until the last few decades--made us a "beacon of freedom" in the world. Constitutional guarantees--we were one of the last countries to abolish slavery, and that took a war that cost more American lives than all the rest. And even after a war to free the slaves, they weren't allowed to vote. That took another constitutional amendment. And perhaps you didn't notice that Abraham Lincoln suspended habeas corpus. Or that under John Adams, one of your exalted Founding Fathers, the Alien and Sedition Acts were passed--not exactly "beacon of freedom" material there.

But according to you, the United States survived and continued to be a "beacon of freedom" despite all those lapses UNTIL the Obama administration did not spend endless time trying to prosecute low level federal officials from a prior administration.

Nice try about slavery. I had a good laugh at the "spirit and meaning of the Constitution" bringing about the end to slavery "WITHIN THE FRAMEWORK OF DUE PROCESS". Yeah, that and 700,000 dead soldiers and incalculable numbers of civilians.

Your assertion was about Obama's lack of courage in comparison to that of the Founding Fathers. So you consider the loss of 700,000 soldiers plus however many civilians, plus the extra 60+ years that 4 1/2 million residents of the U.S. spent living in a situation that certainly fits within your "heinous crimes against humanity" category, the result of the courage of the Founding Fathers?

Adams, Lincoln, Franklin Roosevelt--I think they were all lawyers. Do you think they didn't understand due process as well as you, or had a fundamental disrespect of the Constitution as you accuse me of doing?

Or does that not fit within your "beacon of freedom until the Obama presidency" theme?

[ooglymoogly]

315. The transparently poor sophistry and your attempt to

Paint FDR as a villain while not getting close to the contraventions of the constitution by BO and his upholding of those of his predecessor, which was the subject and meaning and query of my post; In spying on our own and claiming the right to assassinate any one in the world on his charge, or reinstating the Orwellian "Patriot Act" is sad. Your charge against FDR has been mute since 1944 when the Supreme Court found his orders of internment constitutional. Your shallow understandings of the 2nd world war, history and of the Constitution are those of a child.

I do not understand what kind of democrat can disparage FDR, by all counts the greatest president in our history, the constitution, the laws this country was built on and our founding fathers in the same breath. Oh, wait you are a BO "democrat"...that does in fact explain it all. I wash my hands of this disingenuous conversation that I feel I need a shower reading. You know nothing of history, you know nothing of FDR and you know nothing of BO and you expect you can cover for that, with republican talking point trash about FDR and the Constitution and our founding fathers; kazaam you are expelled from my site forever.

[ooglymoogly]

317. thats moot

[suzie]

318. My shallow understanding of WWII? So you have 2 standards, one for the evil Barack Obama

and one for all the other presidents.

You hold harmless the Founding Fathers, FDR, and any other president and reserve the right to trash Barack Obama. Because the public dislikes your preferred candidate and you just can't let the primaries go, you're willing to look at any and everything negative about Obma--but no one else in American history.

You seek constantly to disparage Obama, and yet squeal when I've pointed out the FDR was not perfect. Nor were the Founding Fathers or any other elected official in the history of the country.

You've sought to ignore the ugly history of slavery in this country as something that was simply remedied by changing the Constitution "through due process". I'd say that's tops in the "ignorance of history" category.

Your views are actually far closer to those of Republicans than mine, in your willingness to ignore historical fact. And sorry, but you're the one with the childish adoration of heroes.

I don't expect that I'll agree with every Democratic president on every thing. Lyndon Johnson made terrible mistakes about the Vietnam War. And yet, he probably preserved this country from being torn apart by racial strife. John F. Kennedy backed off on Civil Rights and yet we still point with pride to his agenda for getting to the moon. Jimmy Carter made lots of errors, but he told us the truth about energy.

It's simply immature to view one politician with adulation and hold the kind of grudge that some have against Obama against the rest of those who seek and attain high political office.

[treestar]

309. How about the same Congress - How would it be any different?

And wasn't Dean the one that said keep campaigning in all 50 states, don't give any of them up? So that got us Blue Dogs rather than Republicans.

[ooglymoogly]

310. Twisted...nt

[jillan]

235. AND he won by the largest margin of any President in recent history.

Chimp stole 2 elections - one for sure, and claimed he had a mandate. Even with the voting machine irregularities in 2004, he barely squeaked by.

[ooglymoogly]

281. You have just explained why it was a landslide...nt

[jillan]

236. eh - computer hiccup.

;)

[defendandprotect]

237. In fact, some say that he had a huge landslide . . . 24 more members of Congress ...

and I kinda think that's true . . .

but with computer voting, who knows?

[defendandprotect]

238. Wasn't quite as trusting as others here . . . but feel as you do --

[Deep13]

239. Yeah. I knew it would happen. ...

... I hoped I was wrong. But I wasn't. Most of last year was just squandered time.

[Vidar]

252. K&R.

[grahamhgreen]

253. Obama has failed thus far - but we have not, nor have our ideas or our ideals. We will fight till we

achieve the change Obama pretended to be for.

[jimlup]

259. You've summarized my thoughts well

Thank You!

[Skittles]

263. you know it, Bonobo

I knew this would happen but it does not make it any less painful

[quiet.american]

270. Good Lord. I don't know whether to cue the violins, or what. nt.

[inna]

273. what is this bizarre comment even supposed to mean?

it comes across as borderline creepy, just so you know.

[quiet.american]

276. Hmn - didn't intend it as a Rorschach test, but there you go! nt

[inna]

278. again, you make no sense,

and your snarks come across as borderline creepy, in a passive-aggressive way.

done wasting time "conversing with you".

[quiet.american]

279. I know, Inna, I know. It's all a bit much. nt

[inna]

280. all right. sorry if i overreacted. peace. nt

[ooglymoogly]

287. Do you even know what a Rorschach test is?

And if you did not mean it as an inkblot, what did you mean it as? I see several options...A bloviation;...An attempt at the acerbic;...An attempt to belittle the post you were answering without any discernible thought pattern?

[quiet.american]

288. Alright, then - I'll leave it to you to choose your favorite one and do whatever you'd like w/it! nt

[bertman]

271. Proud to be RECOMMENDER # 196. nt

[elocs]

272. Like FDR, the President needs to be the leader of his party, an inspiration to the rank and file.

When Obama took office he had people who would have walked through fire for him and would have worked hard to fulfill the promises of the campaign.

We needed a leader who would do what needed to be done regardless of the party of NO or other obstacles.

We needed a President who was unwilling to make any compromise just to get a portion of what he wanted because the Republicans were more than willing to take every compromise and give nothing in return.

As John Greenleaf Whittier said:

For all sad words of tongue and pen, the saddest are these, It might have been.

I feel the disappointment for much of what we see is shadow that we are convinced to believe is a great accomplishment of substance. But there are those who will carry that banner to the bitter end.

[Steely_Dan]

303. Very Well Put - Thanks

Leadership takes courage. I have been posting over and over again that I believe Obama lacks the kind of leadership we need right now. Does this mean he is a bad man...of course not. The kind of leadership I am speaking of is rare. It is the kind of leadership where you can tell someone to go to hell and they can't wait for the trip.

-P

[meow mix]

297. dang, too late for +rec

cant beleive the way this is going either.. i feel decieved

[Blue_Roses]

305. Millions still DO support him.

Not sure what you wanted in your "gift bag":shrug:

[Bluebear]

319. Do tell what you mean by "your gift bag"?

" :shrug: "

[TK421]

306. Body Snatchers got to you, too? just kidding...you'll probably get slammed for this