Wow... Obama: "That's the problem with you progressives..."

[WillyT]

Republican Opposition To Elizabeth Warren Allows White House To Duck Uncomfortable Questions
Shahien Nasiripour - HuffPo
Posted: 7/18/11 09:10 PM ET

<snip>

WASHINGTON -- Thanks to united Republican opposition to Elizabeth Warren as the permanent head of the consumer protection agency she dreamed up and shepherded through Congress, the administration is largely able to avoid the uncomfortable discussion about just how much support she had within the White House.

Obama, while often publicly praising Warren, was never committed to nominating her as head of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, people familiar with the internal decision-making process said. There were a variety of factors holding her up, from the administration's perception that she was prone to speaking her mind publicly -- even if her position contrasted with that of the administration’s -- to the intense opposition she generated from Democrats and Republicans in Congress, and from certain parts of the financial services industry.

The internal debate that led to President Barack Obama passing her over as head of the agency, commonly known as the CFPB, pitted one set of advisers -- longtime confidantes Valerie Jarrett and David Axelrod -- against the trio of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, former White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and current Chief of Staff William Daley. Jarrett and Axelrod supported Warren, not least because of the impact she’d have on the Democratic Party’s liberal base, sources said. Geithner, Emanuel and Daley opposed the idea because of a variety of factors, both personal and political.

Ultimately, it was Obama’s call. Sources said an anecdote about a 2010 meeting provides clues to Obama’s thinking. Last summer, during a White House meeting with first-term Senate Democrats, Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, asked Obama whether he'd nominate Warren for the role. Obama held up a half-full glass of water and told him: "That's the problem with you progressives. You see this as half-empty."

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/07/18/republican-opposition-to-elizabeth-warren_n_902165.html

:wow:

:kick:

[ej510]

1. Obama: "I listen to my friends on Wall St., I need Progressives in order to be elected."

[woo me with science]

67. It seems the REAL "rope-a-dope" has been revealed:

[hifiguy]

179. We have been royally played

and royally chumped. By an economic royalist in sheep's clothing. :grr:

[FiveGoodMen]

180. And we're the dopes for believing in that ... guy

[indepat]

176. No one who is party to deficit reduction being thrust on the backs of the old, frail, and poor

rather than on those who own 90% of the wealth and have had a feeding-frenzy sucking at the public welfare teat for more than 30 years will ever get the vote of this progressive. Never, ever in this lifetime. :patriot:

[theaocp]

2. He's right.

Why DO we keep holding his feet to the fire? Christ, it's hot!

[Bake]

168. Doesn't matter ... he's wearing asbestos shoes.

They must be comfortable.

Bake

[ProSense]

3. Obama said what?

Last summer, according to sources? OMG! OMG!

Does Sanders and Warren know? Why are they still supporting him?

OMG!!!

[WillyT]

10. See... I Voted For Him Because I Thought HE Was A Progressive...

Guess what... I was wrong.

Fool me once... shame on you. Fool me twice...

You know the rest.

:shrug:

[cali]

13. do you know anything about Cordray? He's an excellent nominee.

[sabrina 1]

25. There are lots of people who would make excellent

nominees, but none of them better than Elizabeth Warren. And, since the Republicans have already stated they will not accept ANY nominee to that position, they want a board of directors instead and they want to be able to defund it, iow, make it worthless, and until they get what they want, they will not accept anyone in that position.

Given those circumstances, it makes no sense to use the Republicans as an excuse for ditching Warren.

[cali]

31. Look, Warren backs the President on this. I don't see who you are to second guess her.

[DirkGently]

39. I keep hearing that bit about Warren going along. We're to think it was her idea? That she'd kick &

scream? This call was made by the WHITE HOUSE. The fact Warren isn't -- what? ...publicly slamming the President? -- speaks only of her graciousness. It in no way contradicts the very plain fact she was DUMPED.

[WillyT]

80. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

Exactly !!!

:kick:

:hi:

[nashville_brook]

86. exactamundo.

[Marr]

110. See, she didn't kick and scream, so this should be ignored. Of course,

if she had kicked and screamed, it would be proof that she's irrational and too demanding, and should be ignored.

:crazy:

[roxiejules]

49. Rahm on Elizabeth Warren

"We don’t like her either.”

- former White House chief of staff Rahm Emmanuel to Sen. Harry Reid regarding Elizabeth Warren's potential nomination

[DirkGently]

52. Of course. Every other nominee has been a member of the Billionaire Boys Club.

[Bake]

169. Maybe Jeff Immelt could head up the commission.

Oh yeah ... he's too busy raking in gazillions from GE ...

Bake

[WillyT]

62. + 1,000,000,000... Wow !!!

:kick:

:hi:

[bahrbearian]

145. Big WOW!

[sabrina 1]

116. Warren knew he was not going to fight for her. She is a very

classy woman, what did you expect her to say at this point?

Brooksley Born still will not speak publicly about how the Clinton administration ran her out of DC either. She speaks about her own discovery of impending disaster and how she alerted people to it, but she has never publicly slammed either Clinton for not standing up for her, or even Greenspan who reportedly was brutal to her.

So, does her class act by not starting a public fight with Clinton eg, change the fact that what happened to her was wrong and had dire consequences for this country as everyone now knows?

But one thing Warrne didn't say, as has been claimed here over and over again, falsely, that she never wanted the job. But that would have required the WH fighting for her.

And you have not addressed my point regarding the futility of nominating anyone, IF we are being told the truth, that it was the Repubs who made it necessary for the WH to abandon Warren.

[WillyT]

121. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

Exactly !!!

:yourock:

:hi:

[roxiejules]

141. Brooksley Born is the perfect example....see this link for reminder

of how she was treated and how she tried to stop the unregulated derivative time bomb.



http://upload.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=385x600885

[sabrina 1]

153. She was the canary in the coal mine. And they did to her what

has been done to Elizabeth Warren. The only difference is that today, we are more aware of what is going on. Back then, they were able to simply drive her out of her position and few knew anything about it until very recently.

It's getting harder and harder for them to cover up their tracks. There is a desperarion about all that is going on right now, as if they are clinging to their ill-gotten gains and power because the people today have more accesss to information. However, as we can see, even with that, some prefer to remain in a state of denial.

Thank you for the link. I have seen The Warning several times. Everyone needs to see it. If anyone had listened to Brooksley Born, what a different world this would be.

[robinlynne]

146. You said it perfectly. same as all the other decisions....

[ProSense]

14. And

that third-party quote changed your view?

[WillyT]

16. No... Just Confirmed It... Once Again...

:shrug:

[roxiejules]

81. No, the third party quote didn't change my mind.....

everything else did.

[PeaceNikki]

19. Weird. Did you look into him at all before you voted?

He's always been moderate and pragmatic. I was fully aware of this during the primaries and, while not excited, fully understood this and was still happier than a clam to vote for him and ecstatic when he won.

What specifically lead you to believe he was progressive rather than moderate?

[WillyT]

23. I Guess I Was Fooled By The Soaring Rhetoric...

I'm a glass half-full kinda guy.

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[PeaceNikki]

27. It would take a Russ Feingold to get me really pleased with a POTUS nominee.

But I will support the Democrats at all levels while I work from the ground up to help build up the leaders of our future. I'm putting my time, passion and money into the deep sea of amazing Democrats here in Wisconsin and hopefully watch some of them turn into national party leaders.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

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

[ProfessorGAC]

109. And That's Who's Fault?

Not that i agree with your assessment now, or then for that matter.

But, now you're mad at whom because you misread everything?

You really think your complaint makes sense to anyone but you?
GAC

[WillyT]

Oh,You Are ABSOLUTELY Right... WILL NOT Happen Again...

Hope that makes you feel better.

:shrug:

[bvar22]

56. No. He campaigned as a champion of the Working Class. Thats a FACT.

EFCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMNVIQqatyU

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


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


Comfortable Shoes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA9KC8SMu3o

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

Restore America’s Honor
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

Transparency
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5t8GdxFYBU


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

[L0oniX]

59. So ...I guess as long you are working ...hmmmm

[PeaceNikki]

61. Yes, I agree, but when you buy a product do you just look at the manufacturer's prettied up ads,

or do you read the product specs and reviews before making major decisions? :shrug:

I opt for the latter, personally.

[bvar22]

82. No,

...but when it comes down to a binary choice between:

a) Someone who you KNOW represents the Big Money Interests (DLC)

and

b)Someone who insists he is not a toady of the Big Money Interests,
you take the chance, and "hope" he is isn't lying.

If you KNEW he was lying (as you claim),
why did YOU vote for him? :shrug:

At least I had "hope".

[PeaceNikki]

89. I voted for him because he was the best option and because he's a Democrat. And I am a Democrat.

If I never voted for a politician who lied, misrepresented themselves or just plain couldn't do what they even may have hoped to do, I'd never vote.

The world isn't so black and white so I vote for Democrats and work on making the party and its leaders better.

[Name removed]

100. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

112. No. I am a Democrat.

[Name removed]

117. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

118. And you enjoy your stay here.

:hi:

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

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

[PeaceNikki]

126. Shock of all shocks, people get banned who were previously banned and advocate third party.

Considering your name, you can't be so very shocked.

[Name removed]

99. Deleted message

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

[robinlynne]

148. Actually Edwards did. that's why I voted for him (Edwards). Obama always

said there was plenty of room at the tbale for the Repugs. Given the hell our country was going through I didn't think that was possible. And as we now see, it wasn't. You either support the working class or the uber rich. Obama is not EVEN in the center.

[Creideiki]

138. Conservative. He's conservative.

And I still voted for him because the thought of Bible Spice one breath from the White House scared the crap out of me.

I suppose Batpoop Insane Spice may get the nomination--then I will probably claw my nose off and vote for the Traitor in Chief again.

However, the next time someone tells me that I need to support any random Democrat just because he's the minority of the month and it would be oh, so historic to elect another conservative minority to the White House, I'll likely find that I need to walk the dogs instead of get to the polls.

[robinlynne]

147. He said he wanted CHANGE! Remember?

[elocs]

26. If you were a fool it's because you ever thought he was a Progressive.

He wasn't, and isn't.

In the 2008 people saw in Obama what they wanted to see even if there was no reality behind it. They wanted Obama to be what he really was not, but they clung to the illusion they had to be right.

After all, it was an historic election of the first black president and it was an historic illusion because now people feel betrayed by a man who never was what they pretended him to be.

So, whose fault is that?

[anamandujano]

72. He was the pretender, not us.

He pretended to be a Democrat, agreed with Hillary as he was too lazy or ill prepared to make his own statements.

The guy was never ready for prime time. Everyone else did the work and he took the credit. He was bankrolled by Wall Street.

The Repukes ran two candidates. That's all.

[WillyT]

83. Oh, I Agree... Like You Said, I Was A Fool To Vote For Him... Thank You...

we'll see if it happens again.

:shrug:

[elocs]

102. I said "if" you were a fool, not that you were a fool.

Like I said, evidently you and many others were fooled into believing Obama to be what you wanted him to be rather than who he was based upon his past record.

[WillyT]

106. LOL !!! - Now THERE, Is A 2012 Campaign Slogan !!!

"He Won't Be What You Want Him To Be"

:shrug:

[sabrina 1]

92. No, they wanted him to follow through on his campaign

promises. If he was lying during the campaign, that is on HIM, not those who believed him. It seems you're saying he WAS lying, and voters are responsible when/if a politician lies.

That is ridiculous. And for people who seem obsessed with the fact that he is 'the first Black President', speak for yourselves. I supported him based on just a few differences between him and Hillary, the only other choice we had.

1) He opposed Mandated Insurance, she supported it
2) He opposed the Iraq War, yes, I knew he was not in the Senate at the time, but he got the benefit of the doubt on that.
3) He opposed McCain on Offshore Drilling, very eloquently airc. But then I expected any Democrat to support that ban.
4) He opposed Hillary when she stated that she would set up a Commission on the Deficit, stating that such Commissions were an end-run around Congress and his administration would do everything in the open, not behind closed doors, before Congress where these discussions belong.

His ethnicity did not influence my support for him one bit. After all Condi Rice was the first Black female SOS. And we all know how wonderful that was for the country! :eyes:

[Name removed]

103. Deleted message

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

[sabrina 1]

124. I am responding to the claim that we were supposed to have

known he was not being truthful in the campaign. How would we know that exactly? This is the old disingenuous attempt to 'blame the voters' again, when a Politician fails to deliver what s/he promised. I didn't hear these same people during the campaign saying 'hey, don't believe him on mandated insurance, he's lying', did you? But NOW, they are accusing those who supported him based on his own campaign statements on the issues, of not figuring out that he was just kidding after all. Why didn't they tell us THEN?

[pscot]

172. Pretzel logic

It's all they have left.

[druidity33]

133. Cynthia McKinney was the GP candidate. nt.

[Name removed]

95. Deleted message

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

[eilen]

125. Everyone was fooled by "The most liberal voting record in the Senate"

the repubs still are.

[bvar22]

142. ALL I wanted was for him to at least TRY to do what he promised:

Restore America’s Honor
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

Transparency
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5t8GdxFYBU


EFCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMNVIQqatyU

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

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

Comfortable Shoes
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA9KC8SMu3o

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

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

I paid attention.

[emulatorloo]

33. 1. Obama's record was slightly left of center. 2. You get "insulted" over the most trivial stuff

Any body who paid attention in the primaries knew Obama was slightly left of center and a pragmatist.

"The glass half full" statement is a common one - it is an analogy, Obama is not the first one to use it.

To be honest, it seems rather obnoxious of HuffPo to take a one year old statement "according to sources" that we don't know the context of in order to manufacture baseless outrage to their readers.

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

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

[joshcryer]

150. Wow, I must be completely and utterly remembering the primaries completely wrong.

From my perspective anyone who thought he was a progressive was deluded.

[FiveGoodMen]

181. YEEEAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[Creideiki]

135. Lewis Carroll wrote stories more sensible

Nonsense was his stock and trade, too!

[Sportsguy]

4. Wow

No words, just wow, well one word. Oh here's another, stunned.

[xchrom]

5. Obama = 1/2 empty. Right out the gate. Nt

[Bandit]

6. half empty and getting more empty as the days go on...

I would LOVE to start seeing the glass as half full and getting more so but that just isn't the way the ball wants to bounce for us "Progressives"

[L0oniX]

65. I'm an optimist. I see him as half full of sh*t.

[LaurenG]

7. Obama is not ready to be progressive, the best we will ever get

from him is watered down Nixon republican with a few insults thrown our way. :mad:

[Doctor Hurt]

11. That sucks

I wish he'd throw a few more insults in the "progressive" direction.

[nashville_brook]

53. the best we'll ever get *from Obama* is what you say...i have to believe that

there's still the potential for REAL Democrats to win that fucking office, and not turn into lobbyists for the ruling class in the process.

[Doctor Hurt]

8. He ain't wrong.

lol

[EFerrari]

12. He isn't wrong. It is half empty, at a minimum. n/t

[SOS]

171. "That's the problem with you progressives...

You understand that there are two glasses. The Wall Street glass is full and the average American glass is empty".

[pscot]

173. That averages out

to half a glass each.

[EFerrari]

9. Because that's exactly what needs to be done while thousands of Americans

are having their homes stolen by vulture bankers -- diddle around with a new bureaucracy. It's like putting in a sprinkler system to handle a house fire.

Seriously, what is the matter with these people?

[nashville_brook]

46. the middle class has been devastated by the "contract peonage" enforced on us by bankers

and all we asked was to have one person in DC who'd have our back...and for the president we worked our asses off to elect, have HER BACK.

see, but that's not possible, b/c that would mean that the bankers would have to sit down and shut up, and no one in this administration is going to tell them to do so.

[EFerrari]

113. I really do understand that but while they fool around

insulting Elizabeth Warren, who knows how many families lost their homes today.

Last time I called the CA AG, they said they were still looking for patterns of malfeasance.

We're in the middle of a huge land and property grab, facilitated by Obama and signed off on by the very same Elizabeth Warren. That's the bigger picture right now.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[nashville_brook]

41. do you expect "leftbaggers" to help you elect Obama in 2012?

[DirkGently]

48. Wow. Is there a more nakedly weak tactic than this "----baggers" name calling bullshit? Pitiful .

[DirkGently]

54. Right. Because dumped Presidential nominees always feel free to complain publicly.

[Beacool]

18. "That's the problem with you progressives."

Ironic that the left is the wing of the party that carried him over the finish line.

Sometimes life comes back to bite you in the butt.

:eyes:

[WillyT]

21. I Consider My Butt, Bitten, LOL !!!

:evilgrin:

:hi:

[Beacool]

60. Hi, back to you!!!

:hi:

[ProSense]

22. "Ironic that the left is the wing of the party that carried him over the finish line. " And

The first to abandon him over nonsense?

"Sometimes life comes back to bite you in the butt."

Who, the President or "the left is the wing of the party" (Are you a member?)

[EFerrari]

24. Our quality of life is not nonsense.

In fact, anyone who dismisses the concerns of voters in that manner has no business in politics at all.

[ProSense]

29. You're right, but

the outrage over a quote from last summer that lacks context and means nothing is nonsense.

[EFerrari]

30. Yes, I know I'm right. n/t

[nashville_brook]

43. far from being w/o context -- this quote resonates b/c it's WH political strategy to punch hippies.

[shanti]

140. and you know what?

i don't even recall *ush doing much hippie punching, yet obama does. why is that? :shrug:

[Name removed]

105. Deleted message

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

[nashville_brook]

38. our economic welfare is not "nonsense."

[ProSense]

45. You're smart, but

didn't you realize that "nonsense" refers to the outrage over the quote.

Elizabeth Warren isn't outraged.

[nashville_brook]

47. anyone who has ever held a job knows that you don't cross the boss once he's made a ruling

that Elizabeth Warren "isn't outraged" misses the point entirely. The entire middle class is outraged.

[ProSense]

149. "ever held a job knows that you don't cross the boss once he's made a ruling"

Like deciding to establish the agency and putting Warren in charge of setting it up?

She should be livid, and the entire middle class should hate him for what he has done!

[Beacool]

74. Obama was no progressive.

To me he ran as a chameleon. Centrist when it suited him and progressive when he spoke to the left and needed their votes. White Ivy League when he spoke to others with his educational background and a "homey" using slang when he spoke to black crowds. Remember his "don't let them bamboozle you" remark? He would never have said that to a white audience. When a person tries to be all things to everybody, he ends up being nothing to all.

:(

[ProSense]

151. Yeah,

but he won, and kicked ass in the process!

"White Ivy League when he spoke to others with his educational background and a "homey" using slang when he spoke to black crowds."

Too bad his opponents couldn't master that technique, it's clearly the reason he won!!!

[Beacool]

158. The rest of the candidates weren't biracial.

They couldn't have gotten away with "mastering that technique".

;)

[Solomon]

175. Yeah and I remember Hillary "I feel in no ways tiiiiiirred"

when she spoke to black audiences. You guys kill me with your selective memory.

[myrna minx]

174. Our quality of life, our future and how we care for our aging parents isn't "nonsense". Wow. n/t

[nashville_brook]

36. another problem w/progressives will be their unwillingness to carry him over the finish line again.

[Beacool]

64. Hear, hear!!!

But, then who? The Repug candidate would be even worse.

:-(

[Name removed]

107. Deleted message

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

[Beacool]

132. Of course I heard of them.

I just wish that we had a viable third party that could actually win in a national election.

[WinkyDink]

73. That's why Obama wants the billion dollars. ;-)

[MessiahRp]

20. "That's the problem with you progressives."

Well I think we now know he doesn't consider himself a progressive. Nice to have the words to go with the actions... of course he, Rahm and Gibbs had shown their true colors a while ago now anyway.

Rp

[Recursion]

163. Dupe

Silly server

[Recursion]

164. Neither did FDR (Hoover, oddly enough, was the "progressive"), but DU loves him

For that matter, FDR ran in 32 on decreasing "burdensome government regulations" and enraged a lot of his Bourbon base when he did what the situation warranted instead.

[Karmadillo]

28. If progressives could be more like Sen. Coburn, Obama's good friend, Obama might start liking them.

nt

[Hubert Flottz]

32. Obama caves in more often than an AT Massey coal mine.

[WillyT]

34. ROFLMAO !!! - Funny, AND Topical !!!

:applause::applause::applause:

:rofl:

:yourock:

:bounce:

:hi:

:kick:

[L0oniX]

40. "It's so easy a cavemen can do it"

[Dappleganger]

77. DUzy worthy!!

[nashville_brook]

35. and, the problem with Obama is he never misses an opportunity to signal willingness to CAVE to GOP

[DirkGently]

58. ... And before discussion begins. "We oppose a *permanent* extension of the Bush tax cuts."

[Lorien]

161. Or to slam Liberals, Progressives, and anyone else who isn't on the Far Right. nt

[emulatorloo]

37. What is the context of this year- old "according to sources" quote?

One needs to learn to read these articles critically.

[WillyT]

44. Well... Many Major News Stories Started With Unnamed Sources...

Most editors know who the sources are, and will only publish if they trust the sources.

Here, watch this:

http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BODAxMTc4ODcxNF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDY0NTAyMQ@@._V1._SY317_CR8,0,214,317_.jpg

And NO... I'm am NOT equating this to Watergate. Just showing you how quotes, attributions, sources on background, and deep background work.

:shrug:

[emulatorloo]

55. What was the context of the statement? The author does not say.

The author claims it has bearing on the Warren situation. Yet he does not tell us the context of the year old statement.

A bit off topic, but did you see Warren on Maddow last night? I'm going to get you a link. I trust her analysis more than HuffPo. Be right back :

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1525204&mesg_id=1525204


Edited on Tue Jul-19-11 06:12 PM by kpete
Warren:..There are those who don't want the President of the United States to have a political win and he is...let's face it, he worked hard on this agency. When the President and I met last summer, he said, there are two jobs on the table right now. One is I can nominate you but keep in mind you won't be able to talk about the agency or there is a job getting started putting together the thing together right now and which of the two are you most interested and I said RIGHT NOW. I want the one to start working on it right this minute. Right now, I am doing the job I want to be doing. It's a job I need to be doing. I am doing a start-up job. It is a 14 hours day job.

................

Warren: let me start with the first part, we would not have a consumer agency if not for president obama. Two years ago, right about now, he looked out and said the consumer agency, that's what i want to put in financial regulatory reform. Over the next year while everybody fought back and forth over the regular reform bill, there were a lot of offers on the table to get something else. He consistently said no, and a year ago right now, this week, he signed into law a bill that made this consumer agency exist and as strong and independent way.

rest of TRANSCRIPT & Video:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/19/996159/-Do-Pro...


MORE:

WARREN “I want to be real clear. The reason I can not run this agency is because of Republicans,” Warren continued. “They have made it perfectly clear that they are not going to let this agency go forward if I am there. Fine, I can step away from this. What I care about is this agency.”


“I think it’s time to take the fight straight to the Republicans,” she added. “We need a director in place, that is the law, and we are not, not, not going to let the minority come in and dictate the terms of this agency – rip its arms and legs off before it is able to help a single family.”

MORE:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/07/19/996134/-Elizab...
action is my duty, reward is not my concern

[L0oniX]

42. He doesn't have the ballz to be an FDR.

[WinkyDink]

79. See:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=1228260&mesg_id=1231558

[Mimosa]

50. The anti-progressives who Obama thinks his friends will pull him down

They help pull him down by reinforcing Obama's 'aloof, above it all' tendencies.

A medical prof, an astute friend, used to say even before Obama's election that Obama would be brought down by those who most vociferously support him. He predicted Obama would be 'seduced by savvy powerful people who offer entre to the more arcane conclaves of power'.

I didn't quite understand what my friend meant but I'm beginning to.

Here at DU there are people who seem to be the most committed to defend the President's inexplicable compromises with those who want us -the working people- to 'sacrifice' what we don't even have!

I was early on supporting Barack Obama and contributing efforts and money to his campaign. But little did I know he wouldn't need me later and not care to listen to people like me who don't have power and money. But he's making a big mistake in not even talking to us any more. And he does not try to communicate with us as he used to. Remember when it seemed he was courting us? When it appeared he understood our economic challenges?

I haven't yet given up even though I don't understand why he's not -figuratively speaking- 'returning our calls'. Now I understand during the campaign he tried as far as reasonably possible to appear as all things to all people. I didn't buy that, of course. But I believed he would be 'different.'

Maybe there are reasons Obama can't be candid and speak to us face to face about why he can't bring jobs back to America. And why the democratic party isn't even making a big effort. If there is some huge plan to make things better he needs to let all of us in on it. Otherwise we can't help him or even support him. Only the gullible follow a leader blindly, without questions.

[WillyT]

57. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

Wow...

That is spot-on!!!

:yourock:

:hi:

:kick:

[DirkGently]

63. That's extremely astute. Appears the keys to the Executive Washroom were eagerly accepted. Gullible.

[Occulus]

66. There is another

explanation.

[ProSense]

68. Hmmmm?

"there are people who seem to be the most committed to defend the President's inexplicable compromises with those who want us -the working people- to 'sacrifice' what we don't even have! "

And there are those who ignore everything he does.

[emulatorloo]

69. Elizabeth Warren: "we would not have a consumer agency if not for President Obama."

WARREN “I want to be real clear. The reason I can not run this agency is because of Republicans,” Warren continued. “They have made it perfectly clear that they are not going to let this agency go forward if I am there. Fine, I can step away from this. What I care about is this agency.”


“I think it’s time to take the fight straight to the Republicans,” she added. “We need a director in place, that is the law, and we are not, not, not going to let the minority come in and dictate the terms of this agency – rip its arms and legs off before it is able to help a single family.”

Hope you saw Warren on the Rachel Maddow show last night, she was on fire.

Elizabeth Warren Sticks Up For Obama: "We would not have a consumer agency if not for the president"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1525204



I love your erudite friend. But the facts have to match the theory. Far too many here who want to give the Republicans a pass on everything.

[Mimosa]

87. "Far too many here who want to give the Republicans a pass on everything."

Emulatorloo, thank you for your reply. :) Question: who at DU (except for the occasional rightwing trolls) has anything but contempt for Rethugs? (BTW, you might love my friend if you saw him. He's TDH. ;) )

I believe we need to expose right wingers as the neo-fuedalists they are. They gave up on behaving like civilised human beings a couple of decades ago. They are trying to repeal every bit of 20th century progress and drag the world backwards.

I believe Obama was sincere in his wish to restore a culture of civility between the two political parties. (Maybe it never existed but in nostalgic legends.)
But today's Republicans would be happy if there weren't a two party system. They seem to be trying to effect that amidst all their other mischief. They call the president 'man-child' but they are the ones who whine, scream, fight and threaten like schoolyard bullies.

[Moosepoop]

51. So who were the "sources" who provided the "quote"

in this charming "anecdote" from 2010? Any idea? Has Bernie Sanders ever personally relayed this story? Or is it just another bit from yet another hit piece from HuffPo?

[FLAprogressive]

70. I'm surprised there's no posts categorically denying that he ever said this.

[emulatorloo]

75. It is a year-old "quote" with no context. I don't get the outrage

"unnamed sources", no context give for the statement.

Addtionally "I see the glass half full, you see the glass half empty." is not particularly novel OR inflammatory.

Huffpo and AP is acting like Obama said "I love puppies and you kill and eat puppies for joy."

Seem like a real dumb thing to get outraged about.

[WinkyDink]

71. The pronoun "YOU" is the operative word.

[emulatorloo]

76. "I see the glass half full, you see the glass half empty."

For the life of me I can't get the outrage over this rather old phrase.

People are acting as if Obama said "I love babies, you want to put babies in a meat grinder"

[WinkyDink]

78. I refer to "YOU Progressives."

[emulatorloo]

84. But what if "according to sources" qot the quote wrong?

Still don't know what the context of this was. I think it is shit stirring by a huffpo writer.

[Name removed]

111. Deleted message

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

[Beacool]

136. By saying "you progressives" he is saying that he is not one of them.

That's why people are upset.

;)

[nashville_brook]

88. exactly -- as in "those claiming status in a group I don't belong to"

[fascisthunter]

85. No... that's the Problem with Frauds like you Sir

you campaigned as a progressive....

[XemaSab]

90. "You people?" REALLY?

Fuck. x(

I mean, seriously, if I "You peopled" black people, gay people, or any other group on the left here I would fully expect my comment to be deleted. x(

[CaliforniaHiker]

91. So, the issue isn't that he is making the wrong choices...

it is just that progressives are looking at them pessimistically. Right, I'm sure that is it.

[DeSwiss]

93. Correction: We progressives see ''you'' as half-empty.

- Actually, when it comes to progressive issues, it's closer to completely empty.....

K&R

[Raine]

94. BOTH sides work together playing their games on us

they get EXACTLY what they BOTH want and the public gets screwed. :grr:

[Name removed]

114. Deleted message

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

[Raine]

123. Yes, EXACTLY and as far as I'm concerned "a pox

on both their houses". :grr:

[upi402]

98. wow

she is great, he sucks balls

[SidDithers]

101. He's right...nt

Sid

[ClassWarrior]

155. So if that's how you feel about progressives, what values do YOU support?

NGU.

[ClassWarrior]

177. Why are you avoiding the question?

NGU.

[WilliamPitt]

104. (facepalm)

[johnaries]

131. So, Mr. Pitt, you have nothing to say about such obviously poor

and sloppy reporting resulting in a "hit piece"? Especially when Elizabeth Warren herself basically refuted it on National TV?

[Danger Mouse]

108. So, he's not a progressive...what is he, then?

[Name removed]

115. Deleted message

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

[madrchsod]

119. an old time liberal republican...

liberal on social issues and conservative on financial issues.

but even liberal republicans knew they could`t touch social security and medicare.

[Lorien]

162. When has he been "liberal on social issues"??

[Raine]

129. aw geeesh

:eyes: it should be obvious he is NO progressive.

[Beacool]

139. An opportunist.

He is whatever he needed to be to get elected and now reelected, just like your average politician. Foolish those who believed that he was any different.

:shrug:

[Danger Mouse]

143. I believed he was different. I believed it with all my heart. I feel like an idiot.

[Beacool]

144. Don't knock yourself.

Many believed in his promise of hope and change. I never did because to me he always seemed like an opportunist. A user of people he needed to fast track up the political ladder. Ask all of those who he used and threw under the bus when they got in the way of his rise to power. I've seen enough of his kind in the corporate world. People who ingratiate themselves to the higher ups and climb over the bodies of others who were far more experienced and qualified. Sooner or later their true colors show, but by then it's too late because they are already part of the establishment. I have a visceral dislike for those kinds of people, and that includes Obama.

;(

[Recursion]

166. Different than what?

I think DU greatly, greatly overestimates the governable center of American politics.

[DCBob]

156. A moderate liberal but with a conservative streak on a few issues.

Like most normal human beings he does not fit perfectly into a label. I think this should have been obvious from the campaign.. how many times did he say..

"There are no red states, nor blue states, we are the UNITED STATES!!"

Does anyone think he would say that if he was intending to force a progressive agenda on the country.

[Zorra]

157. He's looking more and more like a disciple of Leo Strauss to me. nt

[Recursion]

167. What of Strauss have you read?

I've read a lot of his stuff, and several of my profs were Straussians, and I just don't see it at all.

[Recursion]

165. Progressivism isn't the only way to be a Democrat or a liberal

There are many factions in the Democratic party, even on the left of the Democratic party, and progressivism isn't the only one.

For example, there are (or were, at least) plenty of conservative Democrats.

There are plenty of populist Democrats (historically populism and progressivism are antagonistic -- DU, for all its claims of progressivism, is on the whole much closer to populism, if we use the terms consistently with their history: progressivism is an essentially corporatist movement, which is why Hoover was the "progressive" candidate in 1932).

There are plenty of moderate Democrats (he seems to be in this tradition, along with most other postwar Democrats who become President -- the times we've tried something else, like Mondale or McGovern, haven't gone too well).

Progressivism has a technocratic aspect that I don't like (but that Obama leans towards; this is his brush with progressivism).

I think ultimately what drives parts of DU crazy about him is that he's non-ideological; it's something I like about him. He doesn't really care how we get there. Some on this board would take that farther and say he doesn't even care where "there" is, but I disagree.

[Bluebear]

178. Who the hell knows.

[ProSense]

120. Poll

True or false: Obama hates progressives and sees them as a problem

Be honest!

[Name removed]

127. Deleted message

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

[polichick]

128. And Obama's a guy who sees a crumb dropped from the Republicans' plate...

...as the whole loaf of bread.

[johnaries]

130. "sources said..." WHAT "sources"? How many times have

anonymous sources been proven wrong when dealing with this WH? Certainly more times than I can remember.

I saw Elizabeth Warren on Rachel, and she praised the President. She reminded everyone that the commission would never have happened without him, and also reminded everyone that Republicans were the reason that she could never be confirmed - NOT Obama.

I trust her words, not some "anecdote" probably misquoted by "sources" or speculation by some blogger.

[BNJMN]

134. Operation Kaos, Rush must be giddy with excitement. And painkillers. But mainly excitement. n/t

[Arkana]

137. So glad that the HuffPo could provide us with a quote from unnamed sources!

And yet the same people fall for it every goddamn time. Did you guys forget who runs the Huffington Post now or are you just willfully ignoring it?

[WillyT]

154. Um...

"If you give up your values in the hope of winning, you end up losing and having no values--so you keep losing." --Howard Dean

:shrug:

[deaniac21]

152. He is totally ready for the not ready for prime time players.

[AverageJoe90]

159. Obama may have meant well........

But unfortunately, this is probably going to backfire on him. Not all of us progressives see things as half-empty, ya know......

[Lorien]

160. Outed himself yet again

Hey Obama; you know what you are if you're not a Progressive right?

[tekisui]

170. Not a surprise. He is a centrist, biting the hand that feeds him.

[Blue_In_AK]

182. I wish I had the opportunity to tell him

(to him face) what I think the problem with him is. I"m so tired of this guy.