Obama decries inequality in speech previewing 2012

[Playinghardball]

Source: MSNBC

President Barack Obama outlined the underpinnings of his case for re-election on Tuesday, suggesting the upcoming election is a "make-or-break moment for the middle class."

Obama, speaking in the town where Theodore Roosevelt delivered his "New Nationalism" speech, delivered a rousing defense of his administration's efforts to help the middle class. It was a glimpse of what could easily become a 2012 stump speech, keying in heavily on a sense of rising inequality, and accusing Republicans of supporting policies that would only make things worse for that demographic.

"We simply cannot return to this brand of you're-on-your-own economics if we’re serious about rebuilding the middle class in this country," the president said.

The speech offered the most complete case yet by Obama against Republicans ahead of 2012's bruising election. That contest is expected to hinge primarily on the economy, and Obama will be forced to overcome the poor economic climate that has dogged the U.S. since the 2008 financial crisis.

Read more: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/06/9253505-obama-decries-inequality-in-speech-previewing-2012

[MannyGoldstein]

1. Do I still have to eat my peas?

And catfood?

[No Elephants]

92. Yes. Peas give you your federal daily requirement of issue ducking condescension

from the President you helped elect and his WH that you just can't get from cat food alone.

[Davis_X_Machina]

2. He didn't mean it. I can tell. n/t

[No Elephants]

95. Don't be silly. He means each and every on e of his campaign speeches and always has.

But, after the election, people will fight about his exact words, rather than the impression he waorked to hard to convey when he was camapaigning and remind us that he "never" promised this or that.

So, here's a big grain of salt to go with that speech.

Please see also Reply 15, as to measurables.

[Davis_X_Machina]

124. As a DU donor-member....

...I have the special gift of divining the President's innermost thoughts, and purposes.

(That's what that star next to my name means.)

[Vinnie From Indy]

3. Where is the part where Obama offered

that the best way to achieve this goal is to get even more Wall Street banksters making policy in his Administration.


Pretty words!

[savalez]

130. And out come the the usual suspects!

Welcome to the Republican Underground!

:boring:

[russspeakeasy]

4. He talked like he hadn't been the President during the last 3 years.

He gave us Eric and Timmy.

[vi5]

5. Yes, if only Republicans hadn't forced him...

To appoint Eric Holder, Timmy G., Larry S., Ben Bernake, and pretty much anyone involved in his military leadership.

When he kicks any of those fucking clowns to the curb as they justifiably should be, then I'll believe that he's even close to serious about this and not just getting back into "pretty speeches" mode.

[LeftHandPath]

6. ^^ This!!

Well said.

[Maven]

7. +1

[paparush]

11. Actions.

Actions not words.

[No Elephants]

94. +1

I fell for Obama (as a politician, ffs) hook, line and sinker, beginning in 2004 when he made that speech at the Democratic National Convention. (I was, oh, so much more politically naive then.)

My jaw dropped when he hominated Rahm. By the time he was done with all his nominations, I had a very sick feeling in my stomach.

And then, when he fought the ACLU's FOIA request for the WH visitor logs....

I have been watching closely since.

[TheWraith]

8. Boy, the threadcrappers are hard at work bringing the right-wing memes.

"Just pretty words"

"It's all Obama's fault"

"Democrats want to destroy Social Security"

[frylock]

9. here are some more "right-wing memes" for your list..

actions speak louder than words.
the buck stops here.

[No Elephants]

99. "Fool me once"

Speaking of crapping on a thread, how about sticking to posting on substance instead of to attack your fellow DUers?

If someone posts an "Obama critical" meme, please feel free to post as many "Obama praise" memes as you like to counter them. Either way, they're all memes.

[LiberalEsto]

10. Where's the pony?

I want my pony.

[No Elephants]

100. Yup. That is one of many memes from the other side.

As someone claimed about Reagan when Reagan was President, Reagan was the kind of guy who, upon entering a roomful of manure, starts digging, fast and furiously.

And, on being asked why, replies, "There must be a pony in here somewhere."

Then again, Reagan was not the brightest bulb to begin with and was at least on his way to Alzheimer's when that was said about him.

[elleng]

12. Obama Strikes Populist Chord With Speech in Heartland.

Source: nyt

OSAWATOMIE, Kan. — Venturing into the conservative heartland, President Obama on Tuesday delivered his most pointed appeal yet for using taxes and regulations to level the economic playing field. . .

“This is a make or break moment for the middle class, and all those who are fighting to get into the middle class,” Mr. Obama said as he sought to make an economic case for his re-election next year. “At stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home and secure their retirement.”

Mr. Obama chose this town of 4,500 people where Theodore Roosevelt once laid out the progressive platform he called “A New Nationalism” . . .

The speech, and the days of buildup that preceded it, marked the president’s most stark attack on the rich so far. . .

The visit was unusual for its setting in a state that he lost handily despite his family roots here — his mother was born in Kansas — and which does not have a single Democrat holding a statewide elected position. . .

That (Roosevelt)speech touched on many of the same themes — often in similar language — about concentration of wealth and the need for a level playing field. Mr. Roosevelt called the conflict between “the men who possess more than they have earned and the men who have earned more than they possess” central to progress.

Mr. Obama, to laughter from those familiar with attacks against him, noted: “For this, Roosevelt was called a radical, he was called a socialist, even a communist.”






Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/07/us/politics/obama-strikes-populist-chord-with-speech-in-heartland.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1323208137-Ilwc/AHzmH6BZTeRjdjUrQ

[russspeakeasy]

13. Please remind us who the President has been for the last 3 years.

He acts like he just discovered that the middle class are being shit on and by god that needs to be fixed. But I give him a 10 for the smile. Did Eric and Timmy show up.

[Pirate Smile]

14. That's bullshit. We can list all the things he has done for the middle class but you'll just dismiss

it anyway.

[patrice]

16. 1+++ Fascism always assumes that it owns reality & what it doesn't own can be acquired through power

[elleng]

17. Thanks

:thumbsup:

[russspeakeasy]

19. I've heard the speeches. I'm sure that I will now

see the famous list. If no one better comes along, I will vote for him,but his campaign style is wearing a little thin with me.

[Cal33]

23. I, for one, didn't know until 2 days ago that the Health Care Reform requires Insurance

companies to use 80% (85% for the large ins. cos.) of their premiums for
medical expenses. Failing that, the ins. co. will have to send reimbursement
checks back to the clients. This is being overseen by the Dep't of Health and
Human Services.

Ins. cos. have already tried to get consent from HHS to consider expenses
involved in selling insurance to new clients as a "medical expense." HHS
said, "No."

That is definitely something Obama had done for the middle classes. Another
is a pre-existing medical condition no longer can be an excuse for ins. cos. not
to pay. These are just two things I didn't know about. There must be a
lot more of them.

[elleng]

25. There are many many more things,

and its dismaying that so few realize this.

[defendandprotect]

30. Obama preserved private health care industry -- according to Rahm ...

who "crowed" that news to business while telling them how "grateful" they should be

to Obama -- including for the "billions in lucrative new contracts" which came from

the stimulus!

All while throwing crumbs to the public --

It is dismaying that so many don't realize this!



Here you go --

Posted on DU 8/12/10 --

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

the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system

[certainot]

80. one would think they were listening to team limbaugh, like 50 mil a week do. but likely they got it

second hand. and believed it.

[No Elephants]

109. People see Obama and his accomplishments through different prisms.

It is a mistake to assume that someone whose prism is different from yours lacks knowledge.


I have seen less than zero evidence that all DU's liberals lack knowledge and thinking capacity while those DUers less critical of Obama have all the relevant data and functioning minds.

Sure, each side has its less knowlegable and less analytical posters, but, as two groups, they are, at worst, pretty evenly matched.

[elleng]

126. Thanks for your attempt at rationality, No Elephs.

I assume DUers have thinking capacity because they're here (but for trolls, whom I don't often realize/recognize,) but still dismayed at failure to use thinking and analytical capacity, and failure to understand the state the 'system' has arrived at.



:hi:

[tblue37]

41. Some commentators have said that 80% requirement is intended

as--and will serve as--a poison pill to drive the for-profit insurance companies out of the business and force the US to go single payer, because the companies will nto be able to make enough profit to want to stay in the business:

"ObamaCare’s Hidden Time Bomb That Benefits Every Insured American"
http://www.politicususa.com/en/obamacare-time-bomb

I like that idea, even though it will take a few years to achieve single-payer. A few years is better than never.

[Cal33]

55. I'm all for the single payer system. I hope it succeeds.

[elleng]

63. I like that idea too, that is, make them do what they're supposed to do,

SUPPORT the provision of health care!

[No Elephants]

98. You may want to take a look at reply 97.

(Hope this link gets you there--I don't have good luck linking within DU--) http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x5082122#5082577

[elleng]

101. Right, surely they can 'endure' with 'mere' 20%.

[No Elephants]

102. They're making it on a fraction of 20% now, but the mandate is coming, so things will look up.

[No Elephants]

96. Self delete. Meant to edit this and somehow reposted instead.

[No Elephants]

97. Either those commentators did not do their homework or they are propagandists

do not care much about truth.

Twenty percent profit is a lot more than most health insurers make now. Please see these articles:

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/how-much-money-do-insurance-companies-make-a-primer/

http://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2009/08/25/why-health-insurers-make-lousy-villains

20% profit is almost double the 10.2% oil and gas companies make, on average.

It is about equal to the roughly 20% profits pharmaceutical companies now make, and they are notorious for high profits. (And President Obama killed the drug reimporatation bill).

Also, there are many ways, when accounting, to depress both profits and the appearance of profits. And remember, executive compensation is not limited and neither is marketing. AND there is a mandate.

With a law requiring customers to buy (or pay penalties in the form of higher taxes)--and no limits on the amount insurers can spend on marketing, any stockholder in America would gladly line up to buy the stock.

Hope this helps separate bs from reality.

[tavalon]

78. I'll admit, I had forgotten that magnificent gem

Bring it up to 99% and I will call it perfection and the death knell of the insurance leeches.

[No Elephants]

91. 20% is very generous, esp. if you make under 6% profit now. Please see the article at this link:

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/how-much-money-do-insurance-companies-make-a-primer/

[Cal33]

128. I don't think the 20% (15% for large ins. cos.) is ALL profit. Don't forget, the ins. cos.

still have to pay salaries, rent, office expenses, etc. I'll bet they'll have to
cut down on the paper-work which they have been so happily jacking up in the
recent decades until now. They didn't care because the cost was being passed on
to the patients. Now they'll have to care.

[truedelphi]

129. Think about it. Here's one of the most dishonest and life threatening

Industries in the nation. To make sure they have the profit they "need to have to survive" they will be cooking the books like nobodies' business.

And the Health Insurers already make sure that many aspects of their policies are nobodies' business.

When Kaiser Permanente totally put my household in upheaval, due to a misdiagnosis, they simply erased all records of all the visits during the time that the misdiagnosis occurred.

Can't sue them anyway - few lawyers in California will go up against them.

[Cal33]

132. The insurance cos. aren't the only people keeping records. The medical people

who provide the treatments do, too. The clients (patients) pay a fixed fee.
Yes. Insurance cos. have been getting away with murder for decades. But
they'll have to change their ways as of now. Healthcare Reform has just
become effective as of this week, and insurance cos. must now behave, or
face fines, or imprisonment, or both. Obama's Healthcare Reform does have
some teeth now. Another example "Pre-existing conditions" are no longer
accepted as excuses for non-payment by the Insurance companies.

I'm hopeful we will have single-payer health care some day. We're getting
there slowly -- and will be joining the ranks of the other advanced nations
of the world.

[No Elephants]

107. Two questions:

1. Have you checked definitions in the Act, such as the definition of "premium" and "medical expenses" and how they were defined in the industry previously?

2. Which percentage of "premiums," as defined in the act, did health insurers spend on "medical expenses," as defined in the act, say, five years ago?

And, remember, with the mandate, revenues from health insurance premiums are going to go up dramatically.

Without factoring in all the above, I don't think any of us can say for certain what the information in your post means.

[Cal33]

133. I'm not in the insurance field, and haven't gone into the definitions. About the

premiums going up like crazy, wouldn't the insurance cos. have to
check with the Dep't of HHS first?

Bush had removed all restraints on business ten years ago. Obama
has put back some of them. I hope, in time, there will be more
restraints reinstituted -- especially with the oil people.

[66 dmhlt]

44. You got a "AMEN and DAMN RIGHT!" from this corner!

[defendandprotect]

72. Right -- that's why poverty has increased during Obama's term --

when was the last time Obama talked about the homeless --

50 million uninsured --

or 66 million impoverished Americans?


That's 1 in 3 Americans living at the poverty line or below !!


Here's one to think about --

85% of 2011 college graduates had to go home to live with their parents!!

Personally I'm aware that 2008-09 graduates waited a year and a half in many cases

for jobs -- some longer! And they didn't get the jobs they wanted. Many in customer

service.

[No Elephants]

108. As a measure that list is laughable.

For just two examples, inevitably, health care "reform is on it, along with Ledbetter.


The only thing Obama did as to Ledbetter was not veto it, as Dummya had.

And, as thread after thread in LBN has shown, HCR is subject to be looked at as doing more for Big Health than it does for the rest of us.

Besides, you cannot both excuse Obama's failures as Congress's fault and then give him credit for everything Congress passes.

LOL, originally, even getting his kids a dog was on that lame list--and Bo was a gift to the Obamas from Ted Kennedy.

[dionysus]

27. have a ginger ale. you'll feel better.

[defendandprotect]

28. Obama thinks he can put the "Campaign '08" mask back on again -- ? ROFL

[Name removed]

32. Deleted message

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

[defendandprotect]

34. Every other nation has universal health care, but it's us and not Obama who are "crazy" ... ???

"He's not your boyfriend" -- get over it!

[RBInMaine]

37. And just what Congress is going to PASS it? Did you ever take middle school civics?

[defendandprotect]

40. No Congress ... when Obama took Single Payer "OFF THE TABLE" ....

in back room deals with Big Pharma and the private health care industry!!


Even Baucus was shocked, evidently!

[No Elephants]

104. During his campaign, Obama said single payer could never work in the US==NOT

because no Congress would pass it, but, because, according to Obama, the U.S. already had all "these" existing things.

He was not very specific. But some said he was referring to employer plans. However, every nation that has gone to single payer had some systems already in place.

As for public option, he campaigined on it. If no Congress would pass it, he should have mentioned that to make his promise seem less like a hollow lie.

And I guess calling it unimportant and "only a sliver" while he was making the rounds of the town meetings that August did not help the Senate pass it.

[tblue]

57. Why wouldn't he?

It works. Who ever said he doesn't know how to give a decent speech? That was never the problem.

[defendandprotect]

74. Evidently it works for people who have amnesia -- or who are willing to delude themselves -- !! ???

Post-W ... we're impressed with someone who can actually speak !!


Kinda makes sense in a weird way -- !! :evilgrin:



:hi:

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[msongs]

15. is there a list of specific observable and measurable proposals in this speech? nt

[patrice]

18. Clue. Stay away from poker games. nt

[msongs]

22. oh he is bluffing. thanks for the warning :-) nt

[IamK]

60. no but he looked good..... nice smile.... n/t

[LeftHandPath]

20. Watch what they do, not what they say.

Obama has supported the 1% and the war machine for 3 years.

I'll believe the rhetoric when I see real action, like firing Geithner, Bernanke, Holder, and putting career prosecutors in financial regulation positions.

[Autumn]

21. I like this guy. Where the hell has he been for the last 3 years.

Even more important, will this guy disappear after the election in 2012 like he did in 2008?

[RBInMaine]

33. Out passing more PROGRESSIVE legislation than we've seen since LBJ. Just ask Maddow.

[defendandprotect]

36. Three new trade agreements, more money for MIC, flying drones over Pakistan ... "progressive" .. ???

[RBInMaine]

39. SCHIP, Fair Pay, Wall St. Reform, Healthcare, the MOST green energy investment EVER... and if you

need the whole list, You Tube Maddow. Or is she not "progressive"? Please, find the planet.

[defendandprotect]

42. Obama: "Oil rigs don't spill anymore" ...!! Arctic drilling!! ROFL

if it wasn't so tremendously destructive -- !!

No oil/No wars -- up with the National Security State --

Obama is not only still pushing oil drilling -- he's pushing a new genertion of

nuclear reactors for one of his biggest contributors -- EXELON/?

Obama -- leading the way on Global Warming remedies?

SHAME -- SHAME -- SHAME


Wall Street "reform" -- ?

We'll have Wall Street reform when the New Deal restrictions/regulations are

once again replaced on capitalism --

INCLUDING GLASS-STEAGALL -- !!

[No Elephants]

105. Maddow wants Obama a re-elected. That does not mean his legislation is progressive.

Also, Maddow works for MSNBC, which dumps its Democratic anchors who criticize Obama too much, especially if the WH complains--because MSNBC is "establishment."

Just ask Cenk and Keith, but especially Cenk.

BTW, I don't think you can credibly claim both that Obama' has no control over what Congress passes, but that whatever good legislation Congress does pass is Obama's legislation.

[Autumn]

52. You think so?

Some yes, but this guy who cares about leveling the economic playing field, has been missing in action. Tax breaks for the wealthy and those in the middle class while the taxes went up on the poor and elderly on a pension does not equal "leveling the economic playing field". That's my opinion.

[russspeakeasy]

62. Not true. Just ask Keith.

[No Elephants]

90. I saw what you did there.

Clever!

[No Elephants]

69. Why would we ask Maddow? We've been following along every day since since 2007.

I don't need anyone to tell me what to think.

[Muskypundit]

24. Teddy roosevelt. One of the top three presidents in history.

Obama could learn a lot from him. And should stop pretending like he is like him

[No Elephants]

70. He needed someone new. He's already done Abe Lincoln, FDR and JFK.

Doris Kearns Goodwin wrote a book about T. Roosevelt. Remember when he was seen carrying her book about Lincoln and his cabinet full of his enemies?

I guess that was supposed to plant the seed that when he appointed all the Clintonites and Republicans, he was only following Lincoln's example and not actually appointing the people he agreed with.

And, I, for one, fell for it at the time.

[Earth_First]

26. Talk is cheap. n/t

[SleeplessinSoCal]

29. Obama health reform bill still better than anything Clinton did.

[defendandprotect]

38. Right -- if you IGNORE that essentially it preserved the PRIVATE health care industry -- !!

[tblue37]

43. For now. But when they can't profit enough, they will slink away, and we will end up with single-pay

[defendandprotect]

49. Obama trampled "single payer" in back room deals with private H/C industry --

if you want to see some of the articles on that, let me know -- !!


And right now, Wall Street has given more money to Obama's campaign than what

they've given to all Republicans --

Do you really think that signals change on the way -- a diversion from Obama's

corporate agenda?

[SleeplessinSoCal]

131. Have you seen the benefits of the reform bill? Or are you only going to harp on the negative?

I wanted Medicare for All. But if Democrats bicker like this, it'll go away and we'll never get the opportunity. Stick with Obama and fight.

[Occulus]

81. .

:rofl:

Seriously?

:spray:

[No Elephants]

89. He said he was in favor of single when he was in Illinois, However, when he ran for POTUS

(with Daschle supporting him from the jump), he said single payer could not work in the U.S. because we have all these existing things.

I have no idea what he meant by that, but every nation that has gone single payer had existing things.

And, when he got into the White House, he at first tried to keep the White House logs away from the ACLU, which had filed an FOIA request. And then, when the ACLU filed a lawsuit seeking them and that go on the media radar, the WH gave one ridiculous excuse after another.

And, while alleged affordable health care reform was still under consideration, Obama could not block the drug reimportation bill fast enough. Nor, would he meet with members of the House Progressive Caucus on HCR until after the Senate bill was passed.

Those are verifiable facts.

Roll around on the ground all you like, but each of us is entitled to interpret behavior and like that as he or she wishes.

[No Elephants]

87. I hope you are correct, but I think you are underestimating the ability

of health insurers to find ways to profit.

For just one thing--and the most obvious-- executive compensation is on the expense side of the ledger, and is not considered profit.

They don't hesitate to cut off dying people. I doubt they hestitate to use fuzzy math.

I hope you are correct, but I don't think you are.

Besides, 20% profit ain't nuthin when you are talking a multi trillion dollar industry.

I doubt they make anywhere near 20% now. Here is a link showing one company made "only" 5.2% last year and discussing the issue in general. http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/09/25/how-much-money-do-insurance-companies-make-a-primer/

A lot of small businesses exist just because people want to make a modest living without having a boss over them.

If they made enough to live high on the hog AND give shareholders a 20% return to boot, they'd be sure they'd died and gone to heaven. In fact, so might many big businesses.

[newspeak]

121. did you miss no elephant's remarks upthread?

twenty per cent profit is way generous for the industry, especially if they are not making that now. You act like they are going to cut back, instead of making even more profit. Don't worry, those of us making a not living wage, will just be paying more for shitty insurance that we probably won't be able to use.

Oh, and this isn't a democratic plan, this is the right wing unthink tank heritage plan---in motion by a supposedly democratic president.

[No Elephants]

73. Preserved? It bailed out and protected the health insurers and the private health care industry.

I don't have an objection to preserving the industry, if well regulated and under single payer or a strong public option. However, I do object to the bailout and protection.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

79. I am getting sick of this...

... things do not change over night; Politics is compromise, and if you get 50% of what you ask for, consider yourself lucky.

Good riddance.

[No Elephants]

86. Well, the first step is to ask for it and the second is to fight like hell for it .

[No Elephants]

71. Yet, worse than Nixon's bill, which T. Kennedy killed, much to his lifelong regret.

Obama's bill is not that much different from Hillarycare. Not surprising, since they are all Turd Way.

[certainot]

82. limbaugh has a trophy for defeating clinton HC, just as he does for single payer, and PO, but it's

in a secret trophy room that the left has no clue even exists, because they got their iPods in their ears as they walk by the guy on every corner and stump in the country screaming your liberal mothers are whores and your fathers are traitors and your ideas are shit.

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[Bodhi BloodWave]

110. and words posted on a forum is even cheaper n/t

[No Elephants]

113. Words are all that is possible on a message board.

[pinto]

45. Really good speech, imo. Obama laid out the broad lines in our political tug-of-wars.

And set those lines in broad, populist terms.

:thumbsup:

Congress needs to step up now...let go of the games and get some business done.

[Doctor_J]

47. Agreed. Now let us hope that he doesn't start backpedaling

before the actual tug-of-war starts. He can probably rally his 70 million-person army from 2008 again if he puts his mind to it

[defendandprotect]

50. Ah -- "Populist" ... after making it a dirty word, Dems want to bring it back?

Here's Jonathan Cowan, president of Third Way just a few weeks ago on C-span --

Cowan related to the C-span audience clearly that the policy/stance of third way is

"that the base of the party is to be ignored" ---

And that "populism and populist discussion and debate are the equivalent of Karl Rove

propaganda of extremism" --


Third Way now controls the Demcoratic Party --

If you want more info on that, let me know --

[pinto]

53. Disagree that the Third Way controls the party, especially as recent political events develop.

I think Obama's speech was more than just a nod to the realities. It was an acknowledgment of the situation and a clear, yes populist, statement.

How it'll play out, of course, remains to be seen. I liked his call for Congress to step up to the plate. :hi:

[defendandprotect]

67. Lots of info on DU says otherwise -- including Jonathan Cowan on C-span ....

where he relates how the Democratic Party is to be run --

certainly he wasn't speaking of the Republican Party!


Again -- much info on DU which has been posted over time re Third Way control over

Dem Party -- if I knew how to operate the "archives" I'd direct you --


But we need more active posting on Third Way subject -- too many DU'ers know too little

about it!

Btw, there is a video of the C-span program where Jonathan Cowan, Pres, Third Way presents

the policies of Third Way --

The comments I refer to come at the end of the program -- though think he had been on a while

before I tuned in.



Also --


And make no mistake about the role of Third Way. Third Way runs the policy apparatus of the Democratic Party. In Congress, staffers attend regular Third Way policy briefings, where the group hands out pre-packaged legislative amendments in legal form, generic press releases, polling around those policy ideas, and talking points. It’s a soup-to-nuts policy apparatus. Most of these ideas are harmless – like increased volunteerism – but some are not, like various tax proposals.

The group has enormous juice. On the Congressional side, it has six honorary Senate co-Chairs, and seven House-side co-Chairs. Jim Clyburn, a co-Chair, is in the House Democratic leadership. Two current cabinet members are former co-Chairs. Steny Hoyer, the House minority whip, held regular briefings for the freshmen member staff in the last Congress.

On the administration side, former Third Way board member Bill Daley is now White House chief of staff. Ron Klain, who was Biden’s Chief of Staff, is now with Third Way. The White House is pretty much full of Third Way-style apparatchiks.

Finally, most of the Board members are from the FIRE Sector (Wall Street and real estate), including the head of equity trading for Goldman Sachs and one of the heads of investment banking for Morgan Stanley.

It’s a highly optimized political operation for the White House and Congressional Democrats, with PR muscle, elite validators, access, and policy-making infrastructure.

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

[No Elephants]

85. DLC took over the Party. Whether OWS will change that remains to be seen.

[Doctor_J]

46. Ah, that liberal NYT

The speech, and the days of buildup that preceded it, marked the president’s most stark attack on the rich so far. . .

Attack on the rich? Really?

Christ, it would be so nice to have one lousy newspaper in this country that didn't just print Rove talking points verbatim

[russspeakeasy]

66. Attack on the rich equals "war on drugs". Sounds good,

means nothing. It is the equivilant of doing away with fraud and waste in government spending...Words, words.

[newspeak]

127. Obama does need to repeat the numbers over and over again

the percentage of increase of wealth to the one per centers, the per centage of corporate profits, the increased percentage of CEO wages and the fall of earnings for laborers. Because, the percentages are absolutely obscene. It kind of shows you exactly why we are where we are.

Of course, then what are they going to do about it? Actually, I don't think obama likened himself to FDR, Hoover, maybe, but I don't think FDR. I think in his book he "admired" reagan.

Oh, I know who likened themselves to FDR, little boots!!! At least the media likened their hero little boots (who actually did nothing heroic), to FDR, to churchill. I wonder how much money little boots paid for PR services. All that strutting around in his flight suit. Costumes-that's all it is. A man who never saw the horrors of war sending others to fight is not heroic, or doing nothing, even with warnings. Also, wearing cowboy boots and hat with no horse. Yep, costumes. Of course, it had nothing to do with the economy.

Again, obama needs to keep quoting those numbers, because they are very shocking to those who haven't been paying attention!!!!!

[defendandprotect]

68. Obama has only worked to preserve the elite wealth -- the rich - !! Wall Street -- !!

If there was an attack, I sure as hell missed it -- !!


:evilgrin:

[MARK52]

48. We've seen this movie before.

Obama is great at making speeches. But remember, Obama supports the Patriot Act, has not restored habeas corpus, continues to expand the wars in the middle-east, has not supported organized labor--while 220,000 Postal employees may be facing the loss of their jobs. At the same time the President recently appointed a 'hard right' corporatist, Tony Hammond, to the Postal Regulatory Commission. His support of environmental legislation is spotty, his support of OWS is weak. He considers an anti-labor capitalist, Fred Smith, the CEO of Fed Ex, to be a great example of what an American businessman should be. And if I remember correctly, during the 2008 campaign, Obama spoke favorably of Reagan!!! By their fruits, ye shall know them.

[No Elephants]

106. Actually, both Obama and HRC put Reagan on their top ten U.S. Presidents ever list.

And, since most historians from both Parties, put Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and Truman on their lists, realitixally, they only had six slots to fill, realistically. And five for HRC, because she filled one of those slots with Bill.

[newspeak]

134. I remember McBride from amnesty international

naming the god reagan as one of the bloodiest presidents because of his policies in central america. I'd say little boots probably surpassed him.

What's so great about destroying your country using "voodoo economics?" What's so great about going against the will of the people (congress) to deal with iran and supply guns to your bloodthirsty, child murdering death squads? What's so great about putting drugs on your own streets?

I'd say anyone who puts reagan as the top ten presidents, is absolutely delusional. He was a better actor as president than in any of those b movies he played in.

[craigmatic]

51. Well kidos to him for going there to make that speech. If only he could convince them to vote for

him.

[Doctor_J]

54. Yeah, his energy might be better spent rallying his base

in more civilized areas of the country, but I will give him props for going into hate radio heaven

[MARK52]

59. Promises

All his base wants him to do is fulfill his campaign promises. So far, Obama is more concerned about being politically expedient than standing up for those who voted for him. We want him to 'kick Republican/Capitalist butt'!!!

[No Elephants]

117. According to a lot of people at DU, his base is solidly with him and DU

is an anomoly.

It is hard to underestimate voters, though. We sit here as political junkies. People who are not political junkies never even heard of the DLC.

And I am not talking dumb folk, either. I am talking my very own sister, summa cum laude from Barnard and reader of at least two newpapers a day, one of which is the NYT.

I fell over the other day when I learned she had never heard of it. Still, she is a lifelong Democrat and does not like Obama, but she thought it was something peculiar to him, not that the Party itself has changed.

[TMED]

56. the "Obama Scandal List" tells you how much Obama cares about populism

http://obamascandalslist.blogspot.com/

Read it and weep.

Bush was no better. See the "Bush Scandal List", by the same researcher:

http://bushscandalslist.blogspot.com/2009/10/introduction-george-bush-connecticut.html

[Doctor_J]

58. I almost didn't click given your low post count

but the list is pretty disheartening. Welcome

[SHRED]

61. Now just back populist legislation and we're good

[gtar100]

64. For all you skeptics - thank goodness someone is actually saying it.

I know all the concerns, but think for a second...what are they saying on republican clown tour and what is Obama saying.

It's up to us as a whole. Do you want the lunatics or someone who *at the very least* says what President Obama said today? Better listen closely to what he actually said and not just react to the headline. Then either move to the right or left. If you just walk away because you don't believe him, well remember that's what the republicans want you to do also. We have to push Obama to do the things he's talking about. Hold him accountable. Or would you rather have a president Newt or Mitt. Good luck on holding them accountable.

Please, really listen to the speech. Don't just call it a "speech". Realize these ideas and ideals should also be in you. There is truth here and it needs to ring loud enough and strong enough in more than just Obama. Do these words ring true to you? Regardless of who's speaking, do these ideas speak to you?

[No Elephants]

114. Lack of ideals in us has not been the problem so far. Neither has the inability of Obama and his

staff to write speeches.

Holding him accountable, however, has been a huge problem, especially since he and his staff take criticism and fling it right back at whoever just criticized him/them. Ask Cenk Uygur, for one.

And, of course, "the left of the left" and the "retards" on the left got it again and again, every time they tried to get their point across to the WH.

And the ability to hold him accountable will go to zero (assuming it is not alread there) after he is re-elected.

So, if you have any very specific suggestions on how to hold a President, especially a second term President, accountable please let us know.

Again, please be very specific as possible, because vagu8e words and phrases flying around mean squat.

Oh, and no, I could care less that Obama is saying this now. I cared a lot when he said "no mandate and a strong public option is the only way" when he was running. But, when he got into office, he did the opposite, calling the public option unimportant and "a sliver."

Everyone excused that on the ground that he had just washed Congress and couldn't do a thing with it. So, why would I care what he says about anything that requires legislation?

[judesedit]

65. Anyone who votes republican that is NOT a millionaire is voting AGAINST him or herself

Wake up, brainwashed. And try to do it before it's too late for any of us.

[No Elephants]

115. And what you would say about any Democrat who doesn't see that

the Party of 2012 is not the Party of 30 ago?

You think we'll perish without a Democrat in the Oval Office and everyone who does not agree with you about that needs to wake up.

Others think we'll perish unless something shakes up the Democrats significantly and makes them remember how they once held Congress for 40 years and everyone who does not agree with that needs to wake up.

And a bit of both may be the reality.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

75. Populism will soon become the new "-ism" to attack

I'm sure that fuckbag Frank Luntz is doing it as we speak......training the idiots to see it as a bad word.

[tavalon]

76. He's a great campaigner, I'll give him that

But I lack the dewy eyed innocence I had back in 2008. Yeah, I'll vote for him but that's all.

[DiehardLiberal]

83. I agree with you completely!

Fool me once, etc.. I would love to see some real actions to convince me otherwise but unless I do, I'll vote for him but that's all. No volunteering, donating etc.

I haven't voted for a third party candidate since John Anderson but I'm hoping for a viable option.. And don't tell me about Nader!

[FunMe]

77. Another speech with no actions.

Yawn.

[many a good man]

84. 1.9% surtax on incomes over a million?

Better, but still not getting it.

[No Elephants]

118. And the people making only a half a million PER YEAR won't be asked for

anything in their country's hour of need?

[wundermaus]

88. Here is a cord ya'll can tug on...

Michael Moore's 'Capitalism: A Love Story' - 'You Be Squatters in Your Own Home'
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YVYIBikzwmk

[Citizen Worker]

103. The Obama campaign was probably speed dialing the banks to let them know this speech was mere

campaign rhetoric and not to worry, the same thing the campaign did when Obama spoke out that NAFTA needed to be renegotiated. In other words, he doesn't mean what he said.

[No Elephants]

119. They don;t have to. Wall Street and the rich understand how the game is played.

This is for the rest of us.

[JCMach1]

93. Triangulate me once...

Still looking for the actions to back-up the words. He's the president, where is his populist legislative proposals...

[Bodhi BloodWave]

111. where is his populist/progressive filled house and senate?

without ya people getting a larger number of such people into those two places there is a limit to what he can pass that would satisfy most of DU

[JCMach1]

112. If you evoke TR, expect comparisons...

[No Elephants]

120. He had the largest number of Democrats any Democrat is going to get

unless many Southern states have another change of heart.

Certainly more than he'll have if he gets re-elected.

Besides, that issue has been addressed over and over. You can't blame Congress alone, not the Congress he had in January 2009. Well, you can, but it just won't wash.

[newspeak]

116. I have been critical of obama, especially his choices in cabinet

for getting out of this economical nightmare. Saw part of his speech last night and thought he does get it. He cited percentages of how much wealth had increased for the top one per cent and how much CEO pay has increased. The numbers were downright obscene. Also, cited how much wages has decreased for the rest of us. He knows, he's got the stats, what he does with it, we will see.

When he came into office he knew we were in a financial crisis, I would be listening to the best economists, you know the ones that actually have recognition for their work, instead of some hacks like geithner, summers and those who have continued this train wreck from little boot's administration. As einstein stated, doing the same thing over and over expecting different results is insane.

I keep thinking how those trillions of dollars of our money could have flowed to mainstreet, helping the majority of the people, who then would have helped the banks, instead of giving banks the bailouts while they foreclose on poor families putting more on the streets and basically squatting on the money instead of loaning it out. We, the american people, basically bailed out the S&L after that great heist. How long do we allow corruption to rule the land, while those responsible are held unaccountable (or less punishment) for the great harm they have caused to millions.

Obama has signaled he knows the dilemma and he is very aware why OWS is protesting. Let's all hope there is action behind his words.

[No Elephants]

122. This is not news to anyone in politics, esp. national politics. Obama knew it

when he ran in Illinois.

you can tell that from the questionnaires he filled out then and the things he said then. And the votes he took then. And the votes for which he just happened to be absent then.

He gave the keynote speech at the Democratic Convention that was about to nominate Kerry and John "Two Americas" Edwards. He was right there as both of them said over and over "Help is on the way."

He's been talking about Wall Street and Main Street for years.

Who has his administration prosecuted for all the fraud that led to the 2008 collapse, though?

Hope there is action behind his words--this time?

And what exactly would be the basis for that hope?

No, if you vote for him, vote with the realization that you are voting for the same man who's been in office since January 2009, only after November 2012, he won't be worried about re-election. Then, your heart won't break.

[newspeak]

125. I understand no elephants

but what can be done? It seems like when you do get a democratic candidate who is pro-labor, pro-mainstreet, the DNC and "New" democrats will back the corporate tool. That also goes with the MSM. They attempt to shut out or ridicule anyone who would be for the majority, while pandering to the corporate whore.

Right now Obama is unopposed. As you say, he's saying the words we want to hear. My eyes are wide open-just saying he is aware exactly what's been going on. this speech should have been given three years ago, and stated publicly over and over again. So, that the majority of the people realize exactly who has greatly benefited by little boots and his greedy cohorts' policies and who has suffered. Instead, it's been policies that incrementally hurt mainstreet while not holding those who created this mess accountable including little boots and his band of merry thugs. We cannot look forward without taking care of the past or it will bite us again in the future. I see obama and clinton as covers for the * family.

Someone on the board once wrote with the repugs you drink the poison down, while the new democrats you take a sip at a time. Different methods, same results.

[No Elephants]

123. Well, as usual, one group professes that Obama walks on water and the nation will perish unless

he is re-elected and anyone who thinks otherwise is stupid, ill-informed and/or not facing reality.

And another group believes he has never done anything right and probably never will and anyone who hasn't woken up to that yet is stupid, ill-informed and/or not facing reality.

And probably both groups are right to one degree or another.


But, IMO, this is not about Obama. It is a Party wide issue, especially on the national level. And we are either going to figure out a way to address it or we are going to be even more disappointed in the Democratic President who is elected aftr Obama.