Obama is Bill Clinton -- A Corporate President

[Armstead]

And like Bill Clinton he is looking like he will preside over four or eight years in which Democrats have the White House, but the consolidation of Corporate Power will take precedence over actual liberal/progressive reform aimed at restoring the working and middle class and providing a safety net for the poor.

We will continue to be given comforting vaguely liberal-sounding words, and occasional token bones.

But when push comes to shove, the same ol' gang of Democrat Oligarchs that have worked with the GOP to hollow out America with deregulation, globalization and Insider Government since the 1970's will remain in charge....And now we can add Corporate Bail Outs and Mandated Windfalls to the mix.

Fire Away.

:popcorn:

[Captain Hilts]

1. I got trampled when I mentioned in the primaries that they both want to be liked too much. nt

[Cha]

10. Good.

[Captain Hilts]

11. There are a lot of similarities. I'm just too well-read in presidential history I guess.

I see the patterns.

[Cha]

69. I don't..I know Obama too well..

He likes people and wants to get along but they better watch out if they show the fist.

I really can't speak to President Clinton.

[AllentownJake]

78. If I recall

President Clinton was quite apt at showing "the fist" particularly during times of budget negotiations.

[mkultra]

128. yes, im sure your education was the problem.

[polichick]

41. imo that's true - and it seems this prez is desperate to be liked by scum. nt

[ClarkUSA]

142. imo - it seems this prez gets attacked daily by hateful scum making desperate claims

Your ears must be burning: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8725039

[salguine]

74. You were exactly right.

[ClarkUSA]

140. Bullshit... the two men couldn't be more different in their personal and public lives.

President Obama is a family man who is faithful to his wife who is not always "the last to leave the party".

Unlike Bill Clinton, who was often the last to leave the party, President Obama was all business on his trip to San Francisco.

There was no photo op with local Democrats, no visit to Glide Memorial Church or the Delancey Street Foundation, and
no very late after-event supper at the Steiner Street digs of Susie Tompkins Buell and Mark Buell, with the likes of Robin
Williams, Robert Redford, Willie Brown, Carole Shorenstein- Hays or Paul Pelosi stopping by - all of which Clinton did
when he visited here during his presidency.

"He's just not a party guy like Bill," former state Democratic Party Chairman Art Torres said of Obama.

"It's just not in his nature to go down like Bill to the Slanted Door and talk with the owner until after the place closes,"
Torres said. "He's much more of a hamburger, go to bed and get up early kind of guy."

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/18/BAC21A6U80.DTL

He also doesn't throw tantrums, hasn't sentenced a retarded man to death to prove he's tough on crime, have screaming fits with his
co-president wife in front of staff or lie about "inhaling", either. In fact, he was accused of being cold, detached and professorial
throughout most of his presidential campaign last year, so it's amusing anyone would mistake his famously cool and inner-directed
manner with Bubba's patented gladhanding, backslapping, guffawing three-ring circus persona.

[NYCGirl]

2. I can use some extra money. Can you tell me what lottery numbers will come

up next week?

[ProSense]

3. Clinton = Health reform fails, Glass Steagall repealed, DOMA, DADT passed, etc

Obama = Health care reform passes and cleaning up Clinton's mess.

Questions?

[Armstead]

4. Health Care Deform and using the US Treasury to clean up the mess

Question: Why do you fail to recognize that the same economic geniuses that guided Clintonomics are back in the saddle in the Obama administration?

[jesus_of_suburbia]

75. "Question: Why do you fail to recognize that the same economic geniuses that guided Clintonomics

are back in the saddle in the Obama administration?"




"Question: Why do you fail to recognize that the same economic geniuses that guided Clintonomics are back in the saddle in the Obama administration?"



Answer:



She knows... she doesn't care. Her objective is to promote ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING Obama does.

What's funny is that Obama is being centrist and kissing Republican ass. Something she constantly berates Hillary for. It's called hypocrisy.

This is 2009, not 15 years ago. Barack is playing with a different hand than Bill and Hillary had. She likes to compare the 2 situations as if they are the same, lol. She likes to pretend we are living in the 90's. She knows better, but she's hoping we don't.


We aren't idiots.

[newspeak]

192. Goldman Sachs and Wall Street

not even close to Main Street-don't we have Summers, Paul Robeson? We have the monied fox still guarding the henhouse. How's that going to help main street? How's that financial regulation coming to hold those who have driven us into this mess controlled and regulated?

Just as Clinton swept the BCCI, Iran-Contra scandal under the rug, so will these hooligans be back again. Because if those who had perpetrated crimes from that time had been tried and jailed, we wouldn't have had to deal with the last nightmarish eight years with some of the same players from Reagan. It seems that the standard MO is years of ripping off the people, scams, murder, wars (or corporate business as usual) by mostly neo-cons and the DLC comes in and covers their butt.

Now, I think Obama has more presence (than the last nightmare)--so did Clinton and most of the world gravitated towards that presence. But, if ya'll don't think they're players for the greedheads on Wall Street--think again. I knew Obama wasn't going to be FDR--he's a corporate tool who will probably try to trickle down some crumbs from some of those greedy oinkers just to pacify some of us. It's just reality that we are becoming more and more of a plutocracy or corporatocracy. Those who have been appointed on the financial side should give you a clue where we are going.

I do live in reality-and it looks like it's the standard MO, and I don't expect that corruption, greed, and an outright con on the American people is going to change anytime soon. When I see those white collar crimes from under *'s administration, and the lies for a pre-emptive war and torture being brought to justice, then maybe I'll change my mind. We'll see, won't we?

[FrenchieCat]

6. What do these things have to do with Obama, except for the fact

that folks expect Obama to reverse everything that Clinton put in place, and enact what Clinton failed to enact (like fucking health care), and then some.

Clinton = 8 years to put into place a bunch of fucked up shit.
Bush = 8 years to pile on to the previous 8 years with really fucked up shit.
Obama = folks have been shitting on him since January 20th to undo the last 16 years,
demanding that he clean up everyone elses shit!

I say fuck that shit!

How unfair are people gonna be before somebody shakes them awake,
so they can look at the fucking facts.

These folks are worse than the right....cause at least the Right would prefer he did nothing....
these crazy ass folks on the left want him to get every goddamn thing done like yesterday, like
his name is fucking freakin' Flash!

[AllentownJake]

8. "These folks are worse than the right"

Really tell me more how you feel about activist.

[FrenchieCat]

9. There are activists, and then there are real assholes.

I'm talking about the real assholes, not the Progressive activists...which I am one of.

I don't believe you speak for any group....
cause you can only speak for yourself.

[AllentownJake]

12. One person's activist is another person's asshole

All a matter of perspective.

[FrenchieCat]

13. Activist are people pushing for change......

what they aren't are petulant children who expect someone else to fix
a bunch of fucked up shit and not be given anytime.

Like Wanda Sykes stated yesterday on CNN in explaining why she was giving Obama time to get things done..., he brought us back from the brink! He actually saved this country. It's like the man gives you CPR and saves your life, and then you get up and tell him that his breath stinks!

FUCK THAT SHIT.

[AllentownJake]

14. I don't believe he's saved this country

than again, I'm one of the people who realized yesterday's GDP numbers were a lie. Correction, a spinning of an inconvienent truth.

[FrenchieCat]

17. Well you have a right to that opinion.......

and you know what is said about those.....

[AllentownJake]

18. I think statements like "saved the country"

are a little overblown. We can hang up the mission accomplished banner in two years when we get through the mine field, not when we are still in it.

[FrenchieCat]

20. You can take that shit up with Wanda Sykes......

And if you didn't notice, the pronouncements of what he is or isn't were made today, again, in this thread.....

So if you want to fucking wait, then be consistent, instead of labeling him now, and then talk about how others need to fucking wait before making their own pronouncements. Double.standards.at.its.worse!

[AllentownJake]

23. Last time I checked she was a comedian

A pretty funny one. Her social commentary isn't as good as Bill Hicks or George Carlin or Bill Cosby.

I generally comment on individual policies and some of them have been shit. Some have been great. Other than Pakistan and Afghanistan he is doing an excellent job in preventing the rest of the world from hating us.

[FrenchieCat]

28. She's an activist.....

as well.

And when she spoke, she was speaking as such; she was discussing Gay issues.

[AllentownJake]

30. Good for her

Lady Ga Ga seemed angrier. What the hell is your point.

[FrenchieCat]

35. My point was what Ms. Sykes said......

not so much the fact that she was the one who said it.

But I guess that went right over your head.

Oh well... :shrug:

[AllentownJake]

39. Why would I care if Wanda Skykes said the President saved the country?

She's a comedian.

[FrenchieCat]

This conversation is beyond you.......

just.let.it.go.

[AllentownJake]

46. No you cited a comedian saying the President save the world

So fucking what? Who the hell gives a shit what Wanda thinks. She makes her money as a clown. A good clown, but a clown none the less.

[FrenchieCat]

57. Keep it up. You are starting to sound foolish.

Some folks actually respect Wanda Sykes more than they do AllentownJake.

When you start calling a Black Gay woman a "Clown", to discount what she says,
that's when I have to end it.

SeeYa!

[AllentownJake]

59. LOL

You are playing the race card because I think Wanda Sykes is a clown.

Guess what David Letterman, Jay Leno, Jeff Dunham, Larry the Cable Guy, all make their livings as clowns as well. Some are better clowns than others. They are paid to make people laugh. That is what a clown does.

I swear the obsession with celebrity in this country is absolutely gone to ridiculous levels when someone interprets calling a comedian a clown as racist and homophobic.

[FrenchieCat]

60. Clean it up.

You obviously don't know history.....
But that's ok....
So Go on, with your bad self!

[AllentownJake]

62. This absolutely the dumbest conversation on DU

I've ever encountered. Honestly you have jumped the shark.

[mkultra]

129. well, half of it was

[jeanpalmer]

119. I have a hunch

you might be surprised at the large number of people in the world who hate us. We've come to represent the arrogant schoolyard bully. Everyone hates a bully. And I don't see that Obama has changed that situation by much. The rhetoric has changed, but the actions haven't. People can see through empty rhetoric. I'll bet there are a whole lot of people in the world who are hoping the US crashes and burns. Even countries like Russia and China, cordial on the surface, are licking their chops at the prospect that the US is on a course to implode. And are working behind the scenes to effect it. A recent poll in Pakistan shows 59% of the people think the greatest threat to Pakistan is the U.S. Only 19% think India is the greatest threat, in spite of the fact that two countries have fought 3 wars and there is real hatred between the two. Hillary Clinton going to Pakistan and trying to justify drone attacks on Pakistanis is a symbol of a country that is out of touch with humanity and the real world. Few will shed a tear when the US goes under.

[treestar]

138. Totally wrong on that

Obama got the NPP because of his changing the tone internationally.

[olegramps]

131. Pakistan and Afghanistan?

He is working to extricate us from the mess that he inherited and hopefully stabilize the situation. Are you of the club that sticks its head in the ground and refuses to see the reality of the threat that the Islamic extremists present to our nation just like the Bush administration?

Remember when Bush and Cheney were provided with a detailed and extensive study of the treat the Islamic extremists posed to our nation and they totally ignored it as they made plans to invade Iraq. President Obama is striving to prevent another 9/11 that the Bush administration allowed to happen through negligence and in fact welcomed as their "Pearl Harbor" excuse to launch a war for oil. Itn't is a fact that our foreign policy that we have allowed to be run by international corporations is a major factor in creating so many enemies? Cheney and his international oil buddies are fully responsible for this disaster and the bastard should be facing a trial for treason.

If I have any criticism of President Obama it is that he has refused to pursue justice for those who are responsible for an unjustified war, torture and the outing of a CIA agent that was working to protect American lives. Cheney is guilty of the murder of Soviet double agents who were also outed in his quest for revenge against Wilson. What crimes have to be commited by these bastards before they are held accountable?

[treestar]

137. The point was it would have been much worse

If McDope were President for example, we'd be bombing Iran while unemployment went up so far that many more would join the military. So we could attack Pakistan too.

[treestar]

136. If you think the government's numbers are a lie

You're in tinfoil hat territory.

[AllentownJake]

149. The truth is in the numbers

You just have to read the report and do a few mathmatical equations to get to it.

[jonnyblitz]

32. how is continuing where Bush left off saving this country? how

is escalating a BULLSHIT war saving the country? you are fucking NUTS!. :crazy:

[FrenchieCat]

42. Obama ain't continuing shit....

but keep on with your made up shit,
if it makes you feel more self righteous and offended.

Obama has stated explicitly time and time again during the
primaries and the general election that he wasn't about to just run out of Afghanistan
if he was elected President. If you voted for him, than you already know that.
If you didn't vote for him, then who gives a shit what you think?

Hell, I'm putting you on fucking ignore.
After many years, I've determined that you have yet to offer any
insight about any fucking thing beyond complaining all of the goddamn time.

[izquierdista]

36. And then there is Obama

Who seems far too nice to be an asshole, but he sure ain't no activist. Not at this rate.

[Armstead]

19. I have patience if I see a clear direction -- But bringing back the Clinton crew....

to fix the messes they created was not an auspicious start.

I can deal with "incremental change." However, I am really nervous when I see all this zigging and zagging and continuing to maintain strong ties with the very forces that screwed us over while patting progressives on the head and saying "someday."

[FrenchieCat]

21. Then you are just going to have to be nervous......

Because after witnessing what has gone on for the past fucking 16 years.
I'm less fucking nervous now than I have been in all of that fucking time.
So there.

[Armstead]

27. You're giving them a pass instead of holding their feet to the fire

I'd rather err on the side of being critical than passively assume that they will do what is best.

We should have learned what that leads to in the 90's.

They sold us out with free-trade globalization, deregulation etc. and we let them because it was better than the "alternative."

Well, by the en d of the 90's we were ultimately in just as shitty a position as we would have been if a republican had been president.

I like Obama, I want to support Obama, and I want to be able to relax in the knowledge that the good guys are running things. But there are too many familiar patterns (and people) returing from the 90's.

The only way we can avoid a repeat is if we don't just give Obama a pass, and assume it will all work out for the best.

[FrenchieCat]

33. I'm making sure that he can walk to where he needs to in order

to get us out of this deep shit.
I'm not interested in having been "busy" burning someone's feet since January 20th...
till they can't even fucking walk.

Thank God that there are enough of "Me" to balance the likes of "you".

[Armstead]

45. Then just be a cheerleader, no matter what

That's what the oligarchs have been counting on to keep the opposition to them neutered.

[FrenchieCat]

48. Go ahead and label me......

see if I give a shit.

[Bluenorthwest]

126. Your posts lable everybody

So that is just funny writing on your part. What I enjoy about your posts of late is watching the language degenerate as your position becomes more difficult to hold. A few more weeks and it will be nothing but 'fuck shit asshole fuckers'. Where once there was form and occasional substance, now there is a string of adjectives and aggressive language. Labels for everyone, including yourself.
Wanda would not do that. She just would not. And if she were here, I'd be prompting her to give some context by explaining to the world why she kept closeted for so many long years in the spotlight, while her brothers and sisters fought the fight for her, while she told jokes about her husband and pretended to be straight. She's a genius, but she's an entertainer and she made choices about the closet that were made for reasons she'd be glad to explain in terms you might not enjoy so much. She felt she had to hide, for years. Brave? Not really. Honest? Far from it. An understandable choice? You bet.
She's a comic. Cleve Jones is an activist. I'll be standing with Cleve if it comes to that. My guess is Wanda will too.

[joeycola]

132. LOL...

"A few more weeks and it will be nothing but 'fuck shit asshole fuckers'."

[FrenchieCat]

183. I can say it now...."fuck shit asshole fuckers"..... if that will give you that much more enjoyment!

After all, seems to me everyone else gets to say what they want, so I guess I can too.

As for Wanda Sykes, it was what she said, not so much who she is that was my point.

Obama is giving us some CPR, and some of us are yelling at him that his breath stinks....

[Hutzpa]

70. You call your whining opposition

:rofl:

[Armstead]

82. Oh yes that word "whining"....always a favorite of wingnuts and centrist conservative Democrats

[FrenchieCat]

84. More like funky flamebait......

That's all this thread is....

why it hasn't been locked yet, I have no fucking idea.

[Armstead]

88. Flamebait only if people respond with flames

[FrenchieCat]

90. Calling the President...essentially a "Corporatist".......

and saying he IS another President is Flamebait with butter thrown on top.

You're not slick....

[Mimosa]

118. Obama isn't looking strong so far, FrenchieCat

And I fought hard for him in the early primaries and after.

Many of us are very nervous. WE NEED SOME SUPPORT FROM HIS ADMINISTRATION. Why support them when they don't seem to be working for US?

[FrenchieCat]

182. Obama isn't looking strong to you so far......based on your criteria....

And as for those poor souls who are nervous, welcome to the club...
I was that way for a long spell...
but I'm not anymore....cause currently I ain't got time to be nervous,
cause I'm too busy trying to make a difference,
and shaking on the sideline ain't my thing.

As for your support vs. your non support, I can't help you there,
if you don't think this administration isn't starting to change things,
then that's your blindness getting in the way, and just because you refuse to see
change (and no, it ain't gonna come all at once, shining and pure-like as it might
in your political fantasies), doesn't mean it isn't happening.

But I stress that I believe that you have every right to feel as you do,
just don't expect everyone else to do and be exactly like you....

[Mimosa]

189. Frenchie, just put me in the Helen Thomas category.

I understand you Frenchie. And I luv ya!

But.... Obama is disappointing me. maybe i'm impatient. Maybe I'm distrustful from having long seen how seemingly good men and women in public service seem to start serving the oligarchy once they are in office.

[treestar]

139. You've adopted a position that one must always be critical and

negative.

If you have kids, do you notice only what they do wrong? Assume they are always going to do the wrong thing unless you look for reasons to criticize them?

Do you assume every doctor or lawyer or teacher or accountant you work with is going to fleece you? Do you criticize every move they make and assume it's to cheat you?

[Armstead]

162. I'm reluctantly negative because I'm disappointed at seeing the same ol' crap yet again

I had very high hopes when Obama took office. I supported him and still want t. I know he is not a fire breathing progressive, but he seemed to "get it" and seemed to have the intelligence and the fight to push for real reform and progress.

And it's not that I'm impatient. I have been more than willing to recognize the reality that Rome wasn't built in a day, and that America can't be rebuilt in a day or a year either. I'm a moderate b y nature, so I also recognize the importance of compromise in politics as in life.


But the more I see the more frustrated I get. After running on "change" we perpetually get the same-old same-old from Obama and the Democratic majority in Congress.

Obama has been won over by the notion that "what's good for the oligarchs is good for everybody." Obama picks the Clinton Wall St. Crowd to guide economic policy -- after that same crowd helped to preside over the hijacking and wrecking of our economy. Instead of being sent to jail -- or at least political exile -- their neo-free-market ideology is back in the saddle.

And if Obama truly does want liberal/progressive change, he sure as hell isn't fighting for it. The progressives are having to plead and yell to get any attention paid to what is the agenda Obama supposedly ran on.

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party is still being driven by its Corporate and ConservaDem wing. Yet again, liberals and progressives are told they have to suck it in and settle for a few crumbs. Instead of being given a seat at the table, Congressional liberals and progressives are still being held back by the notion that "we can't do anything because the time is not right yet."

I'm angry that health care reform is going to force people to buy insurance they can't afford without offering any meaningful public program in return. It is basically a GIFT to the insurance industry that has been screwing us. If the democfrats are afraid of single payer or a public option, how about AT LEAST using the power of the government to REGULATE insurance rates.

So yes, I'm negative. I hope like hell circumstances change, and I can once again feel like we are in a new eras of reform, and be able to relax knowing that Obama and the Democratic Party are doing what's necessary to get this country on track.

[Mimosa]

117. By the end of the 90's we were ultimately in about the same position as were during Bush 41

Armstead, I agree. Bringing in the same crew which put us back where we were isn't the way to go forward.

I fought for obama. I hope he can lead. I don't want him to be the corporatist president. Which is all we've had since they killed JFK.

[Raine1967]

109. +1

Amen sister.

[karynnj]

63. Not 16 years - add in the 12 Reagan/Bush years

Nixon/Ford/Carter need to be added too to get back to a progressive President. That's 12 more years. (In reality, the Congress stayed pretty liberal until 1980 - so the best estimate is undoing either 40 years or 28 years.)

The really ironic thing is that many of the liberals here held their nose rather than look at the record of the most liberal nominee we have had in the last 2 decades - John Kerry. Obama, who you are complaining about is second.)

[firedupdem]

15. +1

But for some reason Clinton isn't accountable for those things...it's only Obama, who hasn't reversed it all.

[Garam_Masala]

71. One humongous difference between Bill & Barack

Bill gave us huge budget surpluses
Barack is giving us huge deficits.

I read a report last week which projects interest on our
national debt will be over $800 Billion per year within
5 years at the current rate of budget deficits.
That much money will disappear from the treasury every year!
That amount can pay free healthcare for every single American,
free college education for all qualified students,
food stamps for the needy and have money left over!

Instead that money will be shipped to China and other lenders.

[niceypoo]

145. The current deficits are temporary

...and necessary to fix eight years of kleptomania. Stimulus is temporary.

[niceypoo]

144. The 'mess' that balanced the budget...

...and created 22 million jobs.

[bluestateguy]

5. I need an aspirin

[Armstead]

7. So do I -- You think I LIKE feeling this way?

[AllentownJake]

16. He's merely a reflection of his time

Just like Clinton is a reflection of the world in 1992-2001.

They are politicians, they do what they think will be popular and get them re-elected. Getting re-elected also includes securing finances for campaigns so if you are looking for a President to rock the boat right now, there isn't going to be one.

If there was support in congress for many of the things we wanted there would be more pressure on the President to do these things.

That being said, the trust the President crowd doesn't help because they accept these middle of the road policies sold by our leaders, and I don't just include the President in that list.

[Armstead]

22. That;s the problem....Obama should not be a reflection of shit in shitty times

We're in shitty times largely because we allowed Clinton to sell us out, and we kept accepting it instead of demanding better. So why has Obama turned to the same crew to fix the mess they made?

We might actually get something done if the Democtratic leadership were to actually support the "base" (from moderate liberal to progressive) instead of trying to placate the oligarchs and avoiding angering the right (who would be angry whatever is done).

Swing voters? They can be persuaded, if a strongand unified case is made for liberal/progressive reform by the Democratic Party as an entity.

[AllentownJake]

25. You need money to run a campaign

As long as each congressional race is costing 2.5 to 5 million dollars and Senate races in the 10s of millions of dollars this is the shit you are going to get.

[Armstead]

38. That can't be used an excuse to neuter the political system

What ius the point of winning, if it only means our side has to do the same thing as the other side if we "win."

Obama demonstrated that it is possible to ride the wave of public appetite for reform and change. It was a clear rejection of corporate politics and pirate economics.

If we have a clear message backed up by determination and values we should be able to overcome that systemic flaw in our system. A good sdtarting point would be for Democrats to fight for further campaign finance reform.

Unless there are clear distinctions between what the two parties stand for and DO, then we might as all sit it out and enjoy watching Rollerball on TV.

[AllentownJake]

44. One side has delusions

of either world conquest or forcing the return of Jesus Christ and the other side believes in getting re-elected and providing the plebs with stuff so they don't riot.

[ProSense]

29. LOL!

"They are politicians, they do what they think will be popular and get them re-elected."

Isn't the claim that Obama is flouting popular opinion for his "corporate masters" or are you saying the bill Obama will sign is popular?

"That being said, the trust the President crowd doesn't help because they accept these middle of the road policies sold by our leaders, and I don't just include the President in that list."

Appears the "we're cool because we're criticizing Obama" crowd is confusing themselves with their own moving goal-post arguments.

[AllentownJake]

37. I live in the real world

Any health care bill at this point will be able to be spun as a vicotry. Having a Health Care bill is a popular idea.

Individual provisions will be popular others won't that is life.

I don't think I moved the goal posts here. President Obama is merely a reflection of the political climate in 2009 in America. If there was political will for single payer (and that includes money backing up a campaign) than there would be single payer.

If there was political will to support and Afghan withdrawal there would be an Afghan withdrawal. The fact of the matter is there is not.

You are going to have a lot of moderate half ass intiatives. Some constructive some totally ineffective. It's better than 100% negative intiatives.

Somethings will be fixed somethings will be left as they are. I have little hope on Wall Street regulations based on the campaign finance structure in this country.

I'd prefer to think of him as a decent man in a corrupt system.

Supporting half ass positions ensures things move to the right. You start off demanding the world and you settle for something in the middle. You don't start off in the middle and accept a position that is center right.

[ProSense]

47. "Any health care bill at this point will be able to be spun as a vicotry."

Health care reform with a public option is going to be a huge victory. Get it: huge!!!

You can sit back and deny it all you want, but history is in the making.

[AllentownJake]

We'll take a look at what we are calling a public option

If the insurance industry gets 50 million federally mandated new customers in the same bill, I call it shit.

[ProSense]

53. The uninsured and many people get a public option and the

insurance industry loses its antitrust exemption. Huge! History!

[AllentownJake]

56. Do me a favor

wait till the bill is signed to declare mission accomplished and I'll wait till the bill is signed to call it a total failure.

Some where in the middle I'm guessing is the actual truth.

[Hippo_Tron]

190. +1000

[treestar]

141. So you mistrust anyone simply because they are a politician

How can you be a Democrat? They are all politicians too.

Naturally they want to get re-elected, but is there no parallel between that and doing what is good for people? the people are the voters, anyway.

Why do they need so much money to get elected?

Are there other groups you inherently distrust? Lawyers maybe?

Why are you so much more trustworthy? Why should be trust you ever? Are you part of some superior group?

Sure there are bad apples who are politicians. But like any other group, there are good ones, too.

[cliffordu]

24. So what?

Who do you work for???

[Armstead]

40. Mature response, I must say.

[cliffordu]

68. We are ALL slaves to the corporations. Why not the politicians???

Really. Until we dismantle the multinationals, nothing will change.

Seriously.

As long as they can run the show from the shadows, we are NOT a democracy.

[Armstead]

83. I agree with you there

[tblue]

26. At least Clinton would pull up his sleeves and wrangle members of Congress.

I'm still waiting for somebody to tell Obama he's president and pushing his agenda thru Congress is not a breach of ettiquette.

And I hate the way he has more regard for Republcsns and bipartisanship than he does for the people who voted for change.

[FrenchieCat]

50. Clinton got what achieved? Sure in the fuck wasn't fucking health Care?

or anything to do with DOMA, DATD, NAFTA, the '96 Telecommunications act (why cable is soooo fucked up today), Glass-Steagall, or anything else that I can think of that we are still discussing today....

so Wow....I'm soooo NOT fucking impressed with this twisting arm bullshit.

[blue_onyx]

134. Obama hasn't passed health care either

Obama wouldn't have passed health care in the early 90s. The times are different.

Also, the man in your avatar voted for some of those things, like DADT and NAFTA.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00380

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=103&session=1&vote=00395#position

[FrenchieCat]

181. I'm not a purist.....

I'm just trying to figure out what the arm twisting got us.....

as for what Obama has and hasn't passed, he's gotten much further,
without acting out the Angry Black man role that everyone and their mother
is waiting for.....so sorry.

Further, you to speculate as to what Obama would have done in the early 90s is just
plain silly, period. I know what happened then, and I know what is happening now,
and arm twisting ain't the key to a damn thing.

[blue_onyx]

185. Interesting

You're able to overlook the votes of people who you admire while criticizing others for taking the same position. Not a purist and not consistent either.


"Further, you to speculate as to what Obama would have done in the early 90s is just
plain silly, period."

Not silly in the slightest. It's important to acknowledge that the world is a completely different place and that Obama would have likely had the same difficulty in the 90s.

[jonnyblitz]

31. you are exactly correct. nt

[polichick]

34. I wish it weren't true - but it certainly is looking that way. nt

[ProSense]

43. Yes, for the crowd trying to give the Clinton presidency progressive credibility it does.

Clinton signed DOMA. Oh, but he apologized.

He failed on health care, but at least he tried.

It's hilarious to watch some people using single payer, increased transparency, foreign policy and other issues to slam Obama, only to turn around and cheer Hillary and Bill.

[polichick]

49. I don't care about all that - I care about the constant caving to corporate interests NOW. nt

[ProSense]

51. Right, because repealing the more than half-century old health insurance antitrust exemption is a

corporate dream?

[polichick]

54. And there's all the new business for the ins. companies and the deal with big pharma...

If you're happy with WH "leadership" on this issue, that's your problem.

The fact remains, Obama is a corporate president ~ all you have to do is look at his appointees to know that.

[FrenchieCat]

55. They will continue to move the fucking goalpost........

as long as their following keeps moving along with them when they do.

Nothing he does will ever be enough....
till he swears on the Dalai Lama that he is a socialist in front of a crew of cameras,
and then those will only be just words!


Since it ain't gonna happen, they will always be here.....

[Metric System]

65. lol

[NYC_SKP]

52. Bush or Clinton... Obama can't be both.

:popcorn:

[firedupdem]

58. sure he can.....

he's already a marxist, fascist, socialist, muslin? :shrug:

[Hutzpa]

67. Here you go

We all agree that there is one missing...CORPORATIST.

[Armstead]

80. I didn't say he is Bush

But with Bush you knew where he stood, as shitty as that place was.

With Clinton and Obama they are supposed to be standing with us. I'd just like to see him plant both feet on the side he is supposed to represent.

[SIMPLYB1980]

98. LOL!

:popcorn:

[Thrill]

61. Yeah a Corporate President who is going after offshore Corporate Tax Havens

Yup a Corporate President

[emilyg]

64. Tiny drop in the bucket.

[ipaint]

66. Yes, same as clinton and iran contra.

"The numerous examples provided by the NYT are all well-known to readers here. Contrary to the central strawman invariably raised by his defenders, none of the complaints is grounded in the objection that Obama "has failed to act quickly enough" to repudiate Bush/Cheney abuses. Let's repeat that: none of the criticisms of Obama from the NYT today -- or from civil libertarians generally -- is grounded in the complaint that he hasn't acted quickly enough. The opposite is true: the complaint is that he has actively and affirmatively embraced those very policies as his own -- the very policies which Democrats and liberals almost unanimously claimed for years they found so offensive and dangerous -- and he has vigorously defended them and repeatedly applied them in numerous circumstances.

The NYT documents only a fraction of the examples where this is true: Obama's embrace of both Bush's arguments and threats to coerce a British court to keep concealed details of how Binyam Mohamed was tortured ("an inappropriate threat that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton repeated"); Obama's ongoing assertions of the same radically broad "state secrets" privilege used by Bush/Cheney to block judicial review of presidential lawbreaking ("the Obama administration has repeated a disreputable Bush-era argument"); the fact that Obama "has aggressively pursued such immunity in numerous other cases beyond the ones involving Mr. Mohamed"; and Obama's "flip-flop last May decided to resist orders by two federal courts to release photographs of soldiers abusing prisoners in Afghanistan and Iraq," a decision that just culminated in a successful White House effort, led by Joe Lieberman and Lindsey Graham, to "create[] an exception to the Freedom of Information Act that gave Secretary of Defense Robert Gates authority to withhold the photos."

All of this vividly underscores a vital point. There is simply no way that a person with even the most minimal levels of intellectual integrity could have objected to these actions during the Bush years yet defend them now that Obama is doing them, or even refrain from objecting just as loudly. What would it say about a person who spent years warning of the dangers posed by these very policies, yet found ways to excuse them now that there's a new President who is affirming and further institutionalizing them?

The fact that Obama has done good things in other areas or "is not as bad as Bush" in this realm doesn't negate that fact in any way. Those who were genuinely horrified by radical Bush/Cheney secrecy and immunity claims -- as opposed to those who pretended to care about those things because it was an effective Bush-bashing tool for partisan gain -- have no choice but to reach the conclusion which the NYT Editors today propounded: "The Obama administration has clung for so long to the Bush administration’s expansive claims of national security and executive power that it is in danger of turning President George W. Bush’s cover-up of abuses committed in the name of fighting terrorism into President Barack Obama’s cover-up."

http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/

[Garam_Masala]

72. Major difference between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama is...

Bill gave us huge budget surpluses
Barack is giving us huge deficits.

I read a report last week which projects interest on our
national debt will be over $800 Billion per year within
5 years at the current rate of budget deficits.
That much money will disappear from the treasury every year!
That amount can pay free healthcare for every single American,
free college education for all qualified students,
food stamps for every needy person and have money left over!

Instead that money will be shipped to China and other lenders.
But what do I care! I am retired. Let the young folks carry the burden.

[FrenchieCat]

77. Major difference is that Obama inherited an economy on the brink of disaster....

and the Dot.Com bust didn't come till the end of the Clinton presidency....

And Bush is the one that gave us the HUGE deficit....
Don't get it twisted via spam now.

[Garam_Masala]

85. No question about Bush's last deficit of $400 billion

The mis-adventure in Iraq is a major cause of $1 Trillion wasted.

But now in fiscal 2009 the deficit is 4 times that!
Why are we bailing out monster corporations such as AIG, GM, CITI Bank, Bank of America?
How does that help create jobs? Who cares if those mis-managed banks fail? Other more
efficient banks will take over. Depositers are protected any ways by FDIC.

[FrenchieCat]

95. It isn't 4 times that......(you are counting the 10 years it estimates to)....

and Obama included the War spending into his budget.....

DIRECTOR ORSZAG:
Relative to our previous numbers, the Midsession Review shows a smaller 2009 deficit, but larger out-year deficit. Let me explain briefly why. First, with regard to the 2009 deficit, we now expect that the policies put in place to repair the financial system would cost taxpayers less than originally expected. In particular, we have decided to remove from the budget the financial stabilization placeholder that was originally included in our February and May documents and that seemed prudent earlier this year. We've also lowered our estimate for the expected cost of FDIC bank rescues. And the result of these changes is a $262 billion improvement in the projected 2009 deficit.

That deficit is now projected to be $1.58 trillion, or 11.2 percent of GDP.

Second, with regard to the out-year deficit, the changes are driven primarily by changes in economic assumptions -- and again, Christy is going to talk at more length about those. But what happens as you revise the economic projections to reflect the deeper recession that has occurred is that certain spending programs such as UI benefits and food stamps automatically increase and revenues automatically decline. And although this is helpful in stimulating demand in the short term, it also leads to higher medium-term deficits, both directly because the jumping-off point is different than it was before, and also indirectly, because it adds the interest costs on a higher accumulated debt.

Over the next 10 years we expect to add $2 trillion to the projected deficit, compared to our last projection made on February's economic assumption, and it brings the total 10-year deficit for the 2010-2019 period to a little over $9 trillion, in particular $9.05 trillion -- largely in line with CBO's June projection of the administration's.

The out-year deficits hover in the range of 4 percent of GDP, higher than desirable. It is worth noting, however, that by 2019, the difference between revenue and non-interest spending -- that is what is known as the primary deficit -- is well under 4 percent of GDP and is actually 0.6 percent of the economy. The bulk of the deficit, therefore, in 2019, for example, reflects interest payments, which, in turn, almost entirely reflect the cost of the debt accumulated in the past and the need to run short-term deficits to help the economy recover from the most severe downturn since the Great Depression.

Whatever their cause, the administration is very concerned about these out-year deficits, and getting those deficits under control is a top priority of the administration. We're in the midst of the policy process surrounding the fiscal year 2011 budget, and that process will include proposals to put the nation back on a fiscally sustainable path. I'm not going to comment on any specific regarding the policies that will be part of that fiscal year 2011 budget, but let me make a few general comments.

First, since it's desirable to allow the deficit to increase during an economic downturn, deficit reductions -- (inaudible) --on the out-years after the economy has recovered. Importantly, the first step is to stop making those long-term deficits worse, which is why the administration supports statutory pay-as-you-go legislation so that any new tax or entitlement initiatives are fully paid for.

I note that if we had abided by this approach during the previous administration, the projected 10-year deficit would be $5 trillion smaller. In other words, more than half of the projected deficits over the next 10 years are directly attributable to the failure to follow pay-as-you-go rules in the past.

In addition to avoiding making the problem worse -- and as many of you heard me emphasize in the past -- in order to make forward progress on starting to fill in that hole, the key thing we need to address is the key driver of our long-term deficits, which are health care costs. If we slow the rate of health care spending by just 15 basis points per year -- that's .15 percentage points per year -- the savings for Medicare and Medicaid equal the fiscal impact from eliminating the entire 75-year deficit in Social Security.

We simply can't put the federal government back on a fiscally sustainable path without slowing the rate of health care costs in the long run, and that's why the administration is insistent that health care reform be not only deficit-neutral over the next 10 years, but also leaving and putting in place structural changes that will lead to reductions in the deficit thereafter.

So let me be very clear. I know there are going to be some who say that this report proves that we can't afford health reform. I think that has it backwards. (Inaudible) -- -- the fiscal gap is precisely why we must enact well-designed and fiscally responsible health reform now, health reform, again, that is deficit-neutral over the next decade and reduces it thereafter. Given the long-term nature of that problem, we simply can't afford to wait.

Beyond pay-as-you-go rules and addressing health care in a fiscally responsible way, there are additional steps that will be necessary. We've already put forward a variety of measures -- for example, reform to government contracting. And we will have a lot more to say about other measures as part of the fiscal year 2011 budget.
http://whitehouse.blogs.foxnews.com/2009/08/25/obama-budget-office-10-year-deficit-grows-by-2-trillion-unemployment-to-hit-10-economic-growth-due-in-4th-quarter/
(from fox news, just for you!)

As for why the Bail outs......I think that you are only asking that question,
because they happened. If they hadn't, it is very possible that you wouldn't
be on a computer right now, but rather in some line to eat or sleep or who knows!

Easy to say why something was done, but if you understand economics,
then you'd know why. hell, even Krugman states that it was a neccessary step,
even if George Bush handled it as badly as it could have been....
Obama even had to clean that shit up, and at least allow us to see where the funds
that he was charged with went.

[Garam_Masala]

111. Per NY Times, exact budget deficit for fiscal 2009 = $1.8 TRILLION

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/business/economy/12budget.html

[PolNewf]

124. You do realize...

that you linked to an May estimate for fiscal year 2009 that ended in September.

I believe the actual deficit came in at $1.4 tril, not "exact"ly $1.8 tril.

[Garam_Masala]

154. Ok dokie n/t

[Cha]

195. Yeah, but it's a deficit with a Recovery in mind and

not bc it's being poured down the hole in Iraq. Big DIFFERENCE.

[firedupdem]

81. Barack is giving us huge deficits??? Cleaning up bush's mess!

Are you even serious? Did you just skip over the last 8yrs? You're getting your rw talking points all mixed up.

[Garam_Masala]

87. Wait a minute....I am quoting ACTUAL numbers

Last year of Clinton's presidency we had $250 Billion surplus.

Last year of Bush we had DEFICIT of $400 Billion.

First year of Obama we have $1,600 Billion deficit.

Do your own research at the US Treasury web site.

[firedupdem]

94. Wrong again...

Budget 2001 - 281 Billion surplus
1/09 - 1.2 Trillion
Now - 1.4 Trillion


Debt 2001- 5.7 Trillion
1/09- 10.6 Trillion
Now - 11.9 Trillion


Chris Matthews showed these exact numbers today.

And Obama hasn't been in office a year by the way. Every major economist agreed we needed a stimulus package and most felt it should have been larget than it was! So what has he spent that you have a problem with? How you leave bush out of the equation is quite revealing.

[Garam_Masala]

110. Splitting hair?

Quibbling about "exact numbers"?

My main point is Bill Clinton gave us a huge budget surplus.
Barack Obama is going in the reverse direction.

281 Billion surplus = Clinton
1.4 TRILLION deficit = Obama

There! exact numbers!! Happy now?

[firedupdem]

112. Ha! I quote your last post about your "actual figures"

"Wait a minute....I am quoting ACTUAL numbers
Last year of Clinton's presidency we had $250 Billion surplus.

Last year of Bush we had DEFICIT of $400 Billion.

First year of Obama we have $1,600 Billion deficit.

Do your own research at the US Treasury web site"

:wtf:

Again, why are you leaving out bush's leftovers? We did not have a deficit of 400 Billion in January when president Obama took over. It was in 10.6 Trillion!. Nine months in, after a massive stimulus package and he's going in the reverse direction? What are you even talking about??

[JTFrog]

116. Is that the jeopardy music I hear looping in the background? n/t

[PolNewf]

125. Deficit was estimated at $1.2-$1.3 tril before Obama even took office

You seem to be arguing that we hold him accountable for the deficit before he took office.

I presume you also gave Bush credit for the surplus he started with as well?

[Orsino]

166. Ding!

He was rather obvious in his carefully selected/made-up numbers.

[PurityOfEssence]

73. Boy, that brought out the Barackolytes, didn't it?

I'll go ya one further: they're both in need of being loved by all, so they'll seek consensus and suck up to the right even well after it's brutally apparent that the reactionaries' blood lust can't be slaked.

Many of us have been haranguing on the subject of corporatism since the dawn of the primaries, as you well know, but mounting evidence brings no real satisfaction.

Basically, nobody can really get anywhere NEAR the Presidency without being tacitly approved by our corporate overlords, and that's just the way it is. Still, we don't have to just stand idly by and keen pathetically that at least he's not McCain; we can do what we can to influence.

Remember the achilles' heel of the ultra-moderate: they need to be loved by everyone, and that means THOSE OF US TO THE LEFT, TOO.

[Armstead]

76. I had hoped he'd realize in the election who brlought him to the dance....

He may have lined up corporate donations, but much of his support and voted came from progressives who did not want another Clinton in the White House, as well as "swing voters" who wanted a change.

They didn't want to be told YET AGAIN that change would have to come "in the future." And m anyu of us weren't supporting a sequal with the same cast of characters as the 90's.

[FrenchieCat]

79. You talk as if you represent a large group of folks.....when you speak for yourself.. perhaps a few

others (your followers and such).....
But Hell, I brought him to the dance too, along with millions,
and he is mopping up the shit just fine for now, and I'm not the only
one who thinks that.


He might fail your particular white glove test,
but you ain't the only one standing in that line....
so what you say ain't the concensus.....like you imply. :eyes:

[Armstead]

86. Time will tell

I don't have a "white glove test."

But I do get a little tired of seeing the same movie being replayed yet again. A lot of other people do too.

Mopping up the shit implies more than passing health care "reform" that may well put many people in a worse position than before it. Forcing people to buy private insurance, and allowing the ConservaDems to neuter any public option, while Big Insurance is given the gift of a captive market.

As I wrote before, I would like to be proven wrong, and see Obama stand up against the oligarchs and also recognize that the Republicans are never going to give him any slack.

[Hutzpa]

91. Why don't you try grabbing

a mop and help mopping the mess, instead of pointing a missing spot.

[Armstead]

163. You are parroting a familiar old line

How do you know I'm not also doing my share of mopping in the real world?

This is a message board, not the janitor's closet.

[FrenchieCat]

92. Politics is a long term situation......

and the movie that you are watching hasn't only had this President starring in it for a very short while...and he's had a lot to do, and more to come.

I just think the harshness that this president is being judged is what is tiring....

Kind of like, I put you in, and I'll take your ass out...
which makes you a White(purity) Glove tester, as depicted here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=258x8066

[bvar22]

89. !

Birds of a Feather.

From the DLC Front Page.

[Hutzpa]

93. Where did you get that from??

people like you are the ones responsible for arming the other side. I went to the site
and did not find that image of yours, project much.....:banghead:

:wtf:

[bvar22]

97. Here it is.

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85

It WAS on the front page shortly after Obama picked his cabinet.
Guess it is old news now.

Now what is this about ME "arming the other side"?
You find it tough facing the TRUTH?
.
.
.
.
.
Apology accepted.

[Hutzpa]

102. You took an out dated

web page just to prove your innuendo about Obama, you should be so
proud.

[bvar22]

150. Oh?

Enlighten me.

What is "outdated".
Are these NOT the very same people that Obama chose as his team?

Does every single person STILL occupy the office Obama appointed them to?
This graphic is as valid as the day it was posted by the DLC on their website.


It IS the TRUTH.
It is NOT some vague "innuendo".
What is NOT TRUE about this graphic.

You are obviously troubled by this information, and have tried your best to first dispute it, and then to marginalize it.
You have even accused me of "arming the other side" with this information.
"people like you are the ones responsible for arming the other side."

What do you find so disturbing about this "information"?

How does this valid information "arm the other side"?

Should we try to cover this up somehow?

[Armstead]

164. The page may be outdated, but the people pictured are still there

[Beacool]

96. This was such a fun read!!!

Nothing like watching heads explode.

:popcorn:




:7

[NYC_SKP]

99. Funny how it managed to offend supporters of TWO popular Democratic presidents.

And, to some extent, bring opposite sides together, sort of, eh?

:hi:

[Beacool]

104. Hi, Pooch!!!

How's life?

:hi:

[NYC_SKP]

105. We be chillin'

Keeping a low profile, taking care of mom and pop.

And Ginny.

:P

[Beacool]

106. Me too!!

Tonight I went with friends to Trinity Church (remember the church on Wall St. where Hamilton is buried). They had a showing of the silent film version of Phantom of the Opera. The church is beautiful and the organ is magnificent. It was a lot of fun!!!

:D

[NYC_SKP]

107. I know that little church, not far from the NY Federal Reserve.

Didn't know they showed film, but then I haven't been back to NYC in a while.

Cool!

[Beacool]

108. It's the one right by Wall St.

It's an Episcopal church and must have a large endowment because it's very well appointed. Thank goodness it wasn't damaged on 9/11. They also had punch with rum (for the adults) because Hamilton was born in St. Croix. Walking around the churchyard at night with kids running thought the tombstones was also fun.......and spooky.

:scared:

[Armstead]

165. "I'm a uniter"

[ProleNoMore]

100. Armstead, I Agree Completely!

eom

[Life Long Dem]

101. Just because someone bails out corporate banks doesn't make them a corporate president.

The alternative would have really screwed the country up. No loans and nothing going out I think we would have seen a depression. But as it turns out we are not even in a recession right now. Compare Bush's eight year recession against Obama's nine months in turning this around. And your blind if you missed the nightmare the Bush administration threw at us with the housing bubble. Hello... earth to somewhere far far away! Hello! Is anyone out there? :spray:
:popcorn:

Yeah, sit there and eat your popcorn all you want and ignore reality all you want, but the facts speak for themselves.

[Armstead]

167. The Bush administration had a lot of help from the Clinton administration

And Obama is turning to the same braintrust that opened the floodgates to globalized outsourcing, deregulation, welfare deform and so many other wonderful things.

Yes Obama faced an emergency when he came in. But I'd hold the champaigne until we have a REAL recovery. And I wouldn't celebrate the profits of Wall St. until we sgtart some heavy reregulation, breaking up of these monopolistic bloodsucking megaBanks, and otehr policies that will help the middle class and the poor rather than creatinbg the same illusory bubble we saw in the 90's.

[bertman]

103. My rec didn't even register a positive. Seems like there are some folks here who don't

like what you're saying, Armstead. I think you've got it just about right.

The difference this time could be We The People. Let's hope that's the case.

[ProleNoMore]

172. It Would Appear That Many At DU Do Not Like Criticism Of The President

eom

[bertman]

180. If you've been lurking long (I say that because you only have 41 posts) you know that it

does not go over well when folks perceive that there is UNFAIR criticism of President Obama. The sticking point seems to be what is FAIR versus UNFAIR. But in the style of true Democrats we are a contentious and highly demanding bunch. Not to mention very highly attuned to whether we are seeing REAL progress or that stuff they call "incremental progress" which means it sounds like progress and THEY say it's progress, but it's really more like the illusion of progress.

A belated WELCOME to DU, ProleNoMore.

[ProleNoMore]

184. Fair Vs Unfair Criticism? - Best Be Quiet Then

eom

[dolphindance]

113. How about this. Obama is Bill Clinton - a President of all the people. Not just Dems.

In 4 years we are going to look back now and wonder what some were so angry about.

[Armstead]

168. I hope I can look b ack four years from now and say I am wrong as hell about Obama

But I wouldn't put Bill Clinton's policies and their effects up as the template for future success. He was a good guy, but his policies had a large part in wrecking the economy in the long run.

[CTLawGuy]

114. your thread is all insults and speculation

with no analysis to back it up.

The Weekly World News has more substance than this.

[Mimosa]

115. Why can't I recommend this?

I am very disappointed in Obama.

[dmallind]

120. Oh I fear those horrible days of budget surpluses and

[Armstead]

169. deregulation of Wall St. and outspourcing and....

all of the wonderful things that made Bush's abilitry to put the nails in the coffin much easier.

To effectively analyze history, you have to look at the aftermath of things, not just what it felt like at the time. Clinton presided over policies that helped to undermine the middle class, throw the poor to the wolves, and siphon wealth and power up to the oligarchs at the top.

[BklnDem75]

121. Thanks for you concern, FRiend

Pure crap, of course, but at least you're not in full panic like last week. I so enjoy this new form of 'constructive criticism.' :boring:

[bread_and_roses]

122. I hit the jackpot - my rec took it to + 1

I usually stay away from this forum, but once in a while it serves my daily increasing conviction that the political process in this country has lost any ability it ever had to effect change. Have been working hard local/state/congressional races for past ten years to get "good" Ds into office....wasted time.

[Yavin4]

123. For The Obama Bashers On This Thread

Don't fret. In 3 years, America will elect the Kucinich/Nader ticket. On inauguration day, they will sign into law single-payer national healthcare, give us all free college education, bring RICO charges against Goldman Sachs, push the top tax rate to 95%, and immediately bring all of the troops home from Afghanistan and Iraq. Then, on the next day, they will give us all ponies.

As for the Republicans, they will be so awed at the intellect and the intelligence of the Kucinich/Nader administration that they will go on TV and beg America for forgiveness of their ways.

So, just hang in there for three more years.

[bread_and_roses]

143. You know, that "ponies" slur is just about on the level of kids at the "My Little Pony" stage

One would think you lot would get tired of it after a while and come up with something else trite. Rainbows? Butterflies? To make a bad pun, it's become a "one-trick pony." And no matter how many times you say it, it's still meaningless. People like me who've been slogging away in local politics for years are not exactly naive. I had no exagerated expectations of Obama. But alas, he's fallen short of even those. The irony is that even those of you who's only criteria is getting a D in office are going to suffer politically for it. The Ds have taken the greatest swell of support in at least a generation and squandered it. Take a good look at Congress's approval ratings. That's not even smart politically. The paens here remind me of someone here years ago praising that quisling Lieberman for supporting bicycle paths. As if that could weigh against his war-mongering corporatism. There's substance, as in money and militarism, and then there are the holiday decorations. Some of you could do well to study the difference.

[Yavin4]

156. Let Me Tell You My Expectations

I live in the U.S., not Europe, not Canada, not Japan. My country has been dominated for 30+ years of Reaganism, tax cuts for the rich, expansion of the military, and during the Bush years, military aggression against nations that never attacked us. If McCain was elected, his cabinet would have been comprised of the folks that wanted to go to war in Iran, and by 2010, we would have been at war in Iran.

So, my primary expectation for Obama was that he would keep us out of another war in Iran. That reason alone accounted for 85% of my vote for him. IOW, in a country whose political environment is hostile to progressive politics and governing, I didn't expect all that much from him.

So far, Obama has delivered far more than what I have expected. We're on the verge of having major healthcare reform, and yes, it's far from perfect, but it is a first step toward reversing years of Reaganism and hopefully it will begin to turn the tide against progressives in this country.


Alas, what is the point of having a reasoned debate with someone like you. You live in DU fantasy world where all of America wants single payer and immediate withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Armstead]

170. 30 plus years of Reaganism that included 8 years of Clinton/Reaganism

You can slam people who hope for something better if you want.

But your brand of dead-end cynicism is what helped perpetuate the results of Reaganism.

Perhaps if you supported those who are asking more from our leadership,instead of tossing your cute sarcasm at those who still believe change is possible, we would not now be in a situation where your expectations have to be so low.

[AllentownJake]

147. I swear the dismissive attitude of the cheerleading class

and their outright arrogance hurts this guy more than his own actions.

[Yavin4]

155. And Nothing Would Give You More Joy Than To See Him Fail

You've been on Obama from day one. Obama has gone from being a long shot for the presidency to getting closer than any other modern president to enact real health care reform.

Obama is a progressive operating in a political environment that's outright hostile to progressives, so he has to make compromises in order to get anything accomplished.

But, that's okay. I'm sure Dennis Kucinich can win in a 50 state landslide which enable him to enact his entire political agenda.

[AllentownJake]

157. I was a team leader in the primary and general election

Why don't you do a look at my posts from March/April/June 2008.

Some of you guys make assumptions that are outright idiotic.

I probably put more hours than 95% of the cheerleader types to get this guy elected.

Do you want to see my TV appearence from March of 09 defending the President?

[shotten99]

127. Obama is Bill Clinton?! Thank God

Could you imagine Obama = Bush, Big or Small?

[phleshdef]

130. You don't even know what the word "corporate" means.

[olegramps]

133. Obama should have passed on this one.

The disaster that he inherited and his attempts to right the ship will never satisfy those that don't grasp the magnanimity of the situation.

The situation that the nation is in took years of unrestrained capitalistic greed to achieve. Virtually ever thing that ails the nation, including our international entanglements, was the product of greed by an increasingly more and more powerful oligarchy that is controlled by the wealthiest 1% of the population.

Indeed we have a representative form of government. The problem is that they only represent the wealthiest of our citizens interest. That the average working class citizen has representation is only a pathetic illusion. If at best they are only pawns as easily demonstrated by their manipulation to back issues that are self destructive. You only have to witness the tea-bagging idiots to demonstrate this fact or the working class who drank the managements' cool aid that unions were their enemy and that management would take good care of them. They took care of them all right; out-sourced their jobs, cut their pensions and canceled their health insurance. The will be lucky to be cutting the CEO's grass and their wives washing their toilets for stavation wages.

[Yavin4]

158. Reversing 30 Years of Reganism Is Going To Take More Than One Obama

administration, and probably even two.

[Armstead]

171. I think the word is magnitude -- And i grasp it and agree with your assessment

That's why I am disappointed that Obama has not been willing to take the bull by the horns and lead.

[vaberella]

187. Do you see the statement by the post you responded too...?!

You just agreed that Obama should have left healthcare alone and have done what republicans have done for so long. Does that make any sense and then you call for Obama to have grasped the "bull by the horns and lead."

You have been doing this kind of crap on the board for a while. Your statements are even contradictory. I have stated that Obama has led, people here just don't like the way he did it. Everything Obama has asked for he got, he stated very clearly that if everything he doesn't want, including the PO, are not included in the bill----HE WILL NOT SIGN IT. How is that not leading?!

Secondly, he made it a point to have Congress do the job they were meant to do. They are the ones who should be writing legislation and passing it to him. He went and campaigned on healthcare reform while still President because he was leading. Don't sit there and say he doesn't lead. I'm fuckin' tired of listening to you and so many others proclaim from the rooftop something that is wholly incorrect. He campaigned for it and worked for legislation it and he's getting a good portion. Even Rockefeller, and Weiner, and everyone who has talked about it has said that Obama is in EVERY SINGLE MEETING. How in the hell is he not leading?!

You keep pushing the wrong meme over and over again to in some way marginalize what he is doing. One bill didn't have the public option and that was Baucus. People claim that Pelosi's bill doesn't offer anything. I, someone who has not had health insurance for about 8 years would get it January 1, 2010. So yeah...there is something being done and Obama is leading.


Why don't you bloody well target the serious problem?! Why aren't you screaming from the rooftops that the conservadems AND bluedogs are fucking the system. Anyone who looks at this situation logically realises that Obama is not failing, but those in Congress are and they are the real damn problem. Even the OP you responded too was saying something similar. But you keep pushing on the same bloody meme of Obama this or that.

This is why we will fail in health care, because people don't know what the problem is. It's like a sick patient coming in who is bleeding from the leg and you prescribe them cancer medications. You don't make sense and your targeting the wrong bloody player in all of this.

Your post definitely tells me what your about.

[treestar]

135. Clinton turned the deficit around and there was a good economy

Most people are happy with that at this point. We're still recovering from the 80s and Raygunism. Too many right wingers.

[Yavin4]

159. And He Sacrificed His Majorities in Congress To Do It

Clinton wanted to do a stimulus in 1993, but he was talked out of it by Greenspan. Instead, Clinton was talked into balancing the budget by raising taxes and cutting spending.

In 2001, Greenspan went back on his word and allowed Bush to return the budget back to deficits by publicly approving Bush's tax cuts.

[Armstead]

173. A good economy is assessed largely by its aftermath

Clinton presided over a bubble economy -- bubbles in technology, bubbles in housing, bubbles on Wall St.

Had he been a real leader he would not have pushed for neo-liberal corporatist "free trade" policies that had a large part in hollowing out the employment base for the working and middle classes. Had he been a real leader he would NOT have supported the deregulation of the financial sector.

had he been a freal leader, W would have had a much more difficult time putting the final nails in the coffin that Reagan/Bush/Clinton built for us.

[mkultra]

146. Thank god for the corporate bailouts

I like jobs

[RBInMaine]

148. Oh what hogwash. Go vote for Nader, and enjoy all your wasted time.

[Armstead]

175. I hate Nader and what he did -- But that doen't mean I should hop on the DLC Gravy Train either

[brentspeak]

151. That's pretty much it

[earth mom]

152. No argument from me. K & R, not that it helps here in GD-P la la land. nt

[Cha]

153. This is the Presidential Forum of DU.

[mayya]

160. they both love Big Pharma and the FDA

Big Pharma (along with its puppet, the FDA) owns all the politicians.

[vaberella]

161. IBtL: I think you started this thread because you wanted to start drama on this board. n/t

[Armstead]

176. I was venting....Call tha drama if you like

[vaberella]

178. You've been "venting" for days now. n/t

[Armstead]

179. weeks

[vaberella]

188. Even worse...you like stirring up shit to start trouble. n/t

[smalll]

174. "... occasional TOKEN BONES" ????

That's a blatant redunancy. When you throw someone a bone, it is, by the nature of the idiom, something that's a "token" already. I'm going to have to cite you for RWF -- Redunant While Flaming.

[Armstead]

177. I meant a bone shaped like a token...Or a token shaped like a bone

[BootinUp]

186. He did praise Clintons efforts in his book I hear

but the policies of our government are formed by more than just the office of the President. Obama is doing pretty much what he said he would as far as I can tell. No surprises here.

[Honeycombe8]

191. Dennis? Is that you? nt

[Deja Q]

193. Well, the 1990s were prosperous under Clinton and the budget was balanced...

So it can't be all THAT bad...

[Justitia]

194. FFS - What a raft of shit.