Obama is the furthest-left President

[Jackpine Radical]

that the corporations feel comfortable letting us have.

Everything else proceeds from that.

[yurbud]

1. yep--even Edwards was considered too radical--and he worked for a hedge fund

[cascadiance]

35. I still wonder if Edwards' candidacy was intentional and that they KNEW of his affair earlier!

And THAT is why they *allowed* him to be one of the "top three" left. If they figured those progressives like me would gravitate to him as the one candidate that would have a shot at contending with Hillary or Obama, they promoted him and then at the last minute dropped the bomb once they figured that others like Dennis had no shot then, ensuring that the final battle was between the two corporate friendly candidates. Had Edwards had to drop out far earlier, I still wonder how far DK might have gone! I certainly would have moved towards him then.

I wonder if Edwards knew they knew too earlier if they did know! (that was a mouthful!)

[blm]

50. In 2003-4, Edwards and Lieberman were the supposed preferences of Al From and other DLC hierarchy.

But then, DLC was really just laying in wait for Hillary2008.

[tonysam]

55. Sure Edwards was. Sure. n/t

[blm]

58. He was. Were you asleep in 2003?

Here's some reminders of a time BEFORE Edwards moved left to gain a base.


http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/jim/2003/11/18

>>>>>>>>>
"The division in the party over Dean is less about ideology than about power. Three years after Bill Clinton left office, he and Hillary still control what remains of a Democratic establishment. Terry McAuliffe, the chairman of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), was installed by Clinton. Most of the powerful new fund-raising groups, known as 527s, and the new think tanks, such as the Center for American Progress, are run by the best and brightest of the Clinton administration. As "National Journal" noted in a detailed look at what it called "Hillary Inc.," the senator's network of fund-raising organizations "has begun to assume a quasi-party status." And some of the best Clinton talent is heavily invested in non-Dean campaigns, especially Joe Lieberman's (Mandy Grunwald and Mark Penn), John Edwards's (Bruce Reed), and Wesley Clark's (Bruce Lindsey, Eli Segal, and Mickey Kantor).
>>>>>>

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x392978#393143

<<It is no coincidence that Edwards sought a centrist solution: Bruce Reed, head of the Democratic Leadership Council and former Clinton aide, helped write the plan, while Wendy Button, who recently left the staff of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), wrote his speech. Edwards, who talks to Bill Clinton frequently about his speeches and political strategy, is clearly emulating the former president in both style and substance. The health care proposal fits nicely into that "New Democrat" mold, said Reed. "And if we are going to enact a health care plan, it has to be one we can afford." >>

[Warpy]

2. Exactly, and there's a gap between his rhetoric and his practice

that has existed since he was elected to the Senate.

The PTB only allow change when they are afraid enough of the rabble to fear for their comfortable existence.

[Mari333]

3. knr.

[arcadian]

4. Yup, center-right is the furthest left we're aloud to go as a country.

[tridim]

5. Do you think these corporations like that he just nullified thousands of corporate lobbyists?

Or has that story already been spun into a negative?

It's difficult to keep track because most good news is ignored on DU these days.

[arcadian]

6. Easily undone under the next reich-wing administration

Which is looking like a reality for 2012.

[tridim]

9. So Obama is responsible for all past, present and future events?

Check.

I just asked why good news is ignored on DU, and there's the "reasoning". :eyes:

[TheWraith]

13. Reasoning doesn't come into it.

They just don't know what to do with themselves if they're not bashing the White House and the government, so they need to make shit up to fit their viewpoint. DU increasingly annoys me these days. So what if not everything is cleaned up yet--WE FUCKING WON, and we've gotten more progress accomplished in the last 10 months than in probably 15 years before that. Sheesh.

[arcadian]

24. ...

[SIMPLYB1980]

32. ...

[TheWraith]

53. Thank you for throwing another tankard of bullshit into the debate.

The freepers thank you for the assist in trashing the President.

[wolfgangmo]

27. Maybe...

And even if I was granting your point that we have made more progressive progress in the last 10 months than in 15 years before that, then it is a matter of perspective.

I am looking at just how far to the right this country has swung since in the past 4 decades and think that Obama will need to steer hard port for a LONG time to get this ship back on course.

[arcadian]

17. I'm saying it was an empty gesture.

It has no teeth. It's not good news, bwecause as I stated in the three years the next Republican will simply undo it and probably worse.

[tridim]

23. Spin spin spin!

[jgraz]

18. Funny how he'll use an executive order to ban lobbyists, but gay rights needs an act of Congress.

And, of course, he banned ALL lobbyists, not just the corporate whores. The Sierra Club and the ACLU also lost their voice on these committees (assuming they even had one to start with).

[tridim]

21. He didn't ban the panels, he banned lobbyists sitting on the panels.

Progressive groups will still have a voice.

Keep on spinning!

[jgraz]

25. Yes, and the Sierra Club has *lobbyists*

That's how they get a voice in legislation. What kind of progressives do you think will be allowed on the panel now?

[tridim]

34. Non-lobbyist progressives will still sit on these panels.

And progressive lobbyists will still be able to lobby their representatives. It is real reform and designed to weed out the corporate lobbyists working to destroy America for money.

It is GOOD NEWS.

[jgraz]

39. As will non-lobbyist corporate drones

Where's the win?

[tridim]

42. Just like left-groups, they will have lobbyist-free panels now.

That's good news.

[JoeyT]

56. And lobbyists will keep on lobbying.

They aren't prevented from lobbying, just from sitting on the panels.
So they still own your representatives. They just can't do it quite as openly anymore.
"Hey, you guys at least try to hide it, you're making us look bad." shouldn't be progress.
The fact that it is progress just shows how far we've fallen.

[MrsCorleone]

57. Just curious, why would you want only half measures on gay rights?

Without solid legislation, a future conservative in the WH could simply strip those rights away.

We're talking about human beings here. What happened in CA last year was devastating to so many. He understands the problem. I say we let him do it right and not half assed.

[Life Long Dem]

36. Huh?

2012? This is a war time President. :patriot:

[SIMPLYB1980]

16. Doesn't matter they just need a reason to

justify why that all haven't gotten their ponies yet.

[tridim]

19. This isn't about ponies any more..

It's about ignoring reality to justify bashing the President.

I expect this from Faux News, but not from smart DUers.

[arcadian]

28. Here it is.

Everybody who doesn't agree with Obama's war policies is a right winger. That's pretty lazy.

[SIMPLYB1980]

29. Where have you been since June?

This same group of posters have been doing the same thing for a long time. This is nothing new. I expect it from DU on a daily basis. And I do believe that this is people upset because they deluded themselves into believing Obama was something other than what he told us he was. In my book that makes it all about ponies and the ones leading the heard are the DK people who are still upset he only got about 4% of the primary votes, and feel that he was pushed out.

[snooper2]

47. and at least a third of them are still bitter...

nt

[saracat]

48. But ignoring reality to praise the President whether warranted or not is acceptable?

Some here have literally turned themselves into pretzels justifying certain WH actions unacceptable to liberals. Praise should be given when warranted and not continuously no matter what the circumstances.

[jgraz]

26. Can you please retire that ridiculous talking point?

At this point, it makes you look like a mindless Obama-worshipping bot. Just a little original thought, that's all we ask.

[SIMPLYB1980]

30. When you retire all of yours.

What's the matter like to dish it out but not take it? See how far that gets you.:rofl:

[jgraz]

31. I don't use talking points. I have an actual brain.

You should look into it.

[jgraz]

40. *Jeopardy Theme* while SIMPLY desperately searches for a post where I use a talking point.

:rofl:

[SIMPLYB1980]

44. Not even going to waste my time.

:popcorn:

[MessiahRp]

54. Is this before or after he chose to allow them to win the Health Care Debate with their cash?

Seems too little too late on the most important of issues.

Rp

[redqueen]

7. Most people are perfectly capable of educating themselves about alternatives.

I won't blame anyone but the electorate for only supporting candidates who are 'strong on national security'.

[guitar man]

8. Exactly

no matter what promises you make on the campaign trail - blah, blah, blah - when you win, you go into this smoky room with the twelve industrialist, capitalist scumfucks that got you in there, and this little screen comes down... and it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before, which looks suspiciously off the grassy knoll.... And then the screen comes up, the lights come on, and they say to the new president, 'Any questions?'

I think the above quote from Bill Hicks speaks volumes about out current state of affairs :(

[BeFree]

22. heh

What about those two allowed into the White House?

Is that a message, or just a mistake?

[Echo In Light]

10. The best "democracy" money can buy

[Mari333]

11. knr on your post pic!!!

[inna]

12. Obama is anything but left.

He is center-right, at best.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

14. k&r!!!

[Doc_Technical]

15. Richard Nixon was our last "liberal" President.

EPA, OSHA, opening diplomatic relations
with China.
He caught hell from his corporate masters but
he was smart enough to know that sometimes you
have to give a little to maintain the status quo.

[leftstreet]

33. True. He was also a Guaranteed Minimum Income advocate

How times have changed

[H2O Man]

20. I agree 100%

And I do not believe that he would be allowed to move further to the left, without consequence, with the possible exception of if American citizens put enough pressure on him to do so.

[Jackpine Radical]

38. …which leads to the conclusion that we had best keep the pressure up.

It was clear to me from the beginning that we would need to keep his feet to the fire. Between his conciliatory nature and the presence Rahm, Bernanke, Gates and the like in power positions, there could have been little doubt that he would tend too far to the right for the likes of me. To paraphrase someone, you gotta work with the President you have, not with the President you wish you had. There's a whole lot I like about Obama. He's smart and a master strategist, for starters. He at least understands liberal ideals, even if he doesn't always serve them. And, in general, he is not only the furthest-left guy they will let us have, he is capable of being the most effective guy we can get. We just need to give him the old rat-in-the-shuttlebox treatment, making sure the current is turned on on the right side of the floor grid so he spends all his time over on the left side.

[H2O Man]

46. Definitely.

I live in a rural area. This morning, I had to stop in the local hamlet, to get gas so I could drive to a medical appointment. I was surprised to see a poster on the door of the store, which is owned by a very republican family. The poster was an ad for a public presentation that will examine the costs of the war in Afghanistan. It seems to me that a wider range of citizens are becoming more interested/concerned with the direction this country is heading in.

When the people who publicly oppose this war, for example, are viewed as "mainstream," rather than "fringe," the ability to increase pressure on Washington (especially President Obama) reaches an important new stage.

[cascadiance]

37. THE most important move we can make is lobby for a NON-corporate SCOTUS judge

for his next appt. It was encouraging to hear Thom Hartmann say the other day that Sonia Sotomayor hinted in a decision the other day that she'd come down to overrule that. But we need to get five justices on the court that will shut that court clerk/judicial activist notion of "Corporate Personhood" down! And along with that allow for some meaningful public campaign financing to get put in place and shut down the institutionalized bribery that is mistakenly called "campaign financing" that exists now.

Then perhaps we can see if Obama is truly "waiting in the wings" or if he's not got his heart in being the people's president like we hope for.

[Jackpine Radical]

41. Sotomayor is definitely a gift from Obama to the futurte of the nation.

[Orsino]

43. Yeah. He was so far "left" that They couldn't stop him.

So They've subverted him as best they can.

[salguine]

45. "The furthest-left President that the corporations feel comfortable letting us have" essentially

means "corporate centrist".

[Xenotime]

49. Then we need to get the corporations out of the mix..

Time to put more things in control of the state.

[Jackpine Radical]

52. Yes, and to create an environment that is friendly to small business.

We need to greatly broaden our concept of the commons to include communications (including Internet), transportation, and at least some forms of energy.

[glitch]

51. Look at the stunts they pulled and the exposure they risked to make sure Gore or Kerry wouldn't win.

And they aren't even particularly "left" but they are pro-environment and anti-corruption. And that was enough.

[Fire1]

59. True that. n/t