Maybe we should just give it all back to the Republicans ??

[kentuck]

Yeah, that's the ticket!

They did such a fantastic job the last time they were in power. They fucked up everything. Big time.

We still need to stop these wars. We still need to shut down Guantanamo. We still need to put regulations on the big banks and Wall Street. We still need to bring the huge Republican debt under control.

Where does it end if the Republicans win the next election? Do the American people not see the gamble they are taking? They hate government. Therefore, they cannot govern.

[FLAprogressive]

1. the Republicans will win because we have failed to stop ther wars or close down Gitmo in a timely

fashion. The Republicans will win because we have failed to deliver REAL banking reform.

This is what Americans elected Democrats to do.

[kentuck]

2. In the first year?

Or are the people just a little bit more patient?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[Sherman A1]

4. Seems a bit harsh...

He gets 4 years no matter what we say, but some of us are a little disappointed in the direction and pace of things.

Because someone posts an opinion on their viewpoint doesn't seem to require name calling.

[Skidmore]

5. There's "a little disappointed" and then there's

the "let's kneecap the sucker." Frankly, I'm seeing more of the latter here now and I don't like it.

[nofurylike]

7. very well said, Skidmore. very telling difference. thank you. nt

[tavalon]

16. We are the vanguard here

If we are done with the duplicity, the rest of the country will also be done in about 6 more months. We're seeing the audacity but not so much of the hoped for change.

That is a tired old bone you're chewing on there. We had an awe inspiring candidate who turned out to be a lousy leader. And that we can tell in a years time.

[Hannah Bell]

6. WHERE IS THE ROLLBACK OF BUSH-ERA POLICY?

[eridani]

8. That's what this health care bill will do if passed.

Unless the Repukes ramp up Teh Crazy to unprecedented heights.

[jgraz]

9. Wait... isn't that what Obama is doing?

:shrug:

[Skidmore]

10. NO! That's what your CONGRESS critters are doing. CONGRESS

writes the laws. NO PRESIDENT has 100% control over what CONGRESS does. Not a single one of them. You can thank your Republican obstructionists aided by corrupt Democratic Party obstructionists and factor in a lot of poor strategy, like taking the PO off the table very early. This is one case of having too many cooks in the kitchen having a food fight while one person is expected to deliver a five-star meal. That is just plain stupid to set up an expectation for one person to pull this off.

[jgraz]

11. So... Congress cut secret deals with the drug lobby and then worked to kill reimportation?

That's amazing... :wow:

[Skidmore]

12. How about CONGRESS writes the laws.

[jgraz]

13. So why is Obama NOW saying he's going to work on the final bill with Congress?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/23/obama-health-care-merge-senate-house_n_402682.html

If Congress writes the laws, what is Obama doing helping them merge the two bills? Did the Constitution get amended overnight? :shrug:

[Skidmore]

15. Have you ever worked on policy development with a large group of

people? I have. It isn't as cut and dried or as easy as you think. Congress did their thing. Now it is time to it out. That is our process, like it or not. Sometimes I can be really idealistic in my expectations but I'm alway brought back by what I know to be true of the process. Now if you don't like the outcome now, change the people who are representing you in Congress because, like it or not, they have the constituional responsibility for crafting the law.

[jgraz]

17. You haven't answered the question

If Obama was powerless to do anything about the Healthcare Bill, how is it that he can now participate in the legislative process? Is he lying now? Or was he needlessly hands-off for the past six months? Those are really the only two choices.

[Skidmore]

18. I did answer the question.

This bill is the product of a specific process and the President isn't the sole player, and neither is the Democratic Party. Perhaps you need to start reading about that process.

[jgraz]

21. For months, the excuse has been that Obama can't get involved since Congress writes the laws

Was that excuse bogus? Or did the "process" suddenly change?

I recall Clinton being involved from the beginning in drafting laws that screwed the middle class. Bush rode Congress like a cheap mule when he wanted Medicare Part D passed.

The fact is that Obama's newfound engagement blows your months-old talking point out of the water. He never intended to deliver what he campaigned on, so he set up Congress (and specifically Lieberman) as the fall guy for his own failure.

[iceman66]

24. He is not powerless, but there are limits to his power.

Obama has to WORK WITH Congress to get a bill passed. He cannot DICTATE TO Congress what he wants and expect them to pass a bill.

Why is this so difficult to understand?

[jgraz]

25. How convenient

Now, Obama is actively working on writing the legislation. Before, the excuse was that he had to let Congress write the bill. How does this not come down to one simple fact: that Obama chose to take a hands-off approach up to this point?

[Skidmore]

29. Are you always so obtuse?

[jgraz]

32. If "obtuse" means I wasn't snowed by your sketchy explanation, then I'm happy to be obtuse.

On the other hand, if you'd like to deal with any of the holes I poked in your excusapalooza, go right ahead.

[iceman66]

26. The ugly truth is

that the concessions to the drug lobby were necessary to get enough votes to get a bill passed.

He has already said he will support reimportation in some form, although that is hardly a viable solution to the problem of outrageous prices being charged for prescription drugs in THIS country.

I don't think you can fault Obama for being pragmatic here. He did what he had to do to get the best bill possible through Congress. It doesn't include everything that we, or he, wanted but its a start.

All you naysayers would essentially have us believe that you have better political instincts than the President. If you truly think you could do a better job, why not run for office yourself?

[jgraz]

31. Oh really?

When Obama cut his deals with Big Phrma, there wasn't a single word written on a healthcare bill. Which votes did Obama secure with that capitulation?

Obama has *said* he supports reimportation, just as he *said* he wouldn't sign a bill without a public option. In fact, Obama has actively worked against reimportation legislation, as evidenced by the White House's frantic efforts to kill the Dorgan amendment.


All you naysayers would essentially have us believe that you have better political instincts than the President. If you truly think you could do a better job, why not run for office yourself?

Ah, this is a favorite one of the Obamapologists. I'd never pretend to have better political instincts than a slick operator like Obama. What I do have is a commitment to principles and an affinity for working people that I think he lacks. Given that, I think many, many people would have done a better job this year than Obama did, especially considering the once-in-a-lifetime opportunities that the Bush disaster presented.

Obama pretended that he was that guy: a populist, a big thinker, a revolutionary. What we got instead was another Clintonian corporate incrementalist, complete with a new set of ready-made excuses for why he's not doing the job he was elected to do. What an incredible disappointment.

[iceman66]

33. I challenge you to name ONE viable candidate for President last year

that you can seriously argue would be doing a better job than Obama.

There aren't any!

The ONLY other real choice we were given was Hillary, and she would obviously be even more of a "Clintonian corporate incrementalist" than he is.

I, for one, would rather have a pragmatic incrementalist who actually gets stuff done and moves the country in the right direction, even if it is only baby steps, than a rigid idealist that accomplishes nothing at all. That's exactly what we would have gotten if, for instance, someone like Kucinich had been elected.

[jgraz]

40. Wow, changing the subject AND moving the goalposts. Nicely done.

I didn't say we were picking from last year's primary candidates, let alone the last two surviving candidates. However, if you force me to restrict my choices, I'd have to pick...

This guy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZG8Zq8V54k

Too bad he never showed up.

[tavalon]

14. I can see the bumpersticker now:

Vote Democratic Because We Aren't As Bad As The Other Guys.

See the problem? A little spine, a little spunk and even, egads, a little integrity and they would have us eating out of their hands.

[cowcommander]

19. That same bullshit is what got the republicans where they are today

It didn't work for them, and it won't work with the democrats either. The whole political process is starting to look like one bad movie in pepetual loop.

[tavalon]

23. The thing is, it has worked for them for a long time

They take us for granted because, honestly, where else are we going to go? It's a quandary. A quandary that looks to be an electoral bloodbath come the midterms.

[iceman66]

28. The solution is to elect more Democrats, and more liberal Democrats.

That will gradually push the party, and the country, to the left and eventually even Republicans will have to adopt more moderate positions in order to win elections.

This is not going to happen overnight. It may take a generation or more.

The solution is most assuredly NOT to throw your hands up in frustration and give up because you didn't get everything you wanted in Obama's FIRST YEAR.

[tavalon]

34. I'm well aware of that

I'm not giving up. I'm not one of the people saying I won't vote. I will send my money to appropriate primary challengers and DFA. None of my money or my time will be going to the DSCC or to OFA.

[iceman66]

27. You vastly understate the difference between the two parties.

In this case, "aren't as bad" means quite a lot.

The Democrats are, to a degree, corrupt and incompetent, but for the most part their hearts are in the right place.

In contrast, the Republicans are essentially a criminal organization. If they ever regain the level of power that they had during the Bush years, they will bleed this country dry.

[malaise]

20. K & Rec

Happy Holidays Kentuck.
I'm celebrating the passing of the bill despite its weaknesses. Fugging history is taking place now. :toast:

[Political Heretic]

22. There are worse things than republican rule.

What I think is worse than republican rule is dragging on the corrupt status quo of business as usual with a slightly softer touch.

I don't want republicans to be elected - but I'm not afraid to vote for persons of principle and refuse to vote for persons without principle just because a rebulican "might" win. Sometimes I think it would almost be better for republicans to win, just because it would shake people out of their complacency.

Right now, and it makes me truly sad to say this, it feels like the Democratic Party is just choosing to run our country into the ground slowly while the Republican Party chooses to run our country into the ground rapidly. To me, both those options feels unacceptable. Either the Democratic party needs a massive revolution within its leadership and candidates or it's part of the problem - not the solution.

I post here because DU graciously lets me and because its been my online political community for a long time, long before I ever registered and made my first timid post (yes timid - oh how times have changed!) But I feel like the national democratic party has completely let down poor and working class Americans, and I'm ashamed of the party at present.

[FrenchieCat]

30. Then you are a Republican!

If after 8 years, you can say what you say, then you are a lost soul, without compassion in your heart. This ain't an intellectual excercise......

You should be ashamed....

of yourself.

[Political Heretic]

36. What is truly souless is to believe that any part of our national political system

has anything to do with compassion for ordinary Americans right now. It's clear that right now one party will kill ya slowly, the other will do it quicker.

That has to change. But it won't change but just voting "any D at any cost." The era of that mindset is coming to an end, and I think you feel it slipping away, which is why you adopted such a fevered pitch in desperate advocacy of the status quo.

There's nothing compassionate about supporting these democrats and what they are doing right now. If anything has become crystal clear it is that poor and working class Americans are cheaply exploited by the national Democratic party for cheep political points. The are currently paying lip-service to "ordinary Americans" in their campaigns and then setting their legislative agenda almost exclusively by the wants and whims of the financial elite.

Today's Democrats are trickle-down Democrats, and it is disgusting and devoid compassionate. The theory is that if you bend to the interests of the powerful, then some benefits will "trickle-down" to poor and working class individuals and families, who can lick the crumbs of the carpet under the table supporting the feast for the rich.

So I'm not sure which is more disgusting - that or the people who openly say "screw the poor." Either run is going to lead you to the same place - running the country into the ground.

[Tim01]

35. I agree.

Unfortunately, I think it is the corporations who are in charge now.Republican, democrat, doesn't matter much. And they are getting better at it all the time.
You almost have to work for a big corporation now in order to get good health insurance. They are the only ones making enough money to be able to afford it. The middle class is running out of options and the corporations control those options. That almost makes people slaves to the corporations.

[stillwaiting]

37. If that happens it is NOT the voters fault.

The Democrats have given us little to nothing to believe in after seriously getting our hopes and dreams up.

It's absolutely horrible and terrifying where we are and might go in the future. And it's NOT the Dem voters fault. Zero leadership pushing for progressive legislation that would lead to real change.

[Libertas1776]

38. And all that is going to change under Dems...

HOW exactly? :shrug:

[Wardoc]

39. And what is the point of "our" party winning if they keep behaving the same, only in our name? (nt)