"with Obama, we seem to be getting the best Republican president since Clinton"

[Better Believe It]

President NAFTA Backs President Shafta
by Jeff Cohen
Jeff Cohen is an associate professor of journalism and the director of the Park Center for Independent Media at Ithaca College, founder of the media watch group FAIR, and former board member of Progressive Democrats of America.
December 11, 2010

It was a stunning spectacle yesterday when former President Clinton took the podium from President Obama in the White House briefing room to help shove the Obama-GOP tax deal down the throats of Democratic activists and Congress members.

Meanwhile, independent Bernie Sanders was electrifying much of the country by railing for 8 and ½ hours in the Senate against the wealthy getting billions in tax breaks while deficit-hawks take aim at Social Security and other vital programs.

I'm sure I wasn't the only American fantasizing that one day a fighting independent like Bernie would occupy the White House.

Instead, with Obama, we seem to be getting the best Republican president since . . . well . . . since Clinton.

Read the full article at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/12/11

[OHdem10]

1. Exactly.

[Cant trust em]

2. Well shit, if he's an associate professor of journalism. nt

[notesdev]

3. ehh

Clinton was a better Republican President than Obama

[Pisces]

4. Wow, now Clinton is being denigrated on this blog. What garbage.

Where am I???????

[AndrewP]

34. I agree.

[jaxx]

5. Unrec for calling President Obama a republican.

I'd add another one for calling former President Clinton a repub too if I could.

Bullshit article from the very common commondreams.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[jaxx]

29. That may be your opinion, but 85% of liberals will vote for him again.

The President is a liberal. A Democrat.

[Bluebear]

51. 'The President is a liberal.' - lol

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

58. the President -didnt close Gitmo, didn't give public opt, helped banksters, extd tax cuts for rich

whats progressive about that?

[Hawkowl]

62. Depends what liberal is

I think I understand your reasoning. Obviously if Obama= Liberal, and Obama = scum sucking corporate lackey; then your definition of liberal must be: scum sucking corporate lackey. Therefore 85% of scum sucking corporate lackeys (i.e; liberals) will vote for Obama again.

[MineralMan]

43. That's just nonsense, niceypoo.

And you know it.

[CJCRANE]

6. I think the following is closer to the truth...

The analogy is often used of America as an ocean liner that takes a long time to change direction.

Obama is doing his best to change the direction (by even a few degrees) with the crew he's been given. Half of that crew are always on the verge of mutinying for their own vested interests - he has to try and keep them sweet. That's just the reality of the situation.

(And by crew I would include not just Congress but the MSM, Wall Street, the Pentagon, Big Business etc).

[Better Believe It]

12. How about us being on board the Titanic?

That's an alternative ocean liner analogy.

And President Obama hasn't been "given" this "Wall Street, the Pentagon, Big Business" crew.

He chose it.

[CJCRANE]

17. The crew is America.

Wall Street, the Pentagon, Big Business, the Tea Party etc. are part of America.

[Better Believe It]

22. So are bigots. But, I'm not a member of that "crew" or Wall Street or their apologists.

It's all about class and who actually rules America.

We don't.

[emulatorloo]

18. How about recognizing US GOVT is made up of President/Congress/Supreme Court

It would be convenient if Obama were a dictator, but that's not how it works.

It would have been more convenient if we had won the 2010 election too, because we would have more leverage than we do now against a Robot Army Of Republcans who will NEVER vote for a middle-class only tax cut.

[Better Believe It]

23. The "minority" Republican party seems to have more political pull than the Democratic party

How did that happen with a Democratic House, Democratic Senate and Democratic White House?

Wait, I know!

It is called capitualation and surrender to Republican obstructionism and letting Wall Street and corporate America call the shots!

[emulatorloo]

33. This Senate needed 60 votes for cloture as you well know

Likewise a vote to change that rule mid-session requires 60 votes for cloture.

Which McConnell's army of Robotic Senators was never going to vote for.

Republicans voted as a Robotic Block to deny cloture on practically everything, Anything that might reflect well on Obama or Democrats.

The Senate Dem margins were razor thin and included folks like Liebermann and Nelson

On the other hand, The House had a clear Democratic majority and they put out damn good legislation. But you know how the 2011 election turned out for the House.

I'm sure you are aware of the realities of how the government works. And the political aftermath of 2010.

[Better Believe It]

40. The Senate Democratic majority can change Senate rules at anytime under our Constitution.

Only 51 votes are needed to pass legislation, or 50 with Vice-President Biden casting the tie-breaking vote.

As you should know, the Constitution permits the Senate to make or change their procedural rules at any time, including the "rule" that such changes must be made at the beginning of a Senate session. And under the Constitution and with a ruling from the President of the Senate, Joe Biden, that change can also be made with only 51 votes.

This fact along with the fact that Senate Democrats can end phantom "procedural filibusters" and force "on-the-Senate-floor" Republican filibusters (Senate Democrats did that just this past March. The Republican filibuster was broken in less than 24 hours!) under current Senate rules and can even prevent any kind of filibusters from starting by simply using the Constitutional Option. This has been fully documented many, many times on Democratic Underground.

Do you want me to provide that documentation once again that proves my assertions?

[tblue37]

56. They will probably do so just in time to make sure the Republicans no longer need to collect 60

votes when they take over the Senate in the next election.

Reid should have changed the rules early on, while we still had both houses of congress, and then they could have passed bills that would have made sure voters saw real improvements in their economic situations health care situations. But they liked having the 60-vote impasse rule in place as a convenient excuse so they wouldn't have to make any real changes that might annoy their corporate owners.

[Better Believe It]

44. So 60 votes are needed to end a Senate debate? If that's so, force the Republicans to debate!

Make the Republicans debate against against legislation!

Don't withdaw the bill.

Keep it on the Senate floor until 60 votes are obtained to end the debate.

Don't let other legislation be on the Senate floor using Reid's "two-track" procedure until the Republican filibuster is broken!

It took less than 24 hours to break the Republicans the last time they were forced to actually filibuster back in March of this year.

Now was that so hard?

It's not rocket science.

[ladjf]

7. Without a doubt. nt

[Poboy]

8. Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Obama

How can a man that attended Reverend Jeremiah Wright's church behave/govern in this manner?
Truth be told, when it was shown what Wright believed and preached, I was actually more excited about the idea of Obama as president. I was digging some of what Wright was shown to have said, even some of the things that were labeled 'controversial'.
I was hoping that since he sat there and attended for years, he secretly agreed with Wright for the most part, but had to distance himself after discovery for political reasons. I could totally understand the need to do that. He had to separate himself to appear 'safe' to white bread America. We see now though that the truth was he ATTENDED for political reasons (social climbing/local political connections). The faith or philosophy had little to do with his attendance.

[emulatorloo]

9. Cute Joke. FWIW Commondreams hates democrats, and loves to spin things as negatively as possible

[Better Believe It]

14. So Jeff Cohen, former board member of Progressive Democrats of America, hates democrats. Right.

Thanks for the info.

[emulatorloo]

15. Clinton's approval rating among Democrats is 89% CommonDreams is a minority view website

Don't make the mistake of confusing a minority view website with the view of most Democrats.

EDIT LINK: last polling I could find: http://www.gallup.com/poll/141485/bill-clinton-popular-barack-obama.aspx

I don't know Cohen's work, but I know the "work" of commondreams over the years I have been aware of them.

That being said, Sanders was amazing and said a lot of things people (VOTERS) needed to hear. The unfortunate thing is I don't think the people who most needed to hear it listened,

[Willinois]

32. 2000 Nader supporter. '04 Kucinich staffer Cohen.

He thinks he's still fighting Clinton. We've got too many pundits stuck in the 90's using Obama as a stand in to carry out their old battles against Clinton.

[NorthCarolina]

28. 'Commondreams hates Democrats'? Hmmm....

From Wikipedia

Common Dreams NewsCenter, often referred to simply as Common Dreams, is a U.S. based Leftist news website. Common Dreams publishes both news stories and editorials. Common Dreams also re-publishes syndicated content from Associated Press, columnists such as the late Molly Ivins, and news stories from a number of mainstream mass-market newspapers. The website also provides hyperlinks to other columnists, periodicals, radio outlets, news services, and websites.

The non-profit organization Common Dreams was founded in 1996 by political consultant Craig Brown, and the News Center launched the following year, in May 1997, by Brown and his wife Lina Newhouser (1951–2008). Brown, a native of Massachusetts, has a long history in progressive politics.

Among its notable supporters are Bill Moyers, Ralph Nader, and Don Imus.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commondreams



I don't believe that Common Dreams 'hates Democrats' as you say, but I have a pretty good idea about why you don't like Common Dreams.

[emulatorloo]

35. I don't "hate" commondreams, I understand their perspective.

Which is to the left of Democrats.

[Ikonoklast]

36. Don fucking Imus?

They actually brag on that fact?





HAHAAAAaaaaaa!

[NorthCarolina]

39. I don't know if "they" brag on it as

the info wall pulled from Wikipedia, not Common Dreams. But Bill Moyers is praise enough IMHO.

[Individualist]

31. You're going to hurt yourself with those contortions.

[fascisthunter]

57. self delete

[democracy1st]

10. K & R

[monmouth]

11. At least the Dems have made the top stories in the media. No pubs,

ain't it great? Even Rush wanted to know where the pubbies were. I love it!

[Overseas]

13. K&R. Bernie was telling it like it is. Showing how Cash for Hoarders has not Trickled Down.

I got to watch Bernie since I'm in between temp jobs right now.

He told it like it is-- Dribble Down Economics has failed and a return to Demand Side Economics is long overdue.

That Clinton style "New Democrat" "Third Way" junk was outdated even when he was promoting it.

He got his best results after he raised taxes from Reagan's disastrous slashing of top tax rates.

How dare he pretend that Supply Side deals like the latest speedy "compromise" are the best that Democrats can get!

Is he admitting that he so poisoned the waters that the Super Rich whom he enabled to increase their incomes by hundreds of percent while 90% of us languished can no longer be resisted by Democratic legislators?

[emulatorloo]

16. Sanders was amazing, I really appreciate what he did, and I wish more "Independents"

and "Moderate Republicans" had heard what he said.

[Laelth]

19. k&r for the sad truth. n/t

-Laelth

[rucky]

20. I wish he were President Shafta

can ya dig it?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehg2EaYhoJs

Who is the man that would risk his neck
For his brother man?
Shaft, can you dig it?

Who's the cat that won't cop out
When there's danger all about?
Shaft, right on

They say this cat Shaft is a bad mother
Shut your mouth
But I'm talkin' 'bout Shaft
Then we can dig it

[ncteechur]

24. Well President Sanders would still need 60 fucking votes to get anything done.

[Better Believe It]

60. He would only need 51 votes to pass legislation. And he wouldn't let the Republicans engage in

fake filibusters.

If Republican obstructionists won't vote to end Senate debates .... let them debate .... in fact, make them debate!

Democrats should use Senate Rules as if they were in the majority!

Oh .... they still are.

Well, just end Reid's "two-track" procedure where he permits other Senate business to be discussed while the Republicans are engaged in a phantom "procedural filibuster".

Until the Republicans vote to end debate (closure) no other Senate business can proceed.

And don't withdraw legislation if 60 votes for cloture are not obtained the first time around.

Keep the legislation on the Senate floor until Republicans decide to end their filibuster and than bring the bill to an up or down Senate vote.

Now is that really so hard?

It's not rocket science.

And of course, Senate Democrats are free to change Senate rules at anytime, even the Senate rule that indicates rule changes should be made at the beginning of a new Senate session.

The Constitution rules.

[MineralMan]

25. President Obama is not a Republican.

Unrecommended for random opposition to the President. Seeking out articles like this then posting them is less than useful. Calling the President a Republican is grounds for locking this thread, I think.

[Scurrilous]

26. K & R

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Willinois]

27. Another guy who was ready to write that before Obama took office.

They see want they want to see.

[glitch]

54. They're opinions have been validated.

Maybe you should blame the validator.

[MineralMan]

30. "Shafta?" Really?

I wish I could unrecommend twice.

[Ikonoklast]

37. You can count mine as one of yours.

Cohen is about as much a Democratic supporter as the OP is.

[MineralMan]

41. Thanks. This searching for anything anti-Obama and posting it

here several times a day is getting really, really old. It doesn't seem to matter what the source is or how specious the argument. It gets posted and recommended over and over again. Criticism is one thing. This is something else. The "Shafta" thing has ugly racial overtones that seem out of place on a Democratic website, I think. Someone even posted a "Shaft" parody in this thread in response to the slur.

There has to be some sort of limit on this stuff, I think. Perhaps not. I just don't know anymore.

[inna]

65. Are you fucking kidding? You really don't know what the term "Shafta" refers to?

Hello. ,,, It refers to NAFTA/outsourcing/screwing the American workers.


And you personal attacks and false accusations are just vile, I don't know understand how you get away with this crap.

[inna]

64. uncalled for and vile personal attack.

disgusting attitude, really.

[Heidi]

48. Same here.

Unrecced.

[MineralMan]

49. Thank you.

[emilyg]

38. k

[HuckleB]

42. Obama and Clinton are both Democrats.

They are both to the right of me on many issues, but they are both Democrats.

This type of juvenile personal attack serves no good purpose.

[Individualist]

45. Obama is NDC and Clinton is DLC.

'nuff said.

[HuckleB]

46. Blah. Blah. Blah.

[Ikonoklast]

59. Peace signs are getting scarce around here anymore.

[Phlunk]

47. yet the Repugs hate him........go figure

[Better Believe It]

50. Well, that's what they must do if they want to be viewed as a tough partisan political party.

The Democratic Party under the leadership of President Obamaon appears to be functioning more like a bi-partisan party based on their record of capitulation to Republicans.

[Taverner]

52. Um, yup. This where the 'Corporate Right' decided to hide

Behind Obama.

You see, they couldn't get behind the Palin. She was looney toons. Obama knew the rules, and so they chose him.

It gives me a small, but quickly diminishing hope knowing they would rather have the risk going Left than crazy. But that's not saying much.

It worked. If Romney wins the primary, expect the corporate marrying him. If they elect Palin, expect the corporate re-marrying Obama.

[glitch]

55. Prescience.

Although they are pretty predictable! :hi:

[glitch]

53. I don't know, continuing Bush policies doesn't really make him Republican.

Not restoring Habeas Corpus, expanding aggressive wars, attempting to disable Social Security are all more in line with "the crazies" than actual Republicans.

Note: Bush/Cheney weren't Republicans either.

Not that I am in any way excusing Republicans or what they have allowed themselves to become. I didn't like them when they were "moderate" either.

[BigBearJohn]

61. Have you read Obama's book on fairytales? It's called --

The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American Dream

[inna]

63. lol, are you kidding? Clinton is practically a commie compared to Obama!

exaggerating, of course. }(


but in all seriousness, Obama is very much to the right of Clinton, and that... does not leave much room there, does it.

[Better Believe It]

66. And that would make Nixon a ......?

:)