Obama was and still is the best person for the job. On the issues:

[ProSense]

economy, ethics, health care reform, hunger, labor, poverty, open government and transparency.

[jaxx]

1. I agree!

He is going to do a good job for we the people.

[tblue]

6. "going to" or "is"?

Not picking a fight, just a clarification.

I'm frustrated, but I respect people's right to support and defend the president. If everybody felt like me, it would not be pretty.

[jaxx]

58. Is now and is going to do more.

In one year he's done a lot, and in 3 more years you will see progress like we've not seen in a long time. The momentum isn't slowing, it's gathering speed. All in good time.

Sorry for the late getting back, I'm a 3rd shifter and sleep is my friend! ;-)

[Name removed]

2. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[gleaner]

3. No he is not ....

He has demonstrated how entirely lame he is in every situation you have listed. I have to echo OP's question, and wonder what basis you have for comparison, because Obama is doing many of the things that Bush did, and coming up with some measures that are even more extreme.

Eventually he will do something that will hit you like a ton of bricks and then I wonder what you will do. Cut back to defending him half the time? Or maybe see that you could have better leadership and that you were had just like the rest of us.

[Buzz Clik]

4. What happens if the author of the OP doesn't change his mind about Obama?

The world ends? Or, maybe people simply embrace different political philosophies.

[gleaner]

17. Oh, please ...

don't you think that is a bit dramatic? If you enjoy it then I'm happy for you. What will happen is that Obama will continue doing what he is doing and instead of getting the progressive president we thought we were voting for we will have the Republican amalgam that we got continuing his business as usual. That may be fine for the rich, but it has not been salubrious for the middle class.

Yes, people do have different political philosophies and we are entitled to state them with the caveat that others will respond to the ones they don't agree with. Don't you find it a bit odd though that whenever those of us with an anti Obama philosophy responds to someone with a pro Obama philosophy we are usually attacked for it? So you can embrace your own philosophy and state it, but I can't do the same? I don't think so. If you don't agree with me or don't like what I post, don't read it and block me. But don't try to tell me I have no say or to distort what I am saying into a huge apocalyptic moment for yourself. It doesn't advance your ideas or get across anything except the implied "sit down and shut up."

[countingbluecars]

19. Perhaps you should practice what you preach. n/t

[gleaner]

21. Thought I was ...

care to elaborate on what specifically you disliked about my responses? Or is your main interest a one line hit and run?

[Buzz Clik]

43. Seems you can dish it out but can't take it.

[ProSense]

5. "because Obama is doing many of the things that Bush did"

Yeah, Bush would have done everything in the OP. It's easy to make bogus claims that counter reality.

Ludicrous.

[gleaner]

20. Maybe it is ludicrous ...

in your reality, but we seem not to share the same one. I don't believe that ridiculed what you stated, just disagreed. If you can't handle disagreement, how do you discuss anything?

In the meantime, if you write something I disagree with I will tell you so. If you try to characterize what I write in ways other than a reasonable rebuttal, I will tell you that I think it is inappropriate and is not communicative or informative. We can go on like this for days if you want. Or you could discuss specifics with a range of information to prove your point and back you up and try to rebut the points I try to make. That is called discussion. It is not ludicrous, it is the reason we are all here.

This is not an Obama cheering section, it is a political forum comprised of people with many different ideas which they are inclined to state whether you like it or not.

[MNDemNY]

12. That one is likely to Defend Obama at every turn, if past is any indication.

There is NOTHING he could do to lose that one.

[ProSense]

13. It's the balancing effect.

Did you think it was going to be 24/7 negative?

Surprise!


Obama = That One

[Name removed]

14. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dionysus]

29. i caught the "that one" too, his slip is showing...

:D

[jesus_of_suburbia]

52. yep

[jesus_of_suburbia]

51. "Eventually he will do something that will hit you like a ton of bricks"

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


Obviously you don't know ProSense and her posting history.

[damntexdem]

7. True, but it could still be much, much better.

We did well in 2008; but we need much more.

[ProSense]

10. True, but unfortunately

we don't have imaginary Presidents and this one is doing a better job than most.

[MNDemNY]

15. And you are just fine with < mediocre??

Oh well.

[Lilith Velkor]

48. You go with the President you have, not the one you might wish to have at a later time

To paraphrase the OP.

[MNDemNY]

57. Yes, but you do not "go with him" blindly.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[Fire1]

9. Without a doubt. n/t

[ProSense]

11. Thank you. n/t

[depakid]

16. Unfortunatley, it's becoming clear that Obama was the wrong type of person

to get the job done domestically.

Conflict aversion, unwillingness to recognize- much less make enemies, or use the unprecedented public anxiety and resentment to drive effective policy changes has resulted in squandered opportunities on an historical level.

The nation needed a fighter- a hard nosed advocate and reformer to turn things around. Instead it's stuck with a conciliator and panderer who, like Clinton seems to need everyone to like him.

A lot of us have (and still have) disdain for Hillary- but one thing I would have bet on- she wouldn't have been pushed around by the likes of Nelson and Lieberman (or any other corrupt, two bit extortionist). Not without consequences.

And I doubt we'd have had banksters, fraudsters, torturers and even food poisoners walking around thanking their lucky stars that the Justice Department has decided to look the other way.

[quaker bill]

24. We know about Hillary

she would not have been pushed around by them, just defeated by them. I have seen that film.

Lieberman has nothing to lose. He was flipped off by the party in the primary and won the seat more or less on his own. Push him as a Dem and he will do you wrong just for the sheer joy of it.

Presidents have far more at stake than a character like Joe Lieberman. So he can inflict damage at will with little or no discernable consequence.

[depakid]

32. Maybe, maybe not

I doubt very seriously Lieberman would be in his chairmanship if he'd campaigned against her.

Fact is- no one's afraid of Obama, and in Washington- that's a very poor situation to be in, because people know he'll bend and bend- and bend.

That's not the right characteristic to get the job done.

[stevenleser]

54. I disagree with a lot of what you say, but one thing you said is spot on

"no one's afraid of Obama, and in Washington- that's a very poor situation to be in"

As yet there are no consequences of opposing Obama within or without the Democratic Party. The next 60 days will tell us a lot. 2-3 people should have consequences for their recent actions. Lieberman is one of them. If nothing happens to these folks, it is a bad thing.

[karynnj]

46. Give me a single example where HRC took the lead in fighting

even ONE not popular, progressive idea in the Senate in her 8 years there. She voted WITH the centrists and, especially on foreign policy, fought the liberal wing of the party. On Iraq/Iran etc, her votes are closer to Joe Lieberman than Ted Kennedy.

(Obama at least voted against cluster bombs(not HRC) and he didn't vote for Kyl/Lieberman. )

[firedupdem]

18. Rec'd and appreciated! n/t

[denem]

22. LGBT?

Funny that you left that one out.

[impik]

23. Foreign Policy and Climate Change too

[quaker bill]

25. I agree, K&R

[RepublicanElephant]

26. agreed. i challenged some disgruntled relatives to name anyone

who had a REALISTIC chance of winning the primary, getting the nomination and winning the white house in 2008, who would be doing a better job than obama right now, with this corrupt news media, back-stabbing bush/cheney operatives still in the pentagon and cia, powerful corporations and their money-dripping lobbyists, and an american public that is clueless about the inter-workings of d.c. politics and forget the president is not a magical dictator who can always get 100% of what he wants, but still is probably going to be remembered as one of the most progressive presidents to date.

...they couldn't name anyone who could do better.

realistically.

[brentspeak]

27. He was the "better" of the two major candidates

A few thousand light-years from being the "best" person for the job, however.

[ProSense]

28. Don't you mean three?

Or do you believe that one of the top three wasn't a major candidate?

[ShortnFiery]

30. President Obama is the best damn leader for the Corporatists of Wall Street and the MIC.

On the above tenet, we are of complete agreement: Our country will SERVE the ultra-rich who wish for corporate profits and endless warmongering for profit for the foreseeable future. Yes, President Obama is completely signed onto the Ruling Elite's Goals and Values. :puke:

[ProSense]

31. It's a good thing you don't get to

define reality.

[depakid]

33. Happens to be pretty spot on

as we've seen repeatedly.

How goes those prosecutions of banksters, fraudsters and other corporate crooks anyway?

[SpartanDem]

50. Pretty good I'd say

IRS: UBS agrees to hand over U.S. accounts

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/irs-ubs-agrees-to-hand-over-us-accounts-2009-08-19

IRS Brings New Focus to Auditing the Rich

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125659261162008901.html

More Employers Face Immigration Audits


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125866577819456287.html

[depakid]

56. LOL- so letting all the domestic banksters, fraudsters- and other corporate crroks walk is OK

Even though Bush I prosecuted thousands in the aftermath of a much smaller crisis with the Savings & Loans?

Something else- Bush I wouldn't have let Peanut Corp and their executives walk away after what they did- which just goes to show how far the country has fallen- and what you can expect much more of down the line.

[ShortnFiery]

34. Here's your reality ... we're killing the Mayor of Kabul's political enemies in Afghanistan.

All parties are vile but we have KILLER DRONES and PRETTY WEAPONS.

REALITY UNVARNISHED:

[ProSense]

38. What does your stock images have to do with labor policy? n/t

[ShortnFiery]

40. You're addressing "labor policy" while I'm addressing "endless warmongering" by the MIC

Labor Policy won't mean a tinker's damn because WE ALL know those manufacturing jobs now over in China are NEVER COMING BACK.

Next question?

[donco6]

35. All the evidence points to it.

But $ome people just refu$e to $ee.

[dflprincess]

36. Yes Solis was a good appointment

Let's hope she's allowed to stay there. I fear if the right wing cooks up some imaginary reason to go after her, her boss will cut her lose. He has a track record of doing that sort of thing.

[ShortnFiery]

39. One valuable person appointed is is not all encompassing "USA REALITY"

Not by a long shot.

But thanks for playing. :eyes:

[dflprincess]

44. I agree with you

I don't think it's my post you really wanted to respond to. I have no doubt that if the right targets Solis, Obama will desert her like he has others and appoint someone to the post that Republicans like better.

[ShortnFiery]

45. Understood.

I'm just so disappointed ... just sad. President has so much potential ... but he is not the person I thought (or hoped) he would be.

He's merely a corporatist as are all the national politicians.

Damn, we're screwed until/unless we get TRUE campaign finance reform.

Again, please excuse my shot-gun approach ... I'm just so damn disappointed in both President Obama as well as ALL the Democratic Congressional "leadership." :hi:

[dflprincess]

47. I hear ya

:hi: back

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

41. Cute, ineffective, but cute. What about the issues? n/t

[ShortnFiery]

42. Sorry, I left my blinders and pom poms with my other suit.

[kwenu]

49. I absolutely agree!!!!

No one can be all things to all people. A person is judged by their positives and their negatives and on that account Obama still comes out ahead.

[stevenleser]

53. K&R

[flamingdem]

55. I agree and think Tweety was an ass today picking on him

He's not an authoritarian idiot who will act the part of leader, he IS a great and thoughtful leader.

[ShortnFiery]

59. Obama is authorizing Summary Executions of Ruling Thug leaders in the ME's Political Enemies.

That's not only IMMORAL but it's against "The Rule of Law."

Obama has blood on his hands every damn time he authorizes a KILLING of a "suspected" (not charged or tried) Militant and/or terrorist.

There's NOTHING "thoughtful" about our combat troops occupying two ME nations and using UN-MANNED aircraft to kill the political enemies of the "ruling elite" in two other (Yemen, Pakistan) countries.

It's VILE and IMMORAL. Obama is GUILTY of warmongering.

[h9socialist]

60. Before getting too carried away . . .

. . . Obama is NOT the problem! The SYSTEM is!

The real question is how to get immediate gains for people, while at the same time paving the way for a new and more humane, democratic system.