President Obama: "It's the most insidious takeover of our Democracy. We won't let it happen"

[kpete]

PRESIDENT OBAMA:

...........................

In some races, they are spending more money than the candidates. Not here because here the candidate is spending a lot of money. (Laughter.)

They’re spending more money than the parties. They want to take Congress back and return to the days where lobbyists wrote the laws. It is the most insidious power grab since the monopolies of the Gilded Age. That’s happening right now. So there’s a lot of talk about populist anger and grassroots. But that’s not what’s driving a lot of these elections.

We tried to fix this, but the leaders of the other party wouldn’t even allow it to come up for a vote. They want to keep the public in the dark. They want to serve the special interests that served them so well over the last 19 months.

We will not let them. We are not about to allow a corporate takeover of our democracy. We’re not about to go back to the days when special interests took advantage of Main Street families. (Applause.) We’re not going to go back to the days when insurance companies wrote the rules that let you languish without health care because you had a preexisting condition. We’re not going to go back to the exact same agenda we had before I took office.

FULL TRANSCRIPT: http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/16/remarks-president-a-reception-connecticut-attorney-general-richard-blume
VIDEOS & more:
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/9/17/902681/-President-Obama:-Its-the-most-insidious-takeover-of-our-Democracy.-We-wont-let-it-happen

[NYC_SKP]

1. kick (nt)

:kick:

[ClarkUSA]

2. Bravo, President Obama! This is CHANGE. Naysayers, take a good look.

That was your liberal president speaking out against corporate plutocrats.

:woohoo:

[impik]

3. Amen! Can these people STFU already and have this man's back???!

[Go2Peace]

6. Take a deep breath, if Obama keeps talking like this it will happen

It will take some persistance. I know you don't agree, but people lost some confidence. It will take a little bit of work to rebuild the movement he had in 2008. But if he keeps it up he will eventually restore that confidence and regain momentum.

I actually have more hope than many on this site. This seems to me to be a genuine(and wise) change in tactics and if the party keeps on message we won't lose many if any seats.

Hopefully those who are playing off their anger against the "professional left" won't countinue their divisiveness and welcome the change and get on board. And hopefully the President won't let down but will pick up the populist rhetoric as we get closer to Nov. 2cd. It's what is needed.

[FredStembottom]

36. Please read Go2Peace's response, DU.

We will not be divided here at DU if the party leadership stops dividing us.

They are taking real steps towards that, it seems.

But as long as the O administration, in league with the national party leadership, spends time dissing certain Democrats that they see as 2nd class Democrats we will be divided here at DU.

I'm a 2nd classer. One of the retards. I have noticed and I will speak up louder than ever after the election about this!

It's not anyone's fault here at DU*. We are divided because they divide us.



*On my worst days, I can't help but suspect that some DU'ers are here precisely to facilitate the divisions. But only on my worst, gloomiest days.

[Jakes Progress]

77. +100

If I were to want to divide the republicans, I would go on the sites of their leaders and pretend to be all pure. I would scourge any who have any dissent about the party and tell them to go to hell and stop agitating. I would tell them they are killing the party so they had better shut up if they know what is good for them. I would mock their concerns and preen in my faithfulness until I made as many as possible sick.

Boy. I'm glad no one does that here.

[Usrename]

98. Right! And when we hold all those seats, that will be real change.

Change that Matters!

[JDPriestly]

81. Obama allowed BP to run the show in the Gulf.

That was OK with regard to capping the well. But BP was also keeping out news media and had much too much say in what news was made available to the public about what was going on. BP was trusted far too much.

Then the health insurance companies entrenched themselves more deeply than ever in our medical care thanks to Obama's generosity to them.

And Obama has increased the employment of outside contractors to support our dwindling military personnel.

No, Obama is a friend of the corporations. He says one thing and does another.

[tomp]

7. nice words.

can we have our trillions back from the banks now?

[ClarkUSA]

20. Americans got alot "back" w/interest & preferred stock worth further hundred of billions if sold...

All this thanks to the actions of President Obama and his payback strings-attached TARP II that was put into effect in February 2009, American taxpayers got an average of 8% return on their investment, with more coming.

Do your homework before sniping at this President. He's done a helluva lot more than people like you give him credit for. Read the facts:

A near-universal health-care system? Why would Obama and the Democrats succeed when Truman, Nixon, Carter, and Clinton had all failed, and politicians as adept as FDR and LBJ refused to even make the attempt? They've seen the numbers, right? The health-care industry is bigger now, and richer, and there are no more liberal Republicans. There's no way.

A $787 billion stimulus? Yes, it was too small. But everything Washington does is always too small. And within the confines of that stimulus, the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress managed to make a host of long-term investments that would've been considered huge accomplishments in any other context, but are largely unknown inside this one. Huge investments in green energy, in health information technology, in high-speed rail, in universal broadband, in medical research, in infrastructure. The Making Work Pay tax cut. The Race to the Top education reform program. No recent president has invested in the country on anything like that level... And then there's what didn't happen: The financial system didn't collapse. Henry Paulson, Ben Bernanke and George W. Bush deserve some of the credit for that -- though they also deserve some of the blame for not preventing the crisis in the first place. But as Ben Smith says, TARP, which was begun by Bush and implemented by Obama, is probably one of the most successful policies in American history --"

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2010/09/the_obama_administrations_pipe.html

[Bitwit1234]

28. I grant you he fires people up with a speech BUT darn it

HE HAS TO FOLLOW THRU...I don't care how riled up people get with speeches....I think it is about time he kicked the ass of his own party and got them going. WE HAVE THE MAJORITY BUT FOR HOW LONG.

[Capitalocracy]

38. Yeah, the speech is great,

the speeches were great in the campaign, and now that there's another election, the speeches are great again, but we've got a year of weak leadership we can't help but compare this to. Let's work our asses off to retain the majority, but if this weak leadership continues as soon as this election ends, we'll know he's lying today

[FirstLight]

34. I agree...but

but geez, reading down-thread makes me wonder if I am still at a DEMOCRATIC discussion board.

I don't care how dissapointed you are, Pres Obama has had to push a HUGE rock up a VERY STEEP hill by himself for 2 years (when the hill is a 30 year decline...) And WE have a responsibility to back him up...so do the congressional dems.

If we don't come out swinging, then the fight goes back to the dark ages and it will be WORSE than all our bush nightmares.

I am not being a Obama-groupie, but I will join in the idealism of fighting back...because right now this IS a war and we need to hold the line!
I am so sick of people here thinking they are using 'critical thinking' when they are just demoralizing others and not helping our real cause at all... shut up and HELP PUSH!

YES we CAN, dammitt!

[mdmc]

59. I remember once we had 60 (dems + dlc + joementum+bernie)

plus all we needed in the house.

We didn't do shit to rid ourselves of lobby / corporate influence.

We passed lobby written bills (bailouts, stimmy, health insurance), plus started the war on social security.

I may work on a local assembly race this year. I will vote on the working families party line. But I am no where near fired up, or ready to go.

[swilton]

70. HUGE rock up a VERY STEEP hill by himself????

Obama came into office with majorities in the House, Senate and one of the largest electoral majorities in decades...how can you say he had to do all of this by himself....The public wanted CHANGE - and all they got was waffling and rhetoric.

Sorry, I wasn't fooled by the rhetoric during the 2008 campaign and I don't believe it now either.

[SammyWinstonJack]

76. +1 To your last sentence.

:thumbsup:

[butterfly77]

79. So you already knew..

what the bluedog/republicons were going to do to stop progress...

[JDPriestly]

83. Had Obama pushed in the Democratic direction, the direction

in which Democrats have traditionally pushed, we would all be there pushing with him.

But Obama's fine words and his actual deeds are two very different matters on far too many issues.

[mdmc]

58. really?

What is Obama gonna do to reduce the power of the DLC and their corporate buddies? I read the transcript, it sure as hell didn't say.

[CreekDog]

4. A better message is: *we* can't let it happen

Obama has to stop promising to fix things that he doesn't have the power to fix.

He needs voter support to assure certain things and he needs to tell voters what's at stake if they don't do their part.

[ClarkUSA]

5. Three years ago, there were those who thought "Yes We Can" was also a promise too far.

And look what happened. :)

Who knows what President Obama can do in three more years? If you can't dream, what point is there to fighting?

[lvpenn2]

8. No We Won't n/t

[ClarkUSA]

21. Have you got anything better than baseless snark? nt

[Cha]

30. "No we won't" No we won't what? Let that happen.?.

you're damn straight, we won't.

[POAS]

43. Yes you may...enjoy a pizza today....

Welcome to DU. May your stay here be as long as your worth to the Democratic Party.

[SoxFan]

56. BRAAINS!

[Cha]

29. Obama's Vision is much larger than

"we can't let that happen"..I'm with him..we won't let that happen.

[Canuckistanian]

9. When did lobbyists STOP writing the laws?

Seriously, when was that?

[NorthCarolina]

12. Exactly what I was thinking. More pot calling the kettle black I guess. eom

[ClarkUSA]

22. Around the time of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act. nt

[awoke_in_2003]

35. which was followed by...

the Health Insurance Bailout Act.

[Canuckistanian]

106. Exactly

Didn't one of Baucus' staffers write parts of the bill and was exposed as a former insurance employee?

[harun]

41. My question as well.....

[Posteritatis]

48. Well, I assume they sleep occasionally. (nt)

[mdmc]

60. 1

[bobburgster]

10. Speak Louder!

There is a lot of background noise to drown out.

[Lorien]

11. Lobbyists wrote his Health (insurance) care reform bill

Change begins at home. "We’re not about to go back to the days when special interests took advantage of Main Street families." Um, that was TODAY.

[impik]

13. And you have proofs of this claim? I mean other

than what Jane whats-her-name tells you?

[mdmc]

61. who sat in on the discussions?

where there single payer advocate drafting the bill?
Or did the administration seek "buy in" from the industry?
Who else did they seek input from?

Really, this insurance bill was written so that the Dems could continue to get huge "donations" (kickbacks, whatever) from the corporations. "This was the best" that the Dems could do (Dems= DLC, dems, bernie, and joementum)..

[Binka]

75. Oh Such Poutrage

Waaah Jane whats her name! Lorien does not need any schooling from you she's been here for 8 years. Bye Bye impik your chew toy value is overrated.

[Better Believe It]

15. The Health Insurance Industry and Big Pharma Protection Act was just a start.

They "helped" their representatives in Congress write the Wall Street financial "reform" law after they had Congress loan or give them 10 trillion in financial guarantees and help. But, we can't afford a big job creation program!

Now they are helping the "deficit commission" draw up a plan to cut Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid.

Oh well. Let me try the narrative some people actually believe.

Geithner, Summers and company are really big advocates for working class people. Wall Street and corporate America has no influence over them, President Obama or Congress.

The union movement and "professional left" is calling all the shots in Washington.

mmmmm. Does that sound like a wet dream fantasy or what?

[LibDemAlways]

25. Obama is back on the campaign trail, pulling out the dusty

script from two years ago. Problem is he now has a record that he's apparently hoping people will ignore or forget. He's proven himself beholden to corporate interests- single payer advocates weren't even allowed a seat at the table, for example - and just comes off looking like a hypocrite here.

[butterfly77]

80. So,I guess we all know..

what to do and who will fix all of our problems right away...

[ClarkUSA]

23. Prove it. Is that why the Chamber of Commerce spent billions on lobbying to oppose HCR?

:eyes:

[Jackpine Radical]

32. Have you ever heard the one about Brer Rabbit

and the brier patch?

I truly do hope we are about to get "change we can believe in," and applaud the recent signs of a change in course. Liz Warren, the small-business bill, etc. I also hope that his SC appointments will grow leftward from their centrist roots; that has often happened (as in the case of Eisenhower appointee Earl Warren himself).

But tough words do need to be matched with tough actions.

[scentopine]

49. The chamber of commerce will always, always, always

fight anything, and everything, no matter how big, no matter how little, absolutely anything that imposes restrictions on what business can charge or how they provide their services. It is what they are paid to do.

That is what they do - they are a partisan group, like the republican party and will oppose anything and everything no matter what it is if it has even the smallest suggestion of new regulation. They are as rabidly right-wing as the gun lobby over issues of gun registration and automatic weapons. CoC (and gun lobby) advocate self-regulation, small government, etc.

The argument that the health care plan is good because the CoC opposed is irrelevant.

You are free to say that the new health plan is providing you with access and services at lower costs and higher quality than you had before the legislation, but don't trot out the chamber of commerce argument. It is not a sensible argument to defend Obama's plan.

Meanwhile, those of us who continue to have ZERO fucking relief as our costs escalate 15% to 20% a year and out deductibles increase 15% to 20% a year, will beg to differ on the merit and success of Obama's health care plan.

But I'm glad you are happy and now getting the health care you didn't have access to before the plan.

I'm curious - how are you spending the money you are saving? I expect that a bold new plan to make health care more affordable with access for everyone would be a big boost to the economy. My costs continue to spiral out of control so I haven't been able to spend as much and go to the doctor less often. I'm trying to save every penny because I am older and at risk for getting fired if I get sick - something that the new health plan doesn't prevent.

How are you spending your windfall?

[mdmc]

67. 1

(our health care costs are going up at least 15% this year. We were offered 4 "hoops" to jump through to get the 15% increase - if you didn't jump through any hoops, your increase would be 35%)..

[mdmc]

62. C of C spent billions just cause they could

Why couldn't we get single payer when we had the votes? Cause the DLC needs the C of C donations to keep in power..

The Chamber would have hated single payer much more then the insurance reform. We didn't piss them off. Yet they bitched and spent cash..

[CanonRay]

14. "when lobbyists wrote the laws"

Like last week? :shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

24. Exactly what legislation are you referring to? Provide evidence of your claim.

:eyes:

[mdmc]

63. Health "insurance" reform is the easiest to see

Single payer was not at the table. The table was filled with (insurance) industry insiders.

That was one corporate bill. Single payer would have been a better way to go. But the DLC didn't want to fight the corporations.

[CanonRay]

85. You beat me to it.

The energy bill a couple of years ago was another example. It's been going on for a while, and I see no evidence to say otherwise.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

16. YEAH!

Corporate fascists have extensive tentacles.

It will take determination and time to see results--I sure hope the Administration can put enough focus on it to really combat it, effectively, tangibly.

[Dr.Phool]

39. A Treasury Department owned and operated by Goldman Sachs?

[indimuse]

17. KNR! n/t

[txlibdem]

18. I appreciate the conversion, it was just a bit too long in coming

He should have started this discussion in March 2009. Then I'd believe it. As it is now he'll have to show me he's not a center-right Republican by pushing forcefully for Progressive and Liberal policies.

[ensho]

19. kick

nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

26. Living in a glass house requires careful aim. n/t

[metapunditedgy]

27. "back to the days when special interests took advantage of Main Street families"...

Umm... that's all fixed now?

[L0oniX]

31. It's only a movie ...only a movie.

"We are not about to allow a corporate takeover of our democracy" ...dude (Obama) how stupid do you think we are? If they haven't taken over already then why are we in a recession? DUH! O yea ...and what about that little supreme court thing where the corps get to spend all they want on their little pets? I ain't going to worship a man who talks the talk but wont walk the walk ...single payer off the table oooops public option too. Just who were those people in that meeting? We'll see what happens in 2014 ...when even more people will be out of work and out on the street.

"leaders of the other party wouldn’t even allow it to come up for a vote" Oh you thought you could reach across the aisle huh. DUH! When are you going to realize that they hate you and us and this is a war? You better come out fighting or your done.

[mdmc]

64. 1

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

33. The "old days?"

:shrug:

[mdmc]

65. 1

[NBachers]

37. Presidential activism has to be matched a billionfold by citizen activism to back him up

[Trey9007]

102. "Presidential activism has to be matched a billionfold by citizen activism to back him up"

+10000....Quote of the year, IMO....

[Roland99]

40. Yeah, kinda hard to stop something that's ALREADY happened and that YOU helped further on

geez...more empty promises.

[totodeinhere]

42. Those are good words. But just how does he propose to stop it from happening?

Words are cheap. We need action, not words.

[ibegurpard]

44. "return to the days where lobbyists wrote the laws"

something's changed since healthcare "reform?"

[mdmc]

68. 1

[Drale]

45. I think

one of the Presidents biggest issues since he got elected was that he wanted so bad to get the republicans to help and acually do something. Now that he seems to have abandoned that notion, I think we will see a whole new person.

[scentopine]

46. Watch out - big corporate give away coming....

What's it going to be ?

- a full force protection of net neutrality, bold legislation and speeches saying he supports net neutrality or secret meetings with Verizon and Google with FCC throwing up hands saying "whatever..."?

- a commitment to protecting dwindling and polluted environment by restricting off-shore drilling? Or will he reward a corrupt industry captured Minerals Management Service with drill-baby-drill?

- an equal and affordable universal, single payer health system, or a system that mandates we buy fron private insurance companies with restrictions on drug pricing competition and built in discrimination against pre-existing condition by not having any cost controls? Whose centrist proponents will have us believe this is like FDR's new deal? You know you get to cover your kids to age 25 - something that concedes that our younger generation will never be able to make their own way even after a $100,000 college degree?

- A wall street bail-out completely without public oversight that engorged the rich? The worlds worst fraud, corruption, and treachery with barely a single conviction and an administration stuffed to the gills with Wall Street insiders and a justice department fearful of corporate prosecution?

- Bold cutbacks in defense spending or continued war spending that beats Bush at the peak of the Iraq war engorging war contractors and other profiteers?

- Money pumped into infrastructure and new technologies, a condemnation of outsourcing or more out-sourcing and free-trade agreements? (All the while championing tax credits for corporations)?

- Demanding that colleges and universities stop behaving like corporations and get back to the business of education or privatizing our public education system and attacking teachers because, you know, corporations serve the public so much better than government? Today's school administration is to good education as an insurance lobbyist is to good health care.

- Is it going to be a democrat who is proud of FDR and past democratic presidents and other democratic champions of the people while articulating that investment in the American people rather than multi-national corporations will move us forward, or will it be reverential admiration of Ronald Reagan?

Let's see right after Obama told net roots to keep pushing him, Gibbs came out and attacked the "professional left". And the right wingers on DU told us to shut the fuck up.

The centrists, right wingers, neo-cons and republicans who frequent this board keep telling us to shut the fuck up. Yes, indeed - we stand between them and the right wing corporate oligarchy they are endorsing as a more efficient form of government.

This is just another speech, like the ones about single payer and universal health care. The right wingers will be back here in a month telling us Obama never promised us anything and that we need to pay attention because he made it clear during the campaign that he does not believe liberals deserve representation at the policy table.

If Obama wants change then fire Geithner, Bernanke, Summers, Emanuel et al. That is the heart of the cancer eating away at individual liberty and these are the forces dividing us. It is the new conservatives who have taken ownership of the democratic party telling us to shut the fuck up at the core of the corporate take-over.

The "new" democratic party of the rich, depending on and cultivating the kindness of corporations is working well for everyone, isn't it?

Relying on a corporation for education, health care, human services and national infrastructure is like trusting a sociopath with your credit card.

No we won't shut the fuck up until we get some representation from the man who promised so much and has done so much republican ass kissing.






-

[mdmc]

69. 1

[colsohlibgal]

47. Alright!

He's talking the talk, let's hope this time he'll walk the walk. It's time to speak truth, to fight back and let the chips fall where they may - we have to go after those that want to turn this country into a gun toting screwed up gated Christian feudal society.

[mdmc]

50. Okay.. wtf is Obama talking about?

Is he talking about the corporations that the DLC worships?
Or is he talking about the tea party movement?
Or is he talking about corporate lobbyist?

[scentopine]

55. He's just talking. Again. Lieberman et al will counter with some threat and...

Obama will stand down. Like he always does. Maybe it will be a kill switch on the internet, or some other threat to individual rights that right wingers will threaten, but Obama is not strong enough to counter the right-wing who control the policy department in Obama's admin.

I am also expecting some sort of corporate gift is coming and he's grooming us with this rhetorical boogy man bullshit so we don't get too mad about whatever corporate sponsored policy is about to hit us. You know - good cop, bad cop style. Remember it was some speech about green energy that came just before he passed "drill-baby-drill".

When he starts throwing corrupt wall street and oil industry CEOs in jail and banning the rest from ever trading stock or running a "public" company, then we can celebrate.

[Guilded Lilly]

51. As much as I, we, everyone with an actual brain

wanted very fast action to change the horrible condition of the government after eight years of Republican bullshit , Democrats' hesitancy/seeming impotence, and constant criminal activity from the despicable Bush administration, we also had to drag ourselves through the painfully frustrating realities of how long it actually WOULD take to get the many right things done.

It has been a very slowwwww process impeeded by deep seeded racism, bigotry, blatant obstructionism and the annoying idiocy of way too many mainstream folk in this country eager to embrace pathetic, hateful, conservative party lines behind a wall of rhetoric driven FEAR. None of this was actually a surprise but it is still so hard to deal with in our desire to create a better nation.

No matter how long it has taken and how frustrating it has been...anything that pushes us in the right direction regarding our visions of a much better country is cause for hope.

We CANNOT give up, even while hashing out our vast differences.
We cannot.

[mdmc]

87. well said

peace and low stress..

[mdmc]

52. reading through

I like how Obama admits that we passed health 'insurance' reform instead of health care reform.
That’s why we passed health insurance reform

[mdmc]

54. They want to take Congress back and return to the days where lobbyists wrote the laws.

Isn't that how we got health insurance reform instead of health care reform?

[Patchuli]

82. Thank you so much for the China Cat Sunflower!!

I know you rider gonna miss me when I'm gone!!!!

I needed that, indeed. :hippie:

[mdmc]

89. Peace and low stress and thanks for the reply..

..

[mdmc]

88. my pleasure my friend

I am on the old school mailing list. Usually the emails have tour dates (yah!) or things to sell (bah!). But I noticed all the CDs and music that are offered usually have a free sample of what is being sold. That Chinacat link was one of the free samples that were sent in the email. I love it and now save all my dead emails. Some have great videos and tunes.

Peace and low stress and thanks for the reply..

[No Elephants]

94. We passed health insurance mandate for t he young and healthy bc Boomers were aging into either

Mediicare eligibity or private health insurance that was high risk for insurers.

[onethatcares]

53. wow, o wow, I just read the entire transcript and I'll say

the nail has met the hammer.

NOW, LET'S REALLY GET TO WORK AND MAKE AMERICA WORK FOR US.

[mdmc]

57. I just read the transcript as well - how is this not about the DLC?

Everytime I read "they", as in "they want lobbyist to write the laws" all I can think is how is this different then the DLC?

The whole speech could be a tirade against the DLC, imho.

My other question = what are the democrats going to do to reduce corporate influence in our government? I know Bernie Sanders has some ideas, any chance our party can avoid listening to the DLC and can start listening to Bernie?

[ProSense]

66. The President is not a member of the DLC and this is primarily about

Citizens United, which has the support of Republicans.

From the speech:

<...>

Now, these are the people who lecture us on fiscal responsibility. The same people who refused to pay for two wars, two tax cuts for the some of the wealthiest Americans, and left me a -- as a welcoming present -- a $1.3 trillion deficit when I took office. And now they want to spend another $700 billion that 98 percent of Americans will never see.

That’s their agenda. That’s the sum total of their agenda. That’s what they’re offering the American people -– a future that looks just like the past, one where special interests get free reign to play by their own rules and where middle-class families are left to fend for themselves.

Now, that’s not a future I accept for the United States of America. That is not a future that Dick Blumenthal accepts for the United States of America.

This is a tough election season. People are hurting and they are understandably frustrated. And a lot of them are scared. And a lot of them are anxious. And that means that even when people don’t have ideas, if they’ve got enough money behind them, they may be able to convince some folks that, you know what, just cast a protest vote, throw the bums out. That’s a mentality that has an appeal. And you can’t blame folks for feeling that way sometime. But that’s not a future for our country, a country that’s more divided, that’s more unequal, that’s less dynamic, where we’re falling behind in everything from investment in infrastructure to investment in R&D. That’s not a vision for the future.

And if that’s not a future you accept for this nation, if that’s not the future you want for your kids and for your grandkids, then we are asking you for help in this election.

Because if you don’t think the stakes are large -- and I want you to consider this -- right now, all across the country, special interests are planning and running millions of dollars of attack ads against Democratic candidates. Because last year, there was a Supreme Court decision called Citizens United. They’re allowed to spend as much as they want without ever revealing who’s paying for the ads. That’s exactly what they’re doing. Millions of dollars. And the groups are benign-sounding: Americans for Prosperity. Who’s against that? (Laughter.) Or Committee for Truth in Politics. Or Americans for Apple Pie. Moms for Motherhood. I made those last two up. (Laughter.)

<...>

Now, that is about Republicans. In the Senate, the legislation to counter Citizens United is the DISCLOSE Act, which has the support of the Democratic caucus. Also, the vast majority of elected Democrats oppose Bush's tax policies

The President is targeting the correct group: Republicans.

Still, I'm not exactly sure why you think the President would give a campaign speech to Democrats and not target Republicans?

[mdmc]

71. So Obama wants a law to overturn a SC decision?

Somehow he thinks he can get a bill passed that will overturn Citizen's United? Is that what the plan is?

I thought that the speech was very anti-corporate. Then I thought, wait, corporations donated billions to Obama/Biden. The DLC jocks corporations non-stop, and spites the workers, unions, and leftist that wish to curb corporate dominance.

So now is Obama gonna go after corporations? And give up corporate donors? And give up the "New Democrat" DLC bullshit?

Or is it just talk?

[ProSense]

73. So you're outraged because the President's criticism of Republicans

makes him a hypocrite? Is that what this means:

Somehow he thinks he can get a bill passed that will overturn Citizen's United? Is that what the plan is?

I thought that the speech was very anti-corporate. Then I thought, wait, corporations donated billions to Obama/Biden. The DLC jocks corporations non-stop, and spites the workers, unions, and leftist that wish to curb corporate dominance.

So now is Obama gonna go after corporations? And give up corporate donors? And give up the "New Democrat" DLC bullshit?

Or is it just talk?

Congress writes laws, that's what they do. Look up the DISCLOSE Act.

Did you donate to the Obama campaign? Did you realize that a significant majority of the funds came from individual donations?

When you say DLC, are you referring to someone specifically? Someone in the Senate?

The DLC isn't the President's biggest concern, that would be the Republicans who are obstructing his agenda and figthing to take control of Congress.

As for not believing the President, that still doesn't explain why you think he would give a campaign speech to Democrats and not target Republicans.

[mdmc]

92. So the plan is to pass a bill to overturn CITIZENS UNITED?

If Congress writes THAT law, well kool and the gang..

I did donate..

When I say DLC, I mean the DLC.. All the New Democrats that kept us from having a single payer system medical system.

The obstructionist GOP is Obama's biggest concern. We agree..

The confusion regarding his speech is simple - he (Obama) and the DLC have been tied to the hip with corporations (agenda, donations).. Now he is talking like he has been Bernie Sanders all along and we should treat him as such.. We all know he hasn't been Bernie, he has been any member of the DLC.

[mdmc]

72. Obama's staff are all DLC - he is the corporate poster child of the DLC

The DLC is a huge part of this administration.

So if this is not about the DLC and it is about Citizen's United, is the plan to pass a law that overturns a supreme court decision? Or is it just talk?

[ProSense]

74. Which is why

you apparently don't understand why he gave the speech. Oh well!

[scentopine]

84. Good question - Obama says a lot of things...

the centrists will come back and tell us Obama was just being pragmatic. I finally believe them. So don't take Obama too seriously on these issues.

During the health care debate, the realists reminded us all that a pragmatic politician says things (like supporting single payer and/or universal health care, or being against warrantless wiretapping, etc) in order to win elections. They scolded us all for not understanding this - arguing that the slate gets wiped clean, once in office. We should have known, they say, that he was not an advocate of a single payer health plan. And we shouldn't have expected this since he has so little power. For example, he is so limited in his power, that instead of single payer, we had to accept that opening up the Eastern seaboard to oil drilling was the best we could hope for in the BIG change department.

Centrists have argued that people need to read the transcript carefully, then realize Obama is saying things he believes people want to hear. Just because he says something, it doesn't mean he won't change his mind the minute a right winger whines about how it isn't centrist or conservative or corporate friendly enough. That's politics. Then they say "now shut the fuck up" (excuse the paraphrase, no one hoping to win votes would actually say that to a prospective voter - LOL! Can you imagine? Marketing 101! But I digress...).

To be honest, I read this particular transcript 3 or 4 times searching for anything specific in this piece of disaster messaging. It was mostly rhetoric of the sort that the pragmatic centrists have warned us that we aren't to take literally. Extreme centrists will yell at you and insult you for not knowing the difference between things people say to win elections and what they can actually do in office. Drilling for oil is so much easier.

Maybe some empathy toward the chess players is warranted (without any stupid public judge needing to approve it). The rigid centrists and other extreme pragmatists are feeling a bit defensive. Poverty is up, jobs are scarce as ever- PhD's are fighting for jobs at home depot, working call centers, the gulf is an oily cesspool of toxic waste, bankruptcies and foreclosures haven't leveled out, the war is dragging on, out sourcing is still hemorrhaging jobs.

On the other hand, Wall Street enjoyed a huge bunch of bonuses and record pay - the centrists argue that the trickle down to us regular people saved the world from collapse. Now that wall street spent all our money, they are making noises that they want more. They'll get it. No matter what Obama says, they'll get paid.

[ProSense]

90. "Centrists have argued " Yeah,

centrist like Feingold .

Q. What explains the difficult political climate for Democrats, considering that President Obama has implemented many policies he campaigned on?

A.“There are two primary reasons. One is the economy. Human nature is such that people are going to say, ‘I’m frustrated.’ That creates an environment that whoever is in office, whoever is doing anything, is potentially vulnerable to people being unhappy. There’s a second factor that’s more cynical. A conscious decision was made by certain groups to destroy this presidency the minute it started. People say it was the health care bill – no, it wasn’t. I go to every county every year and hold a town meeting. Within days of the president being sworn in, I had people showing up at my town meeting with hats on, with tea bags coming out, saying this is going to be socialism.”

<...>

Q.Has the president squandered any opportunities?

A.“I don’t look at it that way. What I look at is there are so many challenges at once, there are so many things you can do. The most important things –- we’re getting at the job situation and the recovery. There’s a lot of blood given on that. This health care thing was a courageous and important thing to do, but it was one of the hardest things I’ve ever seen a president do. The one thing I think he did squander an opportunity was the mistake of what he did with Afghanistan. It was a very bad decision. He should not have doubled down on Afghanistan. That is going to hurt him more than these other things.”

<...>

[mdmc]

95. Did you really think Russ Feingold was going to say

If we had 60 real senators instead of DLC'ers Obama would have never needed to squander ANY opportunities!

As far as Afghanistan, War is electable. America is not ready to lose in Afghanistan yet, so War is a vote getter and good politics.

[ProSense]

96. Wait

"If we had 60 real senators instead of DLC'ers Obama would have never needed to squander ANY opportunities!"

Is this an acknowledgment of reality?

You accept what Feingold says about the political climate, but not when the President says it?

There aren't 60 progressives in the Senate, and additionally, there are 41 Republicans.

[mdmc]

107. Yes what we need are 60 Democrats

as long as you cannot count on those with a (D) behind them to stand for working people, we will have a problem.
When the DLC stands with corporations over workers, over patients, over our country, we have a problem.

Obama (along with the DSCC and DLC) chose these types to run instead of people that would stand for workers and patients instead of corporations.

So now Obama says the GOP is obstructing (which is their political strategy); what does he say about the DLC obstructing? Is the Obama plan to actually do something about CITIZENS UNITED (and what will be done? cant do anything without the obstructionist in the GOP and DLC)? Is the plan to elect more rat worm DLC'ers that will act like Republicans? Those seem to be the choices.

[scentopine]

99. Prosense - bungie jumping off a bridge or body surfing can be percieved as courageous

By refusing to acknowledge any of the legitimate complaints about the failures of this administration to deliver beyond the high minded rhetoric, you are alienating us.

At some point, you have to understand that there are many of us outside the beltway bubble and whose livelihood doesn't involve campaign management. We are not impressed with more rhetoric as you have quoted here. Inside the beltway that may seem courageous, outside the beltway it isn't worth shit. Most people do not live inside or around the beltway.

Civil rights march, running into a burning building to rescue people, dodging enemy fire to save a wounded soldier, landing an airplane in the river without a scratch, fighting cancer, those that died at Tienanmen Square, etc, all real acts of courage. A health care bill so bloated with corporate loopholes, mandates, and no cost controls? Not so much. Opening up the East Coast to oil drilling? Not so much, either.

For example, it doesn't do any good for DLC and OFA and other defenders of the back to continue to deny what people are experiencing in their daily lives - well educated, extremely skilled, talented people being sold out to India for $7 Hr. Now, if it were true that the quality of workmanship was as good - it would be harder to argue. But it isn't. I am comfortable talking on this topic because I have many years of experience. But back to the topic at hand.

My health care costs continue to sky rocket - although I am happy for you that health care reform has helped you. Having to worry about a serious illness is a distraction at work and home. I am pleased to see you are much better off with the reform than I am. I can easily correlate rate hikes with the onset of reform - but that would be childish because they would have gone up anyway. In fact all of my collegues have had no relief and will receive no cost relief from the health reform. Zero. Not now, not after Obama is out of office. In fact, 10s of millions of us will get nothing. But our taxes will pay for the subsidies going to drug companies who enjoy no cost controls. Maybe we can by our drugs from a cheaper source? Not so easy, eh?

The wars are dragging on, no end in site. Sure we pulled many troops out of Iraq, but we have 100,000 in Afghan and another 100,000 "contractors". Spending is higher than peak in Iraq.

There are lots of disruptors on this board who say they are here to protect Obama, but they really just end up making things worse. Do you think you are helping this message board by badgering people who are legitimately unsatisfied with Obama?

My guess is you might make things better for everyone if you simply accommodated these complaints and helped us get what we want. Liberals can help you more than republicans can help you.

The facts aren't good for Obama right now, Prosense. No matter how you spin it. A change in direction is warranted. Your ideas about pragmatic republican compromise, and whining liberals are out of phase. This isn't 1980. Ignore this fact at Obama's peril.

If people don't see signs of real courage in the form of a real fight on principals of fairness and justice, it really is your loss. You assume people will vote for your campaign just because. Many will. Many won't. It's up to you, start giving serious representation to those of us on the left, or keep telling us to shut the fuck up. Its all in your hands.

If you can respond in something other than a snark or cut and paste to convince me why my wages aren't falling and quality life degrading at as fast or faster than they were 2 years ago, I'm happy to discuss. I'm in the engineering business - many of us are extremely sharp, managed excellent grades in undergrad and grad, technical achievements, many patents, etc. Layoffs are still hemoraging jobs to india were a low skill worker is being trained ($8 an hour fully loaded labor cost) by US contractors to do very specific tasks - then they are fired, even in India. Good for short term, big disaster long term. Explain to me how Geithner and Obama are working to stop outsourcing - that would be a good place to start to win votes. Companies like AT&T and Microsoft, Intel, all doing it.

Then we can discuss how Obama's education reform is really making things better - its hard to compete with temp workers in India at $8 an hour, no matter how good your grades are.

Come to think about it, if he had worked as hard for signle payer and universal health care as he did with privatizing schools and education "reform", we'd have real progress. But he didn't. That's because he never really wanted it for anything other than a courageous media play. I'm not impressed.

Its not too late. Give us real representation and all is forgiven. Get down on your knees with the right wing and lobbyists who dominated health "reform" and Obama is in for a big fall (he is still leader of the party and responsible).

Obama isn't giving us what we need. Reform. It's that simple.

[ProSense]

101. "At some point, you have to understand that there are many of us outside the beltway bubble

...and whose livelihood doesn't involve campaign management."

Seriouly, somewhere along the line you need to realize that most Americans have no clue what the DLC is or care about politics. They listen to Fox news and the rest of the media and the nuance completely escapes them.

While you're caught up in some campaign against the administration, many Americans and a significant number of Democrats still approve of this President, wanting him to succeed and believing that he will.

"By refusing to acknowledge any of the legitimate complaints about the failures of this administration to deliver beyond the high minded rhetoric, you are alienating us."

No, that's on you. I have nothing to do with your mindset.

As I said before, take a look at what the President said, and then take a look at spin.

Think about it, and then do whatever the hell you want to do between now and election day.

It's fairly certain that the President is not going to view the words coming out of his mouth related to his accomplishments and his critics as an insult because someone decided to spin them as such. Don't think it's spin? Doesn't much matter (see the Gibbs' hoopla).

It's also very clear that the some people are going to continue to claim that the President hates liberals.

Anyone who doesn't like the President and believes he is not liberal enough and is after liberals is never going to be convinced that he's a progressive liberal lover.

Now, do whatever you feel like doing because the positions aren't going to change.

Support Democrats and vote Democratic in the 2010 election if you're so inclined.

Beyond the 2010 election, you can continue to support Democrats and the President, including his re-election or you can join with Greenwald and FDL to find and support your choice of a progressive candidate to run for President in 2012.

That is the reality and those are the choices. It's all up to you, and you have the ability, the freedom, the right to do whatever you want to do, regardless of what you think of the President and his choice of words.

I and the vast majority of the Democratic Party (and I say that with the utmost confidence) are sticking with Democrats and one of the most progressive and accomplished Presidents ever: President Obama.

[scentopine]

104. You didn't respond to my question on outsourcing...

for many years I voted straight dem ticket. Yes, even when dems were elected I was discouraged by the compromise, but never had any candidate turned up the rhetoric on change as much as Obama has.

You have not given me anything but bible thumping and religious faith in defense.

We need results, Prosense. You can cleanse us out of the party to make it more pure for your brand of politics, but it isn't working. It is backfiring.

Until you acknowledge that the complaints are legit, you are eroding your support. You are thinking you can win without the other millions of democrats (*) who don't agree with you. You are so confident that you are correct that you glibly write us off as unneeded baggage aka "the professional left".

How is Obama going to rescue the economy with outsourcing at record levels? It is so bad that even the H1B visas i work with are afraid of getting laid off.

Maybe if you would concede that we are correct about these concerns you'd have much less of the discord and more real discussion on the issues. Prosense, the fastest way for the democrats to destroy potential voters (*) is to say their concerns are not legit.

But that is what I see over and over. It isn't working. Time for change. You need to stop assuming that everyone who doesn't like Obama's politics is trying to destroy him.

The opportunity is always there for you to work with us (*) for change. I don't believe you when you say millions of supporters who think exactly like you is enough to win big elections. You need every vote. Why would you attack legitimate complaints? Do you believe that outsourcing is not a factor in the economic disaster we are facing today? There are other issues, but lets start with this.

And if you think the tea party is helping you, like I've read here recently, you will be proven wrong.

Lots of older folks like myself have lived through a lot, riots during 60s, war, etc. We have experience to go with wisdom. Our families grew up with FDR. We see what happens when a government stimulates the economy directly compared to passing it secretly into the hands of wall street for trickle down. (Obama didn't have to do that. He chose to do that because he felt it was politically expedient and squandered an opportunity for popular support). All those with houses built and bought from GI bill, all the engineers and scientists trained on GI bill who worked for NASA and built highways and railroads and autos and so on. That wasn't done in Mexico nor with $8 an hour workers in India.

We've seen more than enough foolish pride ruin a good thing. I think there is room to accommodate the left (*) in the democratic party don't you? Or are you saying that to persevere the purity of the democratic party, you don't want our(*) vote?

You can mark this post and come back and say i told you so if I am wrong. My pride isn't so big and I'm not so rigid in my views as you are. I am not always correct.

Any way, blind faith is immutable. There are always times when faith intersects with fact, and I suppose that provides validation. But your kind of faith is more religious and pure - you don't think you need to represent the left (*).

When you want to debate the merits of Geithner going to India and promising them outsourcing will continue, I'm happy to discuss. On the theology of Obama and his accomplishments? When wages and jobs return, we have something to work with. Inside the beltway, Obama might be considered incredible and accomplished. Outside, he's bringing us no real relief. That is exactly what is help the tea party. The more people stay idle with shitty jobs, with declining wages and living, the angrier they get. Geithner and Emanuel are making things worse.

You are wrong about peoples mind being made up (otherwise you wouldn't be so prolific about badgering people like me, unless you are just mean spirited). You need to stop attacking those of us who have real complaints. You won't win votes that way.

Have a nice night.

(*)
The several million who don't agree with you
we are people who want an end to the war spending
stop offshore drilling
end to lobbyist writing policy as per health "reform"
stop treasury department secrecy with wall street deals
stop secret meetings over net neutrality
real health reform that includes cost controls
etc etc

The rightwing and conservatives in the party are well represented and they are happy.
The people above, not so much. I am certain they number in the millions, maybe not as
many as those who think like you, but still enough to win an election. Very
bold to toss us out with venmin like "professional left, retarded, etc" as we've heard
from Obama's staff recently. To bad he didn't demand their resignation. That would have helped.

[ProSense]

105. Hmmm?

You have not given me anything but bible thumping and religious faith in defense.

We need results, Prosense. You can cleanse us out of the party to make it more pure for your brand of politics, but it isn't working. It is backfiring.

Until you acknowledge that the complaints are legit, you are eroding your support. You are thinking you can win without the other millions of democrats (*) who don't agree with you. You are so confident that you are correct that you glibly write us off as unneeded baggage aka "the professional left".

My support? Sounds like you need to talk to your elected Representatives.

As for the rest, I think you missed my point.

[mdmc]

108. I have never missed an election, just voted in the primary in fact

I will vote the working families line in Nov. No doubt.
I just won't be donating to campaigns outside my district.
In 2012, I won't be going to PA to GOTV
I am sure Obama will win re-election.
He will do so with corporate support, corporate money.
He does not need me to go to PA. He does not need my small donations..
He will be fine without me.
I will go on trying to afford medical treatment and dealing with pain.
We all play our roles. I used to be that guy going where I was needed to make a change. Now I am a sick person that can't afford medical treatment. This is not Obama's fault. I do blame the DLC (those that voted against single payer & public option) for choosing their careers over health care reform.

[mdmc]

93. 1

[No Elephants]

91. By his own words, the President is a New Democrat. Not a dime's worth of difference between them,

DLC, Third Way, etc. Besides, being a formal member of the DLC is not the issue. This is a President who, as Senator, chose Joe Lieberman as his mentor. As a candidate, he filled his ranks with former Clintonites and people like Daschle. As President, he chose Rahm Emmanuel for his chief of staff, allowing him to, among other things, curse liberals and the UAW. He chose Hillary as his Secretary of Defense and filled his administration with Clinton re-treads and Republicans.


If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

[JDPriestly]

78. So, if Obama is so opposed to the corporate takeover,

why did he for-profit insurance companies in charge of our health care? so much of our military? our schools?

What did he expect when he refused to have advocates for single-payer insurance at the table during insurance reform negotiations?

What did he expect when he put BP in charge of the Coast Guard in the Gulf Coast (for all practical purposes)?

Whose not about to allow a corporate takeover of our democracy?

Obama??????

Obama speaking with a forked tongue. The words promise one thing, the actions do another.

[ipaint]

Did he say this on the way to the $30,000 a plate fundraiser in the gated community

of multi millionaires.

:wtf:

I don't believe a word of it.

[BrklynLiberal]

100. The haves and the have-mores attended.

[AC_Mem]

86. Time for action

We must all pitch in and volunteer to get people to the polls in November. When democrats vote, we win.

Remember....

[bluescribbler]

97. That's MY President!

K&R

That's the change I voted for.

[wial]

103. now that's what a true patriotic American

sounds like. Citizen's United is by far the greatest enemy we face as a country now.

[Kahuna]

109. Yes We Can!

:patriot: