Back to Where We Started
I am starting to think the teabaggers have peaked too soon. A new CNN/Opinion Research survey indicates that a majority of Americans believe that the Democratic party’s policy proposals are good for the country, 51% to 46%, while 53% think Republican policies will send the country in a wrong direction. So, after all the screaming, from the right and the left, we are back to exactly the point we were at in November 2008. That is not a precursor for a tidal wave in 2010. Indeed, I will have a post this week showing the 2010 will break the GOP’s hearts, again.
” the 2010 will break the GOP’s hearts, again” … except in Delaware where Castle will win the race for the US senate. (of course I have been wrong about Castle in the past…so?)
Hey Jason330, speaking of “back to where we started,” why don’t you start a blog for liberals in Delaware?
LOL! A1 my man. That’s the wit, that’s the tone you need to go for. In the meantime, just disagree with the contributors without being disagreeable.
Anonone– if you want a blog where purism reigns supreme, where bombast rules over analysis, and where liberals align themselves with teabaggers, Donviti’s new blog is the place for you.
Honest question DD – when does your patience with President Obama run out?
That’s a weird question Jason330.
Why? The tension on this blog right now isn’t between Democrats and Republicans. It is between Democrats who think President Obama’s approach to governing is failing, and Democrats who think that the jury is still out.
Why is it a weird question? Why does DD’s patience (or mine for that matter) have to run out?
I, for one, look at the next 8 years as a marathon, not a 100 yard dash. So yes, if you think this is a sprint, then you will be disappointed.
Was that so hard? I can respect that sentiment. I don’t agree (because as I’ve said, the game has changed) but I respect it.
“purism reigns supreme” Ha, Ha, Ha – You mean unlike here, where the slightest criticism of Obomba is met with outrage, accusations of immorality and illegitimacy, and general cries of “how could you!”?
But, Del Dem, writing as someone who has read your posts on multiple occasions lamenting the loss of the republicans as a loyal opposition party and your wish to return to some mythical days of ethical republicanism that never was, it isn’t surprising that you love Obomba so much since he just might be the man to bring your beloved loyal-opposition party of republicans back to life.
And he won’t do it by actually promoting and fighting for a liberal agenda, mind you, but by being a weak, vacillating, and unprincipled leader who would rather suck on the bipartisan nipple than anything else. So either way, America lose with this guy.
Sometime in 2012. And even then, if the choice is Obama v. any Republican currently alive today, then I am still voting for Obama.
I voted for this man to be President for four years. I am smart enough to realize that my dream list of things I wanted done in those four years would not be completed in the first year. I am smart enough to realize that my dream list of things I wanted done would be compromised here or there, and I would have to review each compromise to see if I was getting the shaft or if it was a step in the right direction. I am smart enough to realize that this President has prevented a full blown disasterous Second Great Depression. He has signed into law the largest middle class tax cut in all human history. He has ended torture as an official policy of the United States. He has announced a plan to close Gitmo, though it is not completed yet. He has signed into law the most progressive budget in 30 years. He has expanded SCHIP, increased tobacco regulation, provided stimulus funds for Medicaid, increased COBRA subsidies, provided funding for health information technology and the National Institutes of Health, provided increased funding for education, expanded state energy conservation programs and new transit programs, invested in new smart grid technology, funded high-speed Internet broadband programs, extended unemployment insurance for up to 99 weeks for the unemployed and modernizing state UI programs to cover more of the unemployed, increased gas mileage requirements to 35mpg, protected 2 million acres of land against oil and gas drilling and other development, signed executive orders protecting labor rights, signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act, made it easier for airline and railway workers to unionize, while appointing NLRB and other labor officials who will strengthen freedom to form unions, reversed Bush ban on funding overseas family planning clinics, signed hate crimes protections for gays and lesbians, reversed Bush ban on stem cell research, signed sweeping new credit card regulations to protect consumers, saved the auto industry from going out of business, set a deadline for the withdrawal of our troops from Iraq in 2010, and in Afghanistan in 2011, and is on the verge of signing a healthcare bill that will drastically reform health insurance and healthcare costs in this country.
Am I disappointed in no public option? Sure, but I will not kill the bill because of it. Am I disappointed in the surge in Afghanistan? Sure, but am willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt on this. Am I disappointed Bush Administration officials are not being prosecuted? Sure. Am I disappointed in repeal of DADT being delayed? Sure.
But on balance, Obama has earned more of my patience, not less.
Honest question, Jason. When are you going to stop acting like a little girl who did not get a pony for Christmas?
This rhetorical construction…” I am smart enough to realize…” is that meant to suggest that I’m not smart because I disagree with you?
By calling Obama an abject failure after one year and all the accomplishments I list, then you are dumb as shit.
So the shorter DD response is that Obama is just like Bush, right?
😉
To the rest of your point – have you not noticed that Republicans are “all in” on Obama’s failure? Real HCR is not my pony. It is the Obama presidency in an executive summary. (An executive summary that most people will only read part of.)
But hey. I hope you are right and I am wrong.
Failure to grasp reality is the worst kind of failure. I still think Obama can be a great President. I just think he is going to have to put on his boxing gloves to reach his potential.
They are all in for Obama’s failure because they have NO ideas of their own. Nothing. Nada. Obama’s failure is the only way they get back into power. And liberals like you and Donviti and Anonone who parrot right wing talking points and who possess no patience and no understanding of what is actually being accomplished by the President are only aiding those very same Republicans. You owe it to yourself and to the man you voted for to be informed as to what is actually going on.
Losing patience because of a few disappointments (big ones, I will grant you) does nothing but seed the ground for President Palin. Just like the very same liberals who said Gore was just like Bush seeded the ground for the last eight years of Bush.
“you and Donviti and Anonone who parrot right wing talking points”
Pulling out of Afghanistan now is a “right wing talking point”?
Demanding real HCR now, not just a government extortion program for private insurance companies is a “right wing talking point”?
Demanding equal rights for GLBT now is a “right wing talking point”?
Demanding justice for those who committed crimes in the Bush admin now is a “right wing talking point”?
I could go on and on. You have simply lost it, DD.
Oh jeez. Like I said. I hope you are right, but you should realize that you are not talking to Jason330 the blogger who paid attention to this shit. You are talking to Jason the ‘dumb as shit’ average citizen.
“Obama’s failure is the only way they get back into power.”
I agree. The Repups are so damn stupid and clueless these days, they don’t know what to do other than attack Obama and repeat the shit they heard other Republican’s say — so it must be true and worth repeating.
My general rating of the Obama administration is “mild disappointment”, but the expectations bar was set pretty high. There’s still plenty of time left to get things fixed even though progress has been annoyingly slow. My tone is set to “keep pushing till they get it right”, but it sure as hell ain’t set to “give up on Obama, let him fail, and try for a primary in 2012”. Which DV was ready to do before the election had even started. And Jason, it’s hard to take anything you say seriously if you still think Mike Castle is a moderate.
Ezra Klein has a good item in today’s WAPO about why we can’t get anything done. The supermajority requirement in the Senate has hamstrung any efforts to bring about change. As long as the Senate remains dysfuntional the rest of the government follows suit. See:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/12/23/AR2009122301319.html?hpid%3Dopinionsbox1&sub=AR
Last week a member of ProgressiveDemsDel posted a link to an article that analyzes how Obama has approached the office of the Presidency: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/opinion/26douthat.html?emc=eta1
I am pretty much in agreement with it. Obama did not run with Kucinich’s platform, or Howard Dean’s, or John Edwards’. The complaints I am hearing loudest are that Obama isn’t Dean enough, or Edwards enough, or Kucinich enough.
When I declared for Obama in my blog (http://paulprogressive.blogspot.com/2008_01_01_archive.html), in early January 2008, I wrote “Again, I feel that every Democratic candidate is far superior to each and every Republican candidate. I think that they all have their strengths and weaknesses. I recognize that several candidates are ‘better’ than Obama on some issues, for instance the war (Kucinich seems better), and experience (Richardson seems better). I’m fine with that. I’m not a singe-issue voter; I’m looking for the total package, and I think that Obama is it.”
Please be honest with yourself when you are writing a criticism of Obama. Were your expectations that were not met based on your perfect-world view, or based on something that Obama sincerely led you to believe would be accomplished in under a year?
There is a difference between saying ‘I want don’t ask don’t tell reversed today, and I will work hard to encourage the President to make it happen’ and saying ‘Obomba is a liar.’ One is constructive, and one is 100% petulant.
It is also disingenuous to blame Obama for Congress’ actions/inactions. Yes, in the campaign Obama led us to believe that things would change in DC if we elected him, and we did elect him. Some things have changed in DC, in Congress, but there is still a very large amount of further change that is necessary.
You may recall that one stark difference between Obama’s and Hillary Clinton’s speeches was the use of I versus We. Obama charged Us with retaking DC. He has made progress as have We, however as Carper’s example clearly indicates, there is much more work to be done, and to achieve all that Obama laid out for Us, together, to accomplish, We have more work to do.
And that work doesn’t begin with saying “Obomba lied.”
Obama has always been a centrist, and I’m not particularly disappointed. Where I am finding disappointment is in arguing points that were never part of the debate. A1 asks: Pulling out of Afghanistan now is a “right wing talking point”? No, it’s not a right wing talking point, but neither was it a campaign promise. Obama was quite clear on Afghanistan. To act like he lied about his views here is disingenuous.
As far as HCR… sure I’m disappointed with not getting the public option, but lately, in many threads, I keep reading about Single Payer. No one ran on Single Payer (as much as I would have liked them to) so when I see this term popping up it confuses me. And, just like Afghanistan, how can we debate a position that was never on the table.
Jason states: I just think he is going to have to put on his boxing gloves to reach his potential. Suddenly, I’m back in the primary with “Obama better start throwing punches” and “Obama has a glass jaw.” It’s not his style to put on boxing gloves, we all know this, and it’s, in part, what led to his winning the primary and the election.
I guess what I’m saying is that it’s difficult for me to debate positions he never took, and to expect his personality/approach to change.
It’s also impossible to debate the “Obama sucks” position. We use to do nuance.
Shorter PBaumbach: Don’t write that Obomba lies, even when he does, over and over again.
pandora, I was specifically accused of parroting “right wing talking points” by your illustrious colleague, who offered no specifics (as usual).
By the way, using “Obama was quite clear on Afghanistan” when he was campaigning as an excuse for killing more people in Afghanistan is unsupportable. We just lived through 8 years of intransigence in the face of changing facts. The situation in Afghanistan has changed dramatically in the last year. Too bad that Obomba thinks that an undemocratic regime is worthy of more American blood and treasure. Would you want your child over there?
Please pick a point, A1. Are we discussing what Obama should do or what he said he would do?
I, for one, look at the next 8 years as a marathon, not a 100 yard dash. So yes, if you think this is a sprint, then you will be disappointed.
And there will be a Dem Majority with that next 8 years too? It’s this kind of wishful thinking that is leading to a big problem
It’s as if you think the R’s are going to roll over. Are you forgetting how close it really was with McCain/Palin? Don’t you think that they would have won if they had a different VP choice?
Both. They are not unrelated.
Oh jeez. Like I said. I hope you are right, but you should realize that you are not talking to Jason330 the blogger who paid attention to this shit. You are talking to Jason the ‘dumb as shit’ average citizen.
Another fantastic point that is missed here as well these days.
I think Obama knows that right now this is the biggest majority he’s likely to get so he’s trying to get big legislation through while he can. I think things look a lot different now than they did last January. In January did we know that Republicans were just going to become nihilists and try to block everything? The dysfunction if the Senate is relatively new so that’s why we’re starting to look at it now.
Like it or not, the president can’t do it alone. There are 3 co-equal branches of government,
A1, “would do” and “should do” are only related in your vision of how things should be. Everyone has their “wish list.” And I’m not saying to give up on that – in fact, giving up is what is bothering me most.
During the Dem primary I was quite astounded by the number of people who said that if Hillary won the nomination they wouldn’t vote for her, that they were done (and vice versa). Geez, we are nothing if not consistent with our throw in the towel rants. I stated quite firmly that I would support the Dem candidate – no matter who that was. Guess, I was a naive sell-out way back then.
And it’s this all or nothing tone that’s annoying. No one here is thrilled with the current HCR, but I’m not ready to slit my wrists. I’m ready to work to make it better. But I’m rapidly reaching the conclusion that we (progressives/liberals) are better at bitching than fighting.
Well said Pandora. The rants from the purists of all or nothing will turn out to be nothing but rants that fall on deaf ears. Am I happy about HCR, nope. Is it better than nothing, absolutely. At this time, a public option would not pass. Now, if the Stupak amendment continues to be part of HCR, I would want to vote against it.
Am I happy that we are still in Afghanistan, nope. At least we have an exit strategy, which we NEVER had at all.
Am I happy that Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is still a policy of our military, nope. But I do understand that the Obama Administration is working with the Military to repeal Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell through legislation and not executive orders.
However, there is much I am happy about the Obama Administration. I, for one, am not going to throw out the baby with the bath water.
but lately, in many threads, I keep reading about Single Payer. No one ran on Single Payer
No one ran on the individual mandate either.
If we had started with single payer we could have compromised down to the public option.
Didn’t Hillary run on mandates? I can’t remember.
And it’s fine to want Single Payer. What isn’t fine is acting like Single Payer was on the table and that the people who didn’t pursue it broke a promise.
At this time, a public option would not pass.
This bill has a lot of things that weren’t going to pass until Obama got behind them.
And because of that, Nemski, you, I and Pandora are considered shills for the government or sell outs.
Whatever. If that is all DV, A1 or any other liberal purist can say to me in response to our glass half full rather than completely empty analysis, then it is they who have lost the argument.
What I am convinced of is that it is always so much easier to be against something, rather than to negotiate or compromise or explain something. It is easier to shout than to think or explain.
I know that that sounds condescending to my liberal comrade in arms who are purists, but think about how your complaints sound to me:
Didn’t Hillary run on mandates? I can’t remember.
She did, and Obama called her out on it in at least one debate.
Anon…
So Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman would be automatically convinced that they should support the PO simply because Obama got behind it?
First you set unrealistic expectations, and then give Obama with super human mind control powers, and then attack him for not using said fictional power. Nice trick there.
Yes, Hillary and Edwards ran on mandates and Obama criticized them both for it. He said that he adopted both Hillary’s idea on mandates and McCain’s idea on taxing Cadillac plans in the speech to Congress because they were good ideas.
So Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman would be automatically convinced that they should support the PO simply because Obama got behind it?
I guess we will never know.
LOL. You purists are funny.
A lot of supposition, anon. We have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. But I’m not going to assume that Obama did nothing.
Obama got what he wanted. If he had wanted a public option he would have had it.
A lot of supposition, anon. We have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. But I’m not going to assume that Obama did nothing.
what do you mean by supposition? Can you give me an example? Would thinking that Obama is going to be President for 2 terms be an example?
Comment by anon on 28 December 2009 at 10:31 am:
Obama got what he wanted. If he had wanted a public option he would have had it.
agreed
Comment by Delaware Dem on 28 December 2009 at 10:24 am:
Yes, Hillary and Edwards ran on mandates and Obama criticized them both for it. He said that he adopted both Hillary’s idea on mandates and McCain’s idea on taxing Cadillac plans in the speech to Congress because they were good ideas.
is it any wonder now, why wall street and big business got behind Obama? It all makes sense that the Health Co’s had less to lose with Obama in office
donviti, look at your last comment, agreeing that if Obama wanted a public option we would have it. That, sir, is supposition.
Please show me – in detail, by naming names and counting votes – how Obama would have gotten the Public Option.
I’m done with the public option. It was always a hack compromise. I saw it as a step on the road toward single payer, which is exactly why it was defeated.
I guess if we want a compromise that results in a public option, our starting negotiating position has to be a bloody Communist revolution.
Liberal purists remind me of my boy when he takes things literally, such as, “Time to brush your teeth.” If I don’t say, “Please brush your teeth with your toothbrush, water and toothpaste for 2 minutes”, he’ll just pass a dry toothbrush across his teeth for 30 seconds.
Donviti, you make absolutely no sense. You say Wall Street and Big Insurance got behind Obama, even though Obama adopted the policies of his rivals (mandates and the McCain tax). It seems to me you are saying Wall Street and Big Insurance got behind Obama because of the mandates. If that were true, then why did they not support Hillary from the start since she was the one pushing the mandates idea. If it true that Obama is supported by Big Insurance, then didn’t Big Insurance just get burned by having the tax on the “cadillac” insurance plans be part of HCR?
You see, you throw out these mindless attacks about Big Insurance and Wall Street without actually thinking about what you are saying.
Comment by Delaware Dem on 28 December 2009 at 10:21 am:
And because of that, Nemski, you, I and Pandora are considered shills for the government or sell outs.
Whatever. If that is all DV, A1 or any other liberal purist can say to me in response to our glass half full rather than completely empty analysis, then it is they who have lost the argument.
I never realized until now how much name calling you really do do.
Sort of like jason called you out on earlier. I would like to know if you are saying I’m a purist in a negative way? I haven’t lost anything. I have stuck to my guns all the way through, where as you have settled and bargained away what you wanted for something that is “almost” what you wanted.
You make it sound like what I want and other “semi intelligent purists” want is a bad thing and not realistic. I haven’t lost any argument. It is DL that is losing the argument by doubling down on the positions they are taking.
You Bashed Bush and wouldn’t let other’s blame Congress. Now you are blaming Congress and not bashing the President.
Call me a purist, but I’m not doing anything differently then I was 12 months ago.
Are you?
Pandora wrote Please show me – in detail, by naming names and counting votes – how Obama would have gotten the Public Option.
Never going to happen.
“What isn’t fine is acting like Single Payer was on the table and that the people who didn’t pursue it broke a promise.”
I don’t think that’s their position. They’re saying that, if liberals had started out by insisting on single-payer, the public option would be the compromise. That may be true, but I don’t think Obama would ever have associated himself with such a proposal. The administration, I suspect, is OK with safe-seat Democrats proposing liberal ideas, but it’s obsessed with Obama looking like a centrist.
To say that we bashed Bush while giving Congress a pass is quite disingenuous, DV. We most certainly called out Congress for voting for the Iraq War, Patriot Act, unfunded mandates such as Medicare part D and NCLB.
Please stop this nonsense.
Edwards also pushed individual mandates.
donviti wrote Sort of like jason called you out on earlier. I would like to know if you are saying I’m a purist in a negative way? I haven’t lost anything. I have stuck to my guns all the way through, where as you have settled and bargained away what you wanted for something that is “almost” what you wanted.
Really, I don’t see much difference between liberal purists and tea baggers. Ideologically you might be different, but your comprehension of how politics works is just as limited. I shall call you “blue ballers”, because you’ll never have the release you want.
I agree that isn’t their position, Geezer. My problem comes with tying Single Payer to a candidates platform. It simply didn’t exist. I’m all for SP, but I’m having trouble holding a candidate responsible for something that was never on the table.
“I would like to know if you are saying I’m a purist in a negative way?”
Yep. Like Holden from “Catcher In The Rye”.
Please show me – in detail, by naming names and counting votes – how Obama would have gotten the Public Option.
The same way he got the current bill. Like I said, Obama got what he wanted, he just didn’t want the right thing.
The last few votes had to be prodded and bribed to get 60. Why weren’t they prodded and bribed for the public option instead?
Now Senate Democrats have been trained that it pays to be a holdout. Good luck with that, Mr. President.
But you asked for a list. The president has a very large bag of hammers, but they don’t work unless you pull them out of the bag. There are a lot of lists around; here’s mine:
1. Appoint Tom Carper’s ass to ride a desk somewhere.
2. Explain to Harry Reid that he cannot count on WH support for his re-election without his enthusiastic support of the public option.
3. Personally recruit credible primary opponents for conservadems where possible.
3. Offer Snowe or other teabag-targeted Senators something to switch parties.
4. Bribe, bribe, bribe.
And while he is at it, call Joe Biden and ask him WTF is up with Delaware letting Mike Castle walk into the Senate.
Really, I don’t see much difference between liberal purists and tea baggers. Ideologically you might be different, but your comprehension of how politics works is just as limited. I shall call you “blue ballers”, because you’ll never have the release you want.
lol, I like it!
I know how politics works, I’m just not accepting it like you have. Which is part of the problem.
If you understand how politics works, but don’t accept it, how, pray tell, do you plan on getting your agenda passed?
The last few votes had to be prodded and bribed to get 60. Why weren’t they prodded and bribed for the public option instead?
Prodded and bribed to support a bill without a public option. Who of the D holdouts would you bribe for the public option? And we were only dealing with Dems, Republicans were clear they were voting “no.” Even Snowe voted “no” even though the final bill was everything she said she wanted.
The same way he got the current bill. Like I said, Obama got what he wanted, he just didn’t want the right thing.
I’m not sure how you prove that… unless you’re claiming that Obama would have vetoed a bill with a public option?
BTW, who would have replaced Carper? Serious question.
Oh and the most obvious thing Obama could have done is gone over the Senate’s head and appealed directly to the poeple with one of his magificent patented speeches about how critical the public option was for preserving choice and freedom, lowering premiums, helping small business, etc, and how critical the public option is for the overall economy and JOBS… then sit back and watch the approval polls for the public option go up ten points over the next two weeks while Repubs and the insurance industry panics.
But he didn’t want any of that so it’s a moot point.
BTW, who would have replaced Carper? Serious question.
I don’t know, but that would be a most excellent problem to be confronted with.
Comment by nemski on 28 December 2009 at 11:05 am:
If you understand how politics works, but don’t accept it, how, pray tell, do you plan on getting your agenda passed?
So you are ok with how politics work?
No one here is okay with how politics work. But, I’ll tell you how it doesn’t work – by giving up.
anon, you mean like when Obama spoke in front of a joint session of Congress back in September?
No, we are not, but absent a bloody revolution, or the defeat of all Republicans or all Democrats, how do you propose we change our politics.
anon, you mean like when Obama spoke in front of a joint session of Congress back in September?
Good example. He described some of the benefits of the public option, and then in the next breath announced it wasn’t really that important to him, and told progressives not to get their hopes up.
Oh man, I can’t wait for his address on letting the Bush tax cuts expire.
The problem is that the DL writers argue for their low expectations. They get thrown a few fetid crumbs and then wonder why everybody else isn’t grateful for such largess. Meanwhile, we expose Obomba as a liar, a weak leader, and a shill for the corporations and militarists and torturers, and the response here is “clap louder.”
Their only defense is to call names (“liberal purists”), make up stuff (“parroting right wing talking points”), and ask ridiculous meaningless questions (“Please show me – in detail, by naming names and counting votes – how Obama would have gotten the Public Option”) as if all this will just shut us up.
Well, it won’t.
To say that we bashed Bush while giving Congress a pass is quite disingenuous, DV. We most certainly called out Congress for voting for the Iraq War, Patriot Act, unfunded mandates such as Medicare part D and NCLB.
Please stop this nonsense.
hardly disingenuous and it isn’t nonsense. It’s your word against mine. You didn’t provide any links to back up your comment. I’m sensing you are getting frustrated with me. Sorry you are feeling that way if so.
Feel free to dig up all the posts the last 2 years of Bush Co years and find the ones where you bashed congress? I know I can speak for myself and say that I hardly ever blamed congress without blaming Bush. If ever.
Your examples are mostly the first 6 years I believe.
Pandora you seem to be speaking for Nemski. I’d like him to answer. He appears to be fine with how politics work and likes to point out that I either don’t know how it works or am naive to think it can work the way I want it. nemski seems to want to work within the confines of the current system and is fine with making light at my expense that I don’t.
Another interesting argument that is a non winner from Nemski. That’s 2 days in a row he’s posited some doozies.
A1,
you forgot semi-intelligent from DD and I think Cassy called some of us whiners and petulant.
Besides, this is how politics works. Duh.
Comment by Delaware Dem on 28 December 2009 at 11:16 am:
No, we are not, but absent a bloody revolution, or the defeat of all Republicans or all Democrats, how do you propose we change our politics.
Here’s an idea. Stop calling the fucking base names and comparing them to Teabaggers like CNN would.
Wait, I know, not making excuses for Obama by blaming Congress.
Here’s an idea? Not Assume that the Dems will have the super majority next term.
Better yet stop assuming that Obama is going to be here for 8 years.
Here’s another idea. Stop running to the middle.
LOL donviti LOL. I thought Pandora spoke well for me. However, I noticed you didn’t answer my question.
Doozies, you mean like not understanding why we need 60 votes. (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)
FYI, donviti, until you become a registered Democrat, you aren’t the base.
So, this all boils down to the following notion: Some liberals have very high expectations of Obama coupled with no understanding of our political reality, procedure or process. Donviti and A1 and anon believe that Obama can and should act like a dictator, ordering and forcing his will on the Congress, because hey, if Obama really wanted the public option he could have gotten it at the snap of his fingers, no matter what. And if Senate or House precedent, process or procedure get in the way, then such obstacles should be thrown aside by Obama. 60 votes? Pffft. Obama could have done it if he wanted to.
The irony here is Donviti and A1 are arguing that Obama behave like Bush, even though Donviti and A1 spend years arguing against Bush.
So pandora answered for you? but yet you said this?
Comment by nemski on 28 December 2009 at 11:05 am:
If you understand how politics works, but don’t accept it, how, pray tell, do you plan on getting your agenda passed?
From that response as I understand it, you accept it no?
How are you going to get your agenda passed?
and what is your agenda?
Comment by nemski on 28 December 2009 at 11:36 am:
FYI, donviti, until you become a registered Democrat, you aren’t the base.
Interesting. So this site is for Democrats then?
I’m so confused by this Del Lib thing more and more
In politics, the base is referred to as the pool of registered voters who vote in the primaries.
May I, nemski?
My agenda is progress. It involves working towards a goal, and not giving up at the first setback. It’s why I began with a starter home, rather than my dream house. It’s why I drove a Hyundai rather than a Mercedes or a BMW. I’ve always played the long game.
what is a very high expectation DD?
No more war
Public Option
Get rid of “narrow interests” like obama said on 1/20/09
Letting the Patriot act expire
Not being able to lock up citizens indefinitely
Releasing torture photo’s
DADT at the stroke of a pen
yes, you are right, high so lofty expectations.
Unlike you the only thing I can guarantee is 3 more years in office and a Dem majority for the next 12 months.
keep assuming that we have 8 years and will have a dem majority for all 4 cycles.
And, DV, you know very well that I’m not a registered Dem.
Thanks Pandora.
Donviti, your list is missing all ALL of the accomplishment. Why don’t your write them down as well.
your literalism is going to continue to be your down fall. 🙂
Pandora,
then you aren’t the base so stfu. 🙂
right nemski!
DD wrote: “The irony here is Donviti and A1 are arguing that Obama behave like Bush…”
No, the irony here is that we are asking that Obomba NOT behave like Bush. Instead, like Bush, we get more war, more lies, no justice, more hand-outs to corporations, and more discrimination.
We wanted Hope and Change. We got Nope and Same.
HCR 2009 = WMD 2002 Obomba lies while reform dies.
Comment by pandora on 28 December 2009 at 11:44 am:
May I, nemski?
My agenda is progress. It involves working towards a goal, and not giving up at the first setback. It’s why I began with a starter home, rather than my dream house. It’s why I drove a Hyundai rather than a Mercedes or a BMW. I’ve always played the long game.
Well, much like Donovan McNabb didn’t know that overtime ends even if no one scores, you might want to prepare your “long game” for 3 more years. Nothing is guaranteed. Not even a BMW after 5 years 🙂
So your point is… Obama has done nothing good, is the same as Bush, and we might as well have elected McCain/Palin because there is no difference?
DV asked “Interesting. So this site is for Democrats then? I’m so confused by this Del Lib thing more and more.”
Exactly, DV, exactly.
Agreed, Pandora isn’t the political base either.
Nemski? I really am curious who you think this website is for?
I always thought it was for liberals. I think that was where I went wrong among other areas
Comparing Obomba/Biden to McInsane/Palin is just another meaningless argument from the party of low expectations.
Sorry, don’t watch sports, so I don’t get the reference. That said, my long game has worked out well for me. Instant gratification leads to many downfalls. Balance is always the key. Consider this your fortune cookie comment of the day. 🙂
DV and A1, is your definition of a liberal mean that we should be unhappy overall with the Obama Administration?
So your point is… Obama has done nothing good, is the same as Bush, and we might as well have elected McCain/Palin because there is no difference?
Obama at this point has been almost a push really. Nothing has gotten worse and the powers that had influence still do. No one has been punished for anything and the politics (which you guys are fine with) are still the status quo.
I don’t know why everyone here treats it like he has 8 years to make all this change. The first year was a gimme to you all? Do you all know something I don’t? Even jason is saying you guys are assuming 8 years.
Are the dems going to have another majority next term?
The fact that you don’t see this logic as a problem is a problem.
DV and A1, is your definition of a liberal mean that we should be unhappy overall with the Obama Administration?
what do you mean we Nemski? You are a democrat?
and yes, as a liberal I’m looking at more war, CIA drones assassinating innocent people, indefinite detentions, patriot act provisions being renewed. Gitmo not shutting down, no public option
Care to compare meaningless arguments, A1?
The problem is that the DL writers argue for their low expectations. They get thrown a few fetid crumbs and then wonder why everybody else isn’t grateful for such largess. Meanwhile, we expose Obomba as a liar, a weak leader, and a shill for the corporations and militarists and torturers, and the response here is “clap louder.”
At least I couched my comment as a question. Seriously, if you’re going to dish out the insults…
And, frankly, you could use some PR classes. You are trying to get me to agree with you, aren’t you?
DV and A1, is your definition of a liberal mean that liberals should be unhappy overall with the Obama Administration?I see you answered it.
I don’t have a “definition of a liberal” like you do. I have a great understanding of liberal positions on policy issues such as HCR, war, justice, discrimination, human rights, and integrity. Based on Obomba’s performance to date, he is failing in all those areas.
Comment by pandora on 28 December 2009 at 11:53 am:
Sorry, don’t watch sports, so I don’t get the reference. That said, my long game has worked out well for me. Instant gratification leads to many downfalls. Balance is always the key. Consider this your fortune cookie comment of the day. 🙂
I don’t call having expectations after 12 months in office instant. Bush was responsible for 9/11 so this is Obama’s mess by my standards as well
A1 and DV, I, as a liberal, see many of the successes of the Obama Administration out weigh the compromise and failures.
pandora wrote: “And, frankly, you could use some PR classes.”
True. I’ll never be as nice as you. And just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I don’t like you. I kind of make that assumption about everybody here.
pandora also wrote: “You are trying to get me to agree with you, aren’t you?”
That is probably pretty hopeless at this point in time. Maybe in another year you will.
I understand that, Nemski. You see the glass as 1% full and I see it as 99% empty.
Hmm, I thought is was 99% full and 1% empty. 😉
That explains it. 🙂
as a (somewhat) neutral observer, I think DV’s being unrealistic. the “bush had 9/11 so Obama is responsible for everything as it is now” meme is disingenuous at best, at worst, specious reasoning.
sorry bud, calling it as i see it – a purity troll is not a proper goal, not in the real world at least.
anonone predicts future New York Post headline: “Obama Knew” 😉