"Obama is the best president of my lifetime."

[ProSense]

Obama is the best president of my lifetime.

by Anton Bursch

I am 37 years old and Obama has been the best president of my lifetime. In my opinion he has done his job fantastic. From keeping the country from going off of an economic cliff and saving the US auto industry to ending the war in Iraq, ending DADT, ending pre-existing conditions and ending Osama Bin Ladin. I hoped for a good President when I voted for him in 2008 and I have been happily surprised to experience having a great President for the last 3 years.

Being President means making the hardest decisions that there are to make and while I don't agree with every decision that he has made, I can see that he has made the best decisions he believes that he could make all things considered.

There are plenty here who do not share my opinion of the job President Obama has done these last few years. I respect most of them. Even those who say hyperbolic things like "Obama is more conservative than Reagan". I think that's just ridiculous to say but at least they aren't like the people here who compare Obama to Mussolini and Hitler. Like the one who called me a brown shirt the other day and wrote 'Heil Obama!' because I wouldn't condemn Obama for signing the defense authorization bill. Those people are just... I don't know... not right.

<...>

I am proud of President Obama. I am not going to pretend that I am not. How could I be proud of Obama when many here are so dissapointed in him? Maybe because instead of comparing Obama to an ideal President in my head I compare him to all the Presidents who have come before him and to all of the rest of the people in the world and how good they would be doing on the whole if they were President. I compare Obama to past Presidents like Clinton and Reagan and Bush and people like Markos and Greenwald and Krugman. Using that criteria Obama is the best president in my lifetime and I am excited to vote for him again this year! And I am not going to hide that fact! Life is too short to worry about the disapproval of strangers on the internet.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/01/02/1050690/-Obama-is-the-best-president-of-my-lifetime

Good diary. Of course there are the "Nixon was way more liberal" comments.

Let's get real!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100279586

Oh, and I agree!

The Case for Obama...a truly historic presidency
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108

Obama 2012!
http://www.democraticunderground.com/100219885

[Bucky]

1. No, "he has done his job fantastically."

[Mosby]

34. The -ly suffix is disappearing

It drives me crazy.

Remember this Apple slogan from 1997? "Think Different"

[Shanti Mama]

82. I agree, but then you must be at least as old as I am

I think it's generally accepted now to interchange "good" and "well", to use "bad" as an adverb and to omit the "ly." We're a dieing breed.

[Erose999]

96. Given that he was chartered by Wall St. and big corporate donors to do their bidding, I'll agree

with that assessment. He has done a fantastic job.

Unfortunately, he doesn't work for the American people....

[WI_DEM]

2. Good letter

and good points. And no, Nixon was not way more liberal. For a Republican he was more liberal, of course, but he is not more liberal than Obama has been--nor had as much integrity for that matter.

[RC]

37. Obama has proven he is not very Liberal either.

[ixion]

3. If he's the 'best', we're screwed

because he's pretty much sucked.

[Walk away]

6. You haven't said who has been better in the past 37 years.

I can't wait to hear who you pick.

[JohnnyRingo]

39. Last week I listed one example of good things Obama has done after another to this poster

After each one he essentially held his arm out and said "talk to the hand". He considers Obama the worst president in history and is consistantly calling for one term at best, and a cold dark cell in the Hague at worst, and no, he didn't like Clinton either. He admits he despises the Democratic party at large as much as he hates the Republicans. He refers to the Democratic Party as "your party".

When pressed for an alternative, he dodges. To say he hates Obama is a gross understatement to the point that Sean Hannity would advise he rein it in for the sake of common decency, so you do the math.

Since our exchange last week, one DUer has me on ignore, and I really hope it's him:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=56524

[A Simple Game]

49. Strange that you would link to that. Your first response, number 43

makes fun of union members. What do you have against unions?

In response number 103 you appear to have a problem with liberals. Just what is wrong with being liberal?

Do yourself and the rest of us a favor and scroll to the bottom of this page and click on the about button.

Now read the first line under the Mission Statement. Just in case you don't have the time here it is: "Democratic Underground is an online community where politically liberal people can do their part to effect political and social change by:"

Did you see the word conservative or right in that statement? This is a liberal web site. If you have a problem with liberals and union members, perhaps you should find a new place to post!

Signed
A Proud Liberal and Union Member

[JohnnyRingo]

62. I don't know what you're talking about. I'm a proud liberal and lifetime union member local 717.

as was my father before me.

I was refering to my favorite expression: "we'll get to that right away" becuase it usually meant we wouldn't. It was an example of workplace levity perhaps, but making fun of unions? I'm sorry you think so. I'm also not so liberal as to despise Obama out of hand, so take my liberal card for that sin if you must.

I went on to explain how Obama bailed GM out in his first year in office against the screams of Romneys and Burtons who wanted GM to "rot on the vine" for the sake of destroying the UAW once and for all, and I have him to personally thank for my pension check. I made this clear in #142 where I also railed against libertarian ideals:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=73373

If you think anyone at the UAW Hall here is calling for Obama's ouster in 2012 because of some percieved betrayal of deep liberal values, you don't know how grateful we are that he alone stood up for us in our time of need. Obama is our man, and I'll defend him from the puritan left and intolerant right until my keyboard wears out.

My complaint with ixion is that he absolutely hates Obama and Democrats in general. Though he doesn't have much good to say about Republicans either, he walks and quacks like a Ron Paul libertarian duck but knows better than to advocate voting for him here. Foreign intervention seems to be his sole motivating issue in life, and he doesn't accept anyone in the Oval Office who participates in such. That only leaves one potential candidate as I see it.

You have a lot of nerve telling a lifelong card carrying registered Democratic union member to post elsewhere than a site called "Democratic Underground" because you see it as a forum fit only for activists from the furthest reaches of the left wing. If that's true, then it sure has changed since 2003 when I joined. I recall a time not so long ago when no one would dare bash Hillary, her husband, or Obama, though one would be hard pressed to define any of them "far left liberals".

When they rename the site "Liberal Lovefest" I may consider "finding a new place to post".

[A Simple Game]

68. You still have a funny way of supporting unions.

"we'll get to that right away" because it usually meant we wouldn't." Nice way to show your support for unions. That wasn't the way it was in my union.

You then tell the poster you were responding to go to liberal loveland, and then begin to denigrate all liberals by association. You then call the poster a Ron Paul Libertarian, which is it?

I have all the nerve I need to call a random poster on the internet on his words, not what he says he is.

And shame on you for putting words in my mouth, show me where I said I see this forum fit only for activists from the furthest reaches of the left wing. I am a socialist leaning liberal, not an anarchist or revolutionary.

[JohnnyRingo]

77. OK

"Did you see the word conservative or right in that statement? This is a liberal web site. If you have a problem with liberals and union members, perhaps you should find a new place to post! "

If you want to report me for being a little too much of a Democrat here, have at it.

When someone like the poster in question uses this site to call for Obama to serve time in a cold cell at The Hague, he shouldn't be a bit surprised to hear from me or anyone else for that matter. Instead he went on to point out how immoral I am by his lofty standards. Now I hear from you telling me I failed your liberal purity test and that I "should find a new place to post".


On edit, I think I see your problem with me, and it has nothing to do with unions or liberal views, it has to do with my party membership.

I searched your posts and found many that, like ixiom, called for a single term by Obama. The fact that you consistantly refer to Dems as: "you democrats" is telling indeed. It sounds like you're third party all the way.

Your comment on Ron Paul yesterday:

"I'm starting to think he is the Republican candidate you fear the most. "
"Your actually afraid of him, aren't you? You realize that he is the one Republican that can actually take votes away from President Obama"

You really respect him, don't you? And don't tell me you aren't third party:

"If you are happy with what the two major parties have to offer, good for you."

"I'm not, the Democrat running and I am sure whoever gets the nomination for the Republicans are not liberals. Will my voting for the most liberal candidate possible, which could still be President Obama although not likely, make my world better? For me, yes it will. I will know I did the right thing."

"How is anything going to change if we don't change it? Do you really believe voting for the same two parties will facilitate change? The politicians certainly aren't going to change their status quo. don't give me that crap about changing the party from within, hasn't worked for 30 years, isn't going to work now. "

"I am all done voting for someone just because they aren't the other guy. from now on I will be voting for someone because I want them to win. If you are happy settling for less than what you want, good for you. "

Of course, you may be talking about all those other third party candidates who will be running against Romney and Obama.

Good Luck.

[A Simple Game]

80. I am reporting it, to you, that's why we're having this discussion.

This is the internet, we can have our opinions right or wrong.

You had a problem with a poster, fine, why did you have to bring unions and liberals into it. I belong to those groups and I had nothing to do with your problem.

Have a better aim with your venom. I saw nothing in the post you were replying to that led me to believe the poster was either liberal or a union person.

True Democrats support unions!

Edit to add: to you in subject line.

[JohnnyRingo]

81. You don't care a whit about Democrats, and you refer to "your union" in past tense.

And yes, we do have a difference. We'll be on opposing sides in November 2012.

I can live with that, but don't insinuate I'm unworthy of posting in Democratic Underground because I don't follow your zeal in unseating the Democratic president.

[Walk away]

97. That was great! You said it all. Thanks nt

[A Simple Game]

104. I refer to my union in the past tense because our mill shut down and the local was disbanded.

I am no longer a card carrying member.

Why do you think we will be on opposing sides in November 2012? I may well vote for President Obama, he has greatly disappointed me, but he may also end up being the best choice I have. The election is almost a year away, how do you know who will be the best choice? Have you seen a ballot already? They aren't out yet in New York.

Your posting on DU has nothing to do with my "zeal to unseat the Democratic President", it has to do with your being so right wing. No doubt you are a better Democrat than me.

[JohnnyRingo]

105. Wow! Right wing?

That's a first for me, but I guess perspective might have something to do with it.

I know one thing, I'd never consider voting for Ron Paul next year. I'd also not consider voting for any other Republican against Obama in 2012, but those of us in the "right wing" are like that.

[A Simple Game]

107. If you aren't considering voting for Ron Paul, why would you even mention it?

I plan to vote for the most liberal candidate that I can, being as my perspective is from the left and all. That may be President Obama, and it may not, haven't seen a ballot yet. Never know President Obama may move toward the center from the right. Then you would have a conundrum wouldn't you?

[ixion]

40. For you and all the others who need to know: My personal favorite has been Carter.

I consider him to be one of the most ethically consistent presidents post WWII.

On the other hand, I've been not-at-all impressed with Obama, or Clinton. True to the anemic Democratic Platform, they sucked ever-so-slightly less that the Bushes or Ray-gun.

So, to sum up: Every president in my lifetime (I'm 46), except Carter, has sucked. Carter was rewarded for this ethical consistency and honestly noble intentions, as I'm sure you know, with the October Surprise. I was just a teen back then, and even at that young age it was obvious that the event had been staged. It has gone downhill from there.

Happy pappy?

[Mojorabbit]

43. I agree with you on Carter.

I have a deep respect for the man and this country would be a better place if his ideas had been followed in so many areas.

[FarLeftFist]

11. Who's the best of your lifetime?

[freshwest]

46. JFK, Carter, Obama. But the nation has gone so far right since then...

That it's almost impossible to recall those past presidents.

[pipoman]

12. I too am on the edge of my seat

waiting to hear who's been better in the last 37 years..

[surfdog]

14. Sitting and waiting...

Can't wait to hear this...

[WI_DEM]

17. Well in my life time we've had

Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush I, Clinton, Bush II & Obama.

I'd say LBJ was the best on domestic affairs & Carter was very good on several issues--like energy and middle east peace, but overall I'd say Obama the best overall. Had it not been for the BIG tragedy of Vietnam I'd say LBJ was the best of my life time.

[Lionessa]

63. Ding ding ding!

[izquierdista]

4. Yeah, but talk about setting the bar low.

If you are under 42, look what you have to choose from. You start with a crook and work your way down from there.

[cyglet]

7. Setting the bar low

(and I'm 35).

[HopeHoops]

8. K&R

[Frustratedlady]

9. Considering that he was obstructed in most things he wanted to do...

I'd agree that he has done a fantastic job.

People forget that he not only had to contend with Republican opposition to each and every idea he had, he had to contend with their racism and disrespect for the office. After all that, he continued to handle himself with grace and intelligence.

It's easy to sit in front of a computer screen and spew criticisms. Put yourself in his shoes and tell us how you would have done things differently.

As far as I'm concerned, Obama's done a great job with what he had to work with. I'll go even further than that and say that this First Couple of the United States is THE best we have ever had in the White House. THAT is what gets the Republicans panties in a twist. How dare we have a black family in the WH.

Idiots!

[raindaddy]

13. What is it that Obama really wanted to do?

Grace and intelligence aside.. Obama really didn't want the public option.. And he really didn't want to stop supporting Bush's hand picked dictator in the tribal state of Afghanistan.. And he didn't want to prosecute the banksters who took down our economy. He didn't want to stand up to the Bush administration's shredding of our civil liberties, nor the abuses big corporations like BP, Monsanto,etc continue to get away with... We at least know what he didn't want.
It's just as easy to sit in front of a computer "and spew" excuses. The high point of Obama's presidency was we elected our first black president who campaigned as a populist.. Unfortunately it's been a downhill ride after that..

[FarLeftFist]

16. He also never said most of those things. He was FOR an Afghanistan surge, he ended torture

He fined BP, never heard him talk about prosecuting banksters; only regulating Wall Street, he flirted with the idea of a public option but his own party didn't fully back him. How about this for "downhill": http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/?page=1

[raindaddy]

23. He tried to claim he didn't campaign on the public option.. But as we know he "misspoke"...

Let's not forget the title of the thread.. We're talking great presidents here.. I'm not saying Obama hasn't had some high points.. But you can't claim a transformation of the health care system and leave it pretty much under the control of the private insurance industry.. I can't see a great president continuing the craziness in Afghanistan or ignoring the crimes of the "too big to fail" banks that are even bigger than before O came into office, or continuing the 9/11 civil liberties shredding.

Bottom line let's at least not fool ourselves..We're living under a political system that's been completely taken over by corporate interest $$$.. And that INCLUDES Obama.. And as long as that continues there won't be any great Presidents... Just co-opted mediocrity...

[ProSense]

24. Seriously

He tried to claim he didn't campaign on the public option.. But as we know he "misspoke"...

...a pulblic option is valuable, but using it to try to denegrate the significance of health care reform is simply missing the forest for the trees.

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/100294294

[FarLeftFist]

31. Here's a solution: HELP ELECT MORE LIBERALS/PROGRESSIVES for Obama to work with.

He has had a hell of a rabid republican opposition.

[ProSense]

50. Exactly. n/t

[Selatius]

76. You need the money and the numbers to do this.

We got the numbers. The money is the greater hurdle, in my opinion, and it always will be as long as we operate under the current regime of privately-funded elections.

[Motown_Johnny]

18. Welcome to DU, I know you are new here

but when stating opinions as fact it helps to have some facts to back up your opinion. The OP is all opinion and makes that very clear.


You are going to address things like the fact that we now have air pollution limits on Mercury that we never had before (being compared to removing lead from gasoline) before you can just claim that everything has been downhill.

I'm going to post my very old copy and paste response to this type of argument. I could update it but right now it doesn't seem worth the effort.



Two great choices for Supreme Court.

The Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act

The Matthew Shepard Hates Crimes Prevention Act (which they said could not be done)

Children's Health Insurance

Tobacco Regulation

Credit Card Reform

Student Loan Reform

The Stimulus (including the largest tax cut ever, the largest investment in clean energy ever, the single largest investment in education in our country ever)

Health Reform

Wall Street Reform

The New G.I. Bill

The Food Safety Modernization Act (the most expansive food reform bill since the 1930s)

The Don't Ask Don't Tell Repeal

The New Start Treaty (even when the (R)s said he would never be able to get it passed)

Locking up over half the loose nuclear material in the world in less than half of his first term, something most (R)s thought impossible.




Most of that list is from The Rachel Maddow Show and is included in this clip
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/#4077 ...

In that clip she also estimates that ~85% of what President Obama said he wanted to accomplish in his first term had been accomplished in the first half of his first term.




Have we gotten everything we want? Oh Hell No! But the idea that this guy isn't worth reelecting is simply ridiculous from my point of view.

[raindaddy]

30. Thanks for the welcome..

I may be new to DU but I'm not new to politics..Is there anything "specific" in my comments you wish to contend? The title of this threat suggests Obama is a great president not Obama has had some accomplishments... "Great" presidents don't sign bills that threaten our civil liberties or continue endless wars with questionable benefits to the people living in this country or Afghanistan...

[Motown_Johnny]

36. the idea that you can read his mind

because you claim to know what he really wanted



Prove to me you can read minds and I will rephrase my statement, If you can't do that then please site specifics.

[raindaddy]

65. I don't need to read his mind.

Grace and intelligence aside.. Obama really didn't want the public option.. And he really didn't want to stop supporting Bush's hand picked dictator in the tribal state of Afghanistan.. And he didn't want to prosecute the banksters who took down our economy. He didn't want to stand up to the Bush administration's shredding of our civil liberties, nor the abuses big corporations like BP, Monsanto,etc continue to get away with... We at least know what he didn't want.
It's just as easy to sit in front of a computer "and spew" excuses. The high point of Obama's presidency was we elected our first black president who campaigned as a populist.. Unfortunately it's been a downhill ride after that..

................
There's the original post... The facts. Anyone who wanted the public option negotiates down from the more liberal single payer.. They don't try to deny they campaigned in support of it. We're still in Afghanistan, no Wall Street convictions, he signed the Defense Bill etc..
I don't need to read his mind his actions speak volumes.. Is he better than anything the Republicans have to offer. Yes. But lookng at the line-up it hardly qualifies him as a great President. You might end up becoming a great excuse maker though.

[Motown_Johnny]

71. How can you know what anyone really wants?

Half the time I don't even know what I really want.


The very fact that you have convinced yourself that you know his mind disqualifies your opinion.

Just because he did not negotiate down from a more liberal single payer system does not mean he didn't want the public option. It means he was trying to not fight a battle he knew he would lose.

The rest of your reasoning is just as flawed as that example. If you can't read his mind then you don't know what he really wanted. You need to consider the possibility that you are simply wrong.

[raindaddy]

100. And you not only know what he wants to assume he's prophetic

Just because he did not negotiate down from a more liberal single payer system does not mean he didn't want the public option. It means he was trying to not fight a battle he knew he would lose.
...........

You're not only reading his mind but you're giving him superpowers..Logical assumption can't compete with that. Obama doesn't need to act like a leader and fight for the welfare of the middle class because in his infinite wisdom he understands the futility.. You've created a President beyond mortal criticism.. Good luck with that Johnny....

[Motown_Johnny]

101. I know what he was trying to do, I don't know what he wanted

I am basing my statement on his actions, you are basing yours on mind reading.

[raindaddy]

109. You're making suppositions based on his actions..

I am basing my statement on his actions, you are basing yours on mind reading.
................................
You're making suppositions based on his actions.. Good luck with your great president who won't stand up to an eight % congress because he's afraid he'll lose. Maybe if he actually lost a couple of battles fighting for something like the public option, or taking a stand against a Defense Bill that challenges our civil liberties you wouldn't see liberals so divided over Obama's presidency..

[FarLeftFist]

10. I'm 32 and I say that same thing all the time. "Obama is the best President of my lifetime"

I don't know what straw-man president people are comparing him to.

[Motown_Johnny]

20. I'm 48 and I might say the same thing

I could argue for LBJ but Vietnam was such a huge disaster I think I would lose that argument. I could also argue for JFK but that would end very shortly after his civil rights accomplishments which were mostly finished by LBJ. I don't want to diminish the impact of the civil rights act or the changes that these two presidents brought to our nation, but they both seem to hang their hat on just that one peg.



I don't think anyone can argue that Carter or Clinton have the legislative accomplishments that President Obama has, plus he really did stop an economic collapse and turn it into a modest, nearly jobless, recovery.


All the Republican presidents in my lifetime have not only been disasters but have been criminally complicit while in the executive branch to one extent or another. Ford's pardon of Nixon is the least offensive act but still rates as complicity in my eyes.



I think these people are just never happy with anything and need to lash out. There really isn't any reasonable argument that I can think of which doesn't rate Pres. Obama as the best, or one of the best, in 50 years.

[dog_lovin_dem]

15. I agree with the

poster 100% and I have been around for 53 years. Considering the crap he has had to deal with, (media, no compromise congress, etc.), he has far outdone every other president in my lifetime. I didn't expect a pony, and I also didn't expect him to accomplish as much as he has under such adverse circumstances. Obama 2012!!!

[JackRiddler]

19. Given the history of presidents, we might ask: What was the best natural disaster of my lifetime?

[frazzled]

21. My mother is 86

And she has said essentially the same thing, and she was not a supporter of his in the primaries (she was a staunch Hillary Clinton fan). She deplores the difficult time he has been given in the press, and she says that to her, he is the "most intelligent" president she has seen, including Bill Clinton (who she thought was extremely intelligent).

I just add this to insert the opinion of a different age group who is of this opinion and has followed presidents for even more years.

[Frustratedlady]

55. I'm in my mid-70s and I agree with your mother.

The only complaint I have about Obama was the time he wasted trying to "work with" the Republicans. They told him up-front they had no intention of working with him and would do what they could to make him a one-term president. I think he truly believed he could win them over. I despise them for the way they have treated him. NEVER have I felt this way about Congress or the Repubs until his term. My great-grandchildren are more adult than any of those clowns.

Oh, and you can throw in a few of the Supremes, as well.

Give Obama a Democratically controlled House and Senate, then see how great he is.

[justgamma]

22. I'm 61 and I agree.

He's accomplished a lot with what he had to work with. He's not a dictator and has been fought every inch of the way. Why did the right fight so hard? Because they could then make the claim that Obama hasn't kept his promises. That's what they said they would do and that's what they did.

That strategy has worked extremely well. Just read DU. He get's a lot of blame for stuff that Congress fought him on.

The right is not going to win with this old girl. I will never get discouraged and I will never give up hope. I will keep pushing Obama in the right direction. I will work my behind off to give him a Congress that will work for the good of the people of this country.

[liberalmike27]

25. Probably true, maybe Carter, Kennedy, or Johnson, since I'm 56

But it kind of makes me sad too, that Obama would be considered the "best." I guess it's sort of like that feeling I get that the republicans of the 1980s and 1990s actually seem liberal now, or that Obama has embraced some of their policy positions, and allowed republicans to reject positions they once held, and move even further to the right.

I guess we take what we can get. I hope for more in the second term.

[johnaries]

67. I'm 54 (55 in March) and IMHO

Kennedy is hard to compare, since he was so tragically removed from office. The Cuban Missile Crisis I would say was evidence of his greatness, but the Bay of Pigs was a disaster from all aspects. Most of his potential greatness could be seen in his legacy as carried out by Johnson.

As for Johnson, he gave us the Civil Rights Bill which has to be one of the greatest Progressive acts of all time. However, he must have been complicit in the Potemkin lie which led to the escalation of the Vietnam War. A permanent stain on his Presidency.

Carter has been one of the best ex-President's ever! But he was largely ineffective as President. He had some great ideas that - if they had been carried out - would have avoided many of the problems we have today. It can be argued that if he had not been saddled with the remnants of the Nixon "trickle-down" economy he could have done better. But he didn't.

Clinton accomplished a lot of good things - among them DADT which at the time was a huge accomplishment of the LGBT community. The recent repeal of DADT is a major accomplishment of Obama, and an even bigger accomplishment for the LGBT community. This is a strong argument for the "baby steps" approach that some here don't seem to understand much less accept.

Of course, some can argue that the Clinton Administration was more of a Clinton/Gore Admin. It can also be argued that it was really a Clinton/Gore/Clinton Admin as Hillary seemed to have a lot of influence. But although Clinton inherited a bad economy from Poppy (really, the result of Reaganomics that Poppy inherited), the later economic boom can be somewhat attriduted to Clinton but most of it was the result of the Tech Bubble (which Gore tried to warn us wouldn't last).

Obama has admittedly made some mistakes, but he has made some huge accomplishments. Many of those accomplishments included some compromises that leaves them tainted in various degrees, but they were huge accomplishments regardless. Even more so when one considers what he inherited and what he has had to deal with.

If Obama isn't the "best" President in my lifetime, he definitely ranks very highly.

[treestar]

26. I would have to say so

Maybe JFK was better, but though in my lifetime, I don't remember it.

Carter and Clinton are the only two other possible choices. I will give Obama that he did more with less cooperative opposition. And Clinton signed some downright right wing things that he could have vetoed without leverage for something destructive.

[liberalmike27]

27. I was explaining

My problem with Obama the other night to a friend. We were in a time that called for broad, sweeping change, dreaming big dreams, trying to implement huge changes. And sadly, Obama and the congress who resisted a lot, made a few nips and tucks around the edges of an intransigent, stolid way. And when Obama was being accused of being the "mad socialist" by the right wing media, he's up there trimming, making a bit of a cut, a small change here or there.

Where he's failed to me is in not actually acting out the role, for which he was being accused. If FOX is going to act that way, why did he not get out there and push for single-payer until the end. Why didn't he push for the repeal of the banking law that sunk us in 1999, in part bringing this failure--and why not demand no bonuses be paid out of government money loaned because banks were irresponsible to whom they loaned money. Why not push for a living wage, some sweeping changes, perhaps pull back on globalization, and practice it at a much slower pace. Why not allow those tax cuts to expire, if republicans didn't want to play. After all, Obama had the advantage, as they WERE going to expire. Republicans would have folded, had he put on his poker face. The changes they made in the inheritance tax were huge, a huge handout, though rarely discussed in the media.

I understand the congressional intransigence. I understand the media intransigence. But that bully pulpit, standing there, lonely and underused, could have gone a long way to make some more radical changes, and his base would be on-board and cheering. I guess I can see why young people, who a fairly short-view would see him as the best. I just see Democrats giving slack, over, and over, and republicans pulling it taught with a seemingly never-ending move to the right. And it isn't surprising we're pushing up against fascism, and a difficult road back to reason.

[RegieRocker]

28. This reminds me of...

When my son scored a10th grade reading level in 5th grade. I was proud of him. Then I thought " wow those 10th graders must be really dumb".

[Pacafishmate]

29. Obama is the most mediocre president of my lifetime.

The only positive thing that you can really say about him is , hey at least he didn't get us embroiled into any 10 year conflicts. I prefer Clinton minus the gun ban.

[CakeGrrl]

32. Rec - Obama 2012!

[Number23]

69. Second

[Xicano]

33. I disagree

At age 45 I've been alive through Presidents Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush Sr, Clinton, Bush Jr and Obama. Even though I'm not thrilled with Clinton either. Nevertheless I think President Clinton did a better job than President Obama. "Its the economy stupid." Remember?

One of the posters above mentioned about President Obama:

People forget that he not only had to contend with Republican opposition to each and every idea he had, he had to contend with their racism and disrespect for the office. After all that, he continued to handle himself with grace and intelligence.

First of all dealing with "Republican opposition" comes with the job. To use that as an excuse is like a race car driver trying to use "traffic opposition" getting into his way on the race track at each and every turn. Sorry, but, that's part of racing and how well you deal with traffic is part of what determines how well of a race car driver you are. Similarly how well a President deals with political opposition in Washington reflects on how well of a President they are. And I think there's too much making up of excuses for Obama's ineffective ability to deal with political opposition.

Also the poster above mentions: "he (President Obama) had to contend with their racism and disrespect for the office." President Clinton had to contend with their obsession to destroy his Presidency as well. How many millions of dollars and how many years did "Republican opposition" spend trying to destroy President Clinton? Remember the Republican picked and lead "independent counsel" by Kenneth Starr? They doged President Clinton at least as much as they have President Obama if not more. But Clinton was still able to get a balanced budget and deal with foreign policy issues such as Bosnia, maintaining containment of Iraq, reprisal attacks against terrorist camps in Afghanistan, etc.

I might not agree with or like everything President Clinton did while he was in office, but, IMO he was a more effective President than President Obama is.

[ProSense]

35. Actually,

First of all dealing with "Republican opposition" comes with the job. To use that as an excuse is like a race car driver trying to use "traffic opposition" getting into his way on the race track at each and every turn. Sorry, but, that's part of racing and how well you deal with traffic is part of what determines how well of a race car driver you are. Similarly how well a President deals with political opposition in Washington reflects on how well of a President they are. And I think there's too much making up of excuses for Obama's ineffective ability to deal with political opposition.

...no it not an excuse, it's a fact. Opposition does not equal obstruction at all cost.

Republican obstructionism is at an all-time high

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100237492

[Xicano]

38. Actually,

I don't think you're taking into account what happens behind closed doors. Much of the "dealing with effectively" happens behind closed doors and never makes it to the news much less on the floor of congress. This is the game President Obama, and I'm sorry, but he sucks at. Politics has been referred to as a blood sport long before President Obama entered into the picture.

We'll just have to agree to disagree because I still stand by my above post.

[ProSense]

41. I'm

I don't think you're taking into account what happens behind closed doors. Much of the "dealing with effectively" happens behind closed doors and never makes it to the news much less on the floor of congress. This is the game President Obama, and I'm sorry, but he sucks at. Politics has been referred to as a blood sport long before President Obama entered into the picture.

...not even sure what that means. This President has a significant record of accomplishments vastly more progressive than of recent Presidencies. Are you saying that other Presidencies have been more transparent? That would be inaccurate. In your previous comment you stated:

"I might not agree with or like everything President Clinton did while he was in office, but, IMO he was a more effective President than President Obama is."

Clinton had one of the least transparent Presidencies.

Jonathan Chait:

<...>

It is odd that Bill Clinton’s imagined role as ass-kicking economic savior has become the object of such extensive liberal fantasy. We don’t have to speculate as to what Clinton would have done if Republicans had blocked his economic stimulus. It actually happened. Clinton had campaigned promising a stimulus bill to alleviate widespread economic pain, with unemployment at 7.5 percent at the start of his term. Like Obama, Clinton needed a handful of Republican senators to pass it (Obama needed two Republican votes to break a filibuster, Clinton three). Clinton’s proposed stimulus was $19.5 billion. Unable to break a Republican filibuster, Clinton offered to pare it down to $15.4 billion. Republicans killed it anyway, creating an image of a Clinton administration in disarray.

Certainly, the circumstances faced by Clinton were different. (For one thing, the recession was far less deep and passed its worst point shortly after he took office, making the case for stimulus less urgent.) Still, nothing in this episode suggests Clinton possessed any special communicative or legislative skill that would have enabled him or his wife, had either held office in 2009, to pass a larger stimulus than the $787 billion bill Obama signed.

<...>

The rest of Clinton’s first two years consisted of a demoralizing procession of debacles and retreats. A series of Clinton appointments—Lani Guinier, Zoe Baird—came under conservative fire and were withdrawn in a panic. He steered his agenda toward right-of-center goals, like the North American Free Trade Agreement and a crime bill, serving only to alienate his liberal allies without dampening hysterical attacks from conservatives and the business lobby. Health-care reform collapsed entirely, in part because liberals refused to support a compromise final measure. Six months into Clinton’s presidency, after he had abandoned his effort to integrate gays into the military, Bob Herbert summarized what had already settled as the liberal narrative: “The disappointment and disillusionment with President Clinton are widespread … He doesn’t seem to understand that much of the disappointment and disillusionment is because he tries so hard to be liked by everyone.” Hardly anybody contested that portrait.

After Republicans swept the midterm elections, Clinton moved further rightward. He famously declared that “the era of big government is over” and brought in reptilian operator Dick Morris—not yet the right-wing conspiracy-monger seen on Fox News these days, but distinctly right of center—as his chief political adviser. He signed a welfare-reform bill containing such Draconian provisions that several liberals resigned from his administration in protest.

http://nymag.com/news/politics/liberals-jonathan-chait-2011-11/

[Xicano]

44. Hmmmm...

This President has a significant record of accomplishments vastly more progressive than of recent Presidencies.

I hope you don't think these are progressive accomplishments:

-Extending Republican tax-cuts for the 1%.
-Expanding needless wars.
-Passing the NDAA
-Voting for (while still Senator) FISA
-Continuing the no Habeas Corpus policy
-Ordering the assasination of a U.S. Citizen without any due process
-Increasing the War on Drugs effort
-Passed a healthcare plan almost identical to those that had been supported by Republicans such as Mitt Romney
-Tells Progressives and Liberals to go eat their peas.

I could list more, but, I have to get back to work. And sorry, but, I don't like peas.

n/t

[ProSense]

48. You

I hope you don't think these are progressive accomplishments:

-Extending Republican tax-cuts for the 1%.
-Expanding needless wars.
-Passing the NDAA
-Voting for (while still Senator) FISA
-Continuing the no Habeas Corpus policy
-Ordering the assasination of a U.S. Citizen without any due process
-Increasing the War on Drugs effort
-Passed a healthcare plan almost identical to those that had been supported by Republicans such as Mitt Romney
-Tells Progressives and Liberals to go eat their peas.

...do know that a vote as a Senator is not an accomplishment as President, right?

Obama ended the Iraq war and just withdred 10,000 troops from Afghanistan

The Republican obstruction mentioned is the reason the tax cuts for the rich were extended. Obama is still working to end them.

I supposed it's easy to ignore the signing statement, the fact that he does not have a policy of "no Habeas Corpus" regardless of interpretations of existing law.

Also, one of the problems here is using strategic arguments, ones designed to counter Republicans, as the basis to reject health care reform.

RomneyCare is a strategic argument that backs Romney into a corner.

In fall 2005 the House and Senate each passed health care insurance reform bills. The legislature made a number of changes to Governor Romney's original proposal, including expanding MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) coverage to low-income children and restoring funding for public health programs. The most controversial change was the addition of a provision which requires firms with 11 or more workers that do not provide "fair and reasonable" health coverage to their workers to pay an annual penalty. This contribution, initially $295 annually per worker, is intended to equalize the free care pool charges imposed on employers who do and do not cover their workers.

On April 12, 2006 Governor Mitt Romney signed the health legislation. Romney vetoed 8 sections of the health care legislation, including the controversial employer assessment. Romney also vetoed provisions providing dental benefits to poor residents on the Medicaid program, and providing health coverage to senior and disabled legal immigrants not eligible for federal Medicaid. The legislature promptly overrode six of the eight gubernatorial section vetoes, on May 4, 2006, and by mid-June 2006 had overridden the remaining two.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massachusetts_health_care_reform#Legislation

Romney was glad to take credit for a bill he vetoed in large part. Now he's trying to run from it.

As for the President's progressive accomplishments:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100219885

http://upload.democraticunderground.com/100294294

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100233108

[Frustratedlady]

60. After Obama has had 8 years in office, I'll come back and compare him to Clinton, God willing.

I realize it feels like Obama has been in office for a long time, but let's give him a break. You can't compare his 3 years to Clinton's 8. Be fair.

As for dealing with Republican opposition? Of course it comes with the job. Opposition didn't include treating him like a dog. I'd say Obama came up with some pretty clever maneuvers to throw it back in their faces without boasting about it. This young man has been taught how to use his manners; unfortunately, the Republicans skipped that class.

They inferred that he was a wimp. I think he proved them wrong on that count, as well.

I stand by my statement that Obama, having to contend with the racist attitude of the Republicans and Tea Party, had a lot to do with his accomplishments in this less than one term. You can't compare that to Clinton's BJ. Granted, that was a horrible time for Clinton, but it didn't cut to the soul like I'm sure much of the "coded" messages of the Republicans did to Obama. He's held his head high through it all and kept right on working.

I'm white and it broke my heart to see this treatment of him. I can't imagine the hurt this young family has endured as they took the high road to try to save face while being looked down on by those who should know better. Shame on them.

[1stlady]

75. I totally agree

Clinton, didn't have to deal with a fake news channel that bashed him and used racial slurs against him 24/7. The rethugs basically came after Clinton for scandals he was actually a part of, Clinton cheated on his wife, he got a blow job in the WH etc. Now just imagine the type of intense hatred and fake outrage the rethugs and the media would make if Obama actaully did the scandalous things Clinton did. I respect Obama more than Clinton, but I wont compare their presidencys until or if Obama has completed 8yrs.

[msongs]

42. Astroturfing, PR, 2012 = 2011 nt

[bvar22]

45. That is a sad statement about politics & the Rightward drift in the US over the last 40 years.

For many people, the opening statement is TRUE,
however, those of us who remember the New Deal and the Great Society will laugh.
I NEVER thought I would ever say that LBJ was the Most Liberal President of the last 1/2 century!
But There it IS.

I guess if you have no living memory of what Democrats Used to Be,
then what passes for "Democrats" today will be The New Normal,
but some of us remember:

"In our day these economic truths have become accepted as self-evident. We have accepted, so to speak, a second Bill of Rights under which a new basis of security and prosperity can be established for all—regardless of station, race, or creed.

Among these are:

*The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation;

*The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation;

*The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living;

*The right of every businessman, large and small, to trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home or abroad;

*The right of every family to a decent home;

*The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health;

*The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accident, and unemployment;

*The right to a good education.

All of these rights spell security. And after this war is won we must be prepared to move forward, in the implementation of these rights, to new goals of human happiness and well-being." FDR, SOU, 1944

Please note:
*The above items are labeled as Basic Human "Rights" to be protected BY our government Of the People,
and NOT "commodities" to be sold to Americans by For Profit Corporations.

*The above was excerpted from the State of The Union Address delivered by a Democratic president.
THAT is the establishment of Party Policy.
It may surprise some here that the above were once Traditional Democratic Party Values.


---bvar22
Once a loyal, enthusiastic, Mainstream Center, FDR/LBJ Working Class DEMOCRAT,
now labeled as Far Left Fringe.
I haven't changed.



[font color=firebrick][center]"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans.
I want a party that will STAND UP for Working Americans."
---Paul Wellstone [/font][/center]
[center][/font]
[font size=1]photo by bvar22
Shortly before Sen Wellstone was killed[/center][/font]



[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[Skittles]

84. CORRECT

[Betty Karlson]

99. I suggest you repost the above in a separate thread

It certainly deserves one.

Thanks for the post.

[freshwest]

47. Thanks for the OP and links, ProSense.

[blkmusclmachine]

51. Notice that the title does NOT say "Best DEMOCRATIC President." There's a reason for that:

Considering what the Country wanted, and thought they voted for in 2008, this Administration has been a total bait-and-switch. We were lied to, plain and simple.

[Skinner]

52. That makes no sense.

If he had said "Best Democratic President," the implication would have been that there was a Republican president who was better.

[Rex]

86. Good point.

[great white snark]

53. My first K&R of the new year.

And I can think of no one I would rather kick....figuratively of course.


Thank you ProSense.

[T S Justly]

54. The subject line could have been said by a ...

A four year old.

[frazzled]

57. But it wasn't

I'm not getting your point. A 37-year-old wrote it, and people of all ages have chimed in with their opinions (pro and con). Four-year-olds don't write subject lines all that well. This is not a convincing objection.

[Karmadillo]

56. Three year olds say the darnedest things.

nt

[ProSense]

58. Especially

"Three year olds say the darnedest things."

...ones that make more sense than that comment.

[AngryAmish]

59. He is certainly the best President of my son's life

Hands down.

[mmonk]

61. Not mine. I'm 55.

[cyberspirit]

64. Some people are just negative.

They see everything in a glass half full kinda way. Blame others for their problems. They are unaware of anything that doesn't fit into their little "woe is me" boxes. We could have a perfect person become president and they'd still criticize and complain. President Obama is the best President in my lifetime as well for so many reasons.

[Skittles]

70. LOLOL

[Scurrilous]

66. K & R

[Raine]

72. For once I'm glad to be older because

I've lived long enough that I know there were others much better, that were progressive.

[progressoid]

87. +1

[Lydia Leftcoast]

73. Someone who is 37 years old was born in 1974 (unless he was a New Year baby)

This means that the first president he is likely to have more than vague memories of is Reagan, then Bush Sr., then Clinton, then Bush Jr.

[judesedit]

74. Amen

Absolutely right.

[RetroLounge]

78. My daughter is 11

She would agree.

RL

[russspeakeasy]

79. Not even close.

....DO NOT SEND ME THE LIST.

[McCamy Taylor]

83. LBJ and Bill Clinton beat Obama. JFK and Obama are about equal.

Carter was a good man, but I am not sure he was suited for the job of president.l

One thing we can all agree on---Nixon, Reagan, Bush and Bush were all disasters for the country.

[Martin Eden]

90. Vietnam knocks LBJ off my list

Clinton signed "free" trade agreements and repeal of Glass-Steagall, though otherwise he mostly did well.

I have to rank JFK first in my lifetime. Obama and Carter are about equal. Ike was the only decent R.

[Tx4obama]

85. K & R n/t

[progressoid]

88. Thats sad.

[Rex]

89. I have to go with Bill Clinton.

I've had Carter, Clinton and now our current POTUS. I pick Bill.

[magical thyme]

91. "said somebody under 40" was my gut response to the title

then I opened the thread and saw the writer was 37. Color me not surprised

[Vinca]

92. I've just finished reading a book about the Cuban missile crisis.

For some strange reason I have no actual memory of it at the time (I was 13) except for the bomb shelter built by a neighbor. In any case, my respect for JFK's courage, independence and reserve has put him at the top of my list for the time being. President Obama has certainly done some very good things, but he allowed the GOP to play him for too long and that diminished him in the eyes of many. He seems to be turning that around and only in the nick of time.

[NNN0LHI]

93. I have been saying this for years here

Because it is the truth.

Don

[LanternWaste]

94. We often see what we want to see

We often see what we want to see, and more often fail to see those things which run contrary to our convictions.

[Scurrilous]

95. Kick

[dmosh42]

98. In your lifetime, Bill Clinton was the best!

FDR, Truman and Ike did the best in my lifetime. LBJ did good for social justice, but had a big negative based on Vietnam. Nixon had a few good accomplishments, but his ego got him in trouble. I thought Carter was the most honest of all the presidents, but handled the Iran attempt to free the hostages in a bad way. Reagan was like a mountain of bullshit, and really got the inequality of wealth distribution going in a big way. Bush sr. was another sleazebag. Clinton was a vary smart president, except for the oral sex part being public. But he was smart enough to avoid invading with ground troops in that Croat-Bosnia area, all the while our media was beating the drums to do it, and he had a real booming economy going with surpluses when he left office. The second Bush was as good as Buchanan, who preceded Lincoln. Obama is a real expert politician, but lacks the convictions needed to be remembered.

[GeorgeGist]

102. In spite of all the Republican obstructionism ...

he's accomplished more than FDR.

Does not compute. Think about it, seriously!

[Shining Jack]

103. Obama is the best President of...

the 21st century!

[ellisonz]

106. K & R

It's not an easy job...

[brentspeak]

108. If the writer was 11 years old, a case could then be made

But the way things are going, even that is debatable.