I agree completely with George Clooney

[Gman]

He nails this one. (From Keith Olberman's FB page)



You're either with us or against us.

[bitchkitty]

1. George Clooney is an actor.

And I am against absolute statements like "You're either with us or against us."

I'll be voting against someone instead of for someone in the next election. What else is new?

[Gman]

3. It still remains that you're either with us or against us

The line is very clear.

[Bandit]

27. The "Line" is not clear at all

I am a PROUD Independent with very Liberal beliefs. Democrats are straying further and further away from those beliefs....."If you can make people believe absurdities, then you can get them to committ atrocities" Voltaire

[aquamarina]

38. Nicely stated.

[TheWraith]

49. People have been saying that for decades, and it's still bullshit.

You can look all the way back to FDR, and still find people at the time complaining that he was far too moderate and was selling out the people. Wasn't true then, hasn't been true since. The Democratic slide away from traditional Democratic values is entirely imaginary, and an excuse for people who want a reason to feel disillusioned and put upon.

[SemperEadem]

93. thank you

[Scuba]

102. "The Democratic slide away from traditional Democratic values is entirely imaginary..."

Really? You think we're just delusional?


http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/03/1032783/-Capitulation:-60-House-DEMOCRATS-Embrace-Austerity,-Sign-Off-on-Medicare-Cuts,-Defunding-Government

[TheWraith]

109. Yes.

And the total, wild hysteria over the whole deficit commission is perfect evidence. Every single event, practically every day for a year from the original deficit commission to the joint committee brought apocalyptic predictions about how Obama and the Democrats were about to destroy Social Security and Medicare. It was, every single word of it, total and utter absurd horseshit, with less than zero basis in reality.

Of course it's not just delusion, there's a healthy amount of Republican propaganda mixed in there. It's no coincidence that right after the Republicans get their heads handed to them over a plan to privatize Medicare, suddenly the drumbeat starts up among the shit-stirrers on the "left" like FDL that it's really DEMOCRATS who are plotting to destroy Medicare and Social Security.

[Scuba]

113. What's absent, in my humble opinion.....

... is a loud and strong call from Democrats not just to maintain the status quo, but to strengthen "traditional Democratic values platforms".


Where's the Medicare-for-All proposal?

Where's the bill to eliminate the cap on SS earnings or otherwise secure SS? Where's even the loud and persistent counter to the "Social Security is broke" meme?

Where's the bill to raise the minimum wage?


The absence of a strong, active front advocating daily for "traditional Democratic values" is very telling, at least to this observer. My conclusion is that the Democratswe have representing us in Washington are indeed guilty of sliding away from such values.

I do not believe this to be true of average Democrats throughout the Country.

[eridani]

178. And wasn't Rachel Carson a silly little twit, whining about bird extinction?

That people read her book and got environmental laws passed of course had nothing to do with preventing extinctions of a number of species. This proves that alarmists should just shut up.

[Zoeisright]

164. No. Just not willing to accept reality.

Which is that a true liberal is just not going to get elected.

And that sitting out elections out of pique or voting for a third party candidate is just going to increase the misery in this world when repukes win. Or get close enough to steal it.

[roguevalley]

118. It doesn't matter what anyone says. Judge them by their actions.

The rich get richer, he chooses rich bitches every time to be his guides and 40 million people are hungry. Actions, not words.

[Tarheel_Dem]

165. !

[dsc]

170. It is pretty hard to make the case we haven't moved significantly to the right

on economics. Despite a 60 seat majority in the Senate we didn't get card check for unions, we didn't increase taxes on the wealthy despite massive deficits, and did cut many programs affecting the poor. I am not saying Obama is to blame here but a significant portion of our party has moved rightward on economics and taken some issues totally off the table. It is hard to imagine the Democrats of the 1980's or 1970's letting this stuff go on with those kinds of majorities.

[FarLeftFist]

62. Amazingly, Obama has an 84% approval rating with Liberal Democrats and a 77% approval with Liberals

We need to elect more Libs/Progressives to congress and senate.

[roguevalley]

119. that doesn't mean a thing without the other voters too. This is like saying Santorum has the

religious right locked up. WHo cares? How does he play elsewhere? That is what matters. Putting the liberal vote out as some kind of indicator means nothing. No one asked me or any of the other libs I know. He can kiss the ground he walks on that the pugs are as bad as they are or things would be a lot worse.

[woohooman]

174. Yes there were absurdities and too many atrocities

Did some of Bush's NEO-CONS hijack the party?

[barbtries]

48. straight from gwbush.

i don't buy that.
yes i will be voting for obama, with plenty of enthusiasm. on the other hand gitmo is still open and civil liberties in this country are still in peril.
i can too be upset with my president and still claim him as mine and still vote for him again and still work to see that he wins in November.

[FarLeftFist]

52. GITMO is still open because a 90-6 SENATE BLOCKED it's closure.

[barbtries]

53. damn congress.

okay correct me if i'm wrong. can't the commander in chief simply order it?

[TheWraith]

64. No, the President cannot override Congress.

And honestly, this isn't meant as a slam on you, but just a comment about what drives me nuts about so much of the criticism of Obama: people blame him for stuff they don't understand he legally cannot do. Like people complain that he didn't veto the NDAA even though it had a massively veto-proof majority, or complain that he didn't close Gitmo even though the Senate passed a law explicitly blocking him from doing so. People assume that Obama has more powers than he actually does, including the belief that he can force Congress to vote for something if he just argues for it hard enough. A lot of people here seem to want and expect our own Imperial President.

[barbtries]

66. thank you.

he should not have made that promise then, or at least qualified it. perhaps it was not foreseeable that the promise could not be kept.
well i'm still learning and was in fact unaware that congress had preempted his plans for gitmo by passing an actual law keeping him from closing the place.
well aware of the obstructionist all around ethic of the republicans in congress and how they have really set about just trying to tie his hands. if he wants it they're against it and they are so partisan and care so little about this country that there is absolutely no exception to this rule. i get that.

[gateley]

162. I think a lot of Presidents take office thinking they'll be able to accomplish more than

they actually can once they get there. It always looks easier from out here, even to seasoned politicians, I think.

[kenfrequed]

85. Communications and staffing errors.

His mistakes were in messaging and the people he put in positions of prominence in the white house. Suskind did a fairly good job of pointing out the problems and the personalities that complicated every descision and whose philosophies contradicted the very kind of reform and change that the President (and those that voted for him) sought.

Outside of the White hourse

The republicans were not held to the fire for being the most abusive, absurdly irrational and obstructionist part in modern American history.

Evan Bayh and his blue dog contingent made it harder to enforce messaging discipline by providing cover for Republican fillibusters and worse by wrecking havoc on good legislation in conferences. Legislation that would have been popular, populist, and would have sought to reform our financial system and do a better job of reforming healthcare.

[Confusious]

106. It's not about winning or loosing

It's how you play the game.

A veto of the NDAA would have shown spine, which is something that would have given him points with me.

I guess you just give up in the face of odds. Glad you weren't around during, well, most of the history of the United States.

Eh, freedom from England? they're a superpower.

Eh, free the slaves? Looks like the south might fight.

Eh, defeat Hitler? look, he's winning everywhere.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

124. You are so right!! Bill Maher on his show loudly proclaimed that Obama LIED about Gitmo!

People cheered him who should have known better. Closing Gitmo requires an act of Congress. The president cannot override a congressional action. Why that is so difficult for some liberals--upset at the president--to understand simply baffles me. Maher was ill-prepared and got away with misinformed his audience. That is irresponsible. I went on his Facebook page and chastised him for that, also sending a letter.

It took Debbie Wasserman Schultz last week on Maher's show to finally say that it is a congressional responsibility.

Thank you so very much for this post!

[vaberella]

92. No he can't. Most people need a civics class.

Even if Obama vetoed something...Congress can still make it law. Hence the reason the President in hindsight would have to go along with NDAA. If he didn't and Congress still pushed it as it originally was it would have been detrimental politically. Most people would see Obama as weak until they read and understand civics which gives Congress so much power.

For instance during the time of Bush I believe both the Republican and Democratic congress overruled Bush's veto a few times.

[Beartracks]

141. True. It would have shown only short-term "spine."

He could have vetoed it it to placate the critics of NDAA and to make a point, but when it eventually became law anyway despite that veto, it would have made him appear politically impotent.

=========================

[vaberella]

190. Not to mention if he didn't push for wording changes...the bill would have been 5x worse.

Then we'd be back to square one. Can't win here.

[roguevalley]

116. Its easy for him to say what he says. he hasn't been unemployed for two years.

He didn't see the jobs president take on health care first. I don't like for or against shit either. When he's been in the ditch with everyone else then fine. I can't go to the white house and see obama and tell him MY truth. Just because he can doesn't make him right. It just makes him freaking lucky. Suck dirt for a while, George and tell me the same thing.

[just1voice]

136. It's clear you have a line of unstated allegiance to something

Please tell everyone here just exactly where "the line" is OK?

[phleshdef]

7. What do you do for a living that makes your opinion more valuable than his?

[Union Scribe]

78. Literally fucking anything.

Any worker's opinion is superior to a cozy millionaire's who would presume to scold the commoners for their unrest.

[phleshdef]

82. Thats an outright prejudiced point of view that has no place in a liberal discourse.

You are actually passing judgement on someone's intellectual abilities based on their chosen profession. You are telling me that your opinion is superior to someone else's based solely on the fact that that person acts and has money. I'm sorry, but that kind of bigotry and prejudice has no place among people who are supposedly critical thinkers. How dare you claim another American's point of view is worth less than your own because of their career title. Thats just as shallow as Republicans calling antiwar folks unamerican.

[kenfrequed]

88. Hmm

While certainly the person you responded to was blunt and maybe his argument was simple they did not deserve the level of outrage you tossed at them.

Throwing out the words "prejudiced" and "bigotry" I don't think is appropriate in this case. It is obvious the person believes that not enough has been done to help the working class and the poor in this country. If you want to convince someone of that there are better ways than those you have elected to employ.

[phleshdef]

89. No, its 100% appropriate. Saying someone's opinion doesn't matter because of what they do...

...for a living is bigotry in my view. And its most certainly prejudiced, just by the very definition of the word. They are prejudging another person's credibility based on their job. Theres no getting around it. The word means what it means and its not subjective.

[kenfrequed]

105. I would say

That George Clooney has good intentions, and I like his active role in the film "Good night and good luck," and I agree with much of what he says, but I think he comes from a position of some privilege, and that I think is what the poster that you responded to was attempting to get across, however inarticulately.

And calling the person a bigot or prejudiced waters down the meaning of those words considerably. Yes, the poster is guilty of massive hyperbole and wild exaggeration but is it really a strech to say that his life experiences may actually be relevent and that possibly coming from a background that is not as priveleged. I think there are better and more accurate ways to indicate how the poster is wrong.

Certainly, while it might be technically correct to possibly use the words you chose it really doesn't capture the spirit of the way that those words are commonly used in the English language.

[Union Scribe]

111. Oh bullshit, it's not his career it's his detachment

There are plenty of actors out there who aren't rich, pampered playboys so distant from the plight of ordinary workers that they feel free to pass judgement on them from on high.

How dare I? I do, so get over it. His opinion on working class unrest is worth less than working class people's because he isn't one.

[phleshdef]

112. You don't know him. You have no clue how detached he is or isn't.

But if you actually listen to what he has to say, he doesn't seem detached in the slightest.

His opinion is just as worthy as any other thinking persons.

[Union Scribe]

114. Again, utter bullshit.

"if you actually listen to what he has to say" it's clear he doesn't get why people are upset at "not getting everything they want"--it's the same ugly, dismissive thing all the apologists say, usually with words like "magic wand," "pet issue," "pony," etc etc.

And since you think people's opinions are equal regardless of experience, I trust you don't bother with doctors because I'm sure your neighbor can tell you how to cure an infection just as well. And why ask people in other lands what they think of, say, our foreign policy when we have cable news pundits. Everyone's opinion is perfectly equal in worth, right?

Clooney's a clown.

[phleshdef]

115. Not bullshit. Truth. 100%. Clooney's opinion is valued by others the same or more than yours is.

But go on BRAVE KEYBOARD WARRIOR. Put yourself up on that big god damn pedestal and beat that fucking chest till it bleeds. After all, thats what make you "right", right?

[Union Scribe]

120. I put working people's opinions about working people

over rich people's condemnation of working people's concerns. So sue me. Or just try to insult me some more, since you apparently take criticism of both Obama AND George Clooney personally for whatever reason.

[phleshdef]

122. What I take personally is you making blanket judgements on an individual over their profession.

Especially someone like Clooney who by all accounts is a good person with a good head on his shoulders.

But hey, if average working people are the only ones with valueable opinions about average working people, then by the same standard, only actors can have a valuable opinion about other actors, which means by your own screwed up logic, your opinion regarding Clooney has no value.

I'm an average working person and I agree with Clooney's assessment. You can now assume I spoke the same words. Now the opinion has value. Happy?

The funniest part of your logic is Clooney's quotes in the OP are referring to Matt Damon, another rich actor.

[Union Scribe]

123. ...which would be true if I was talking acting.

Now wouldn't it be stupid if I talked about film-making and acted like I knew more about it than Clooney or another professional in his field? That's the correct application of "the same standard" and "my logic." And I don't give a shit if he's a "good person"--he isn't entitled to dismiss the concerns of the working class and his opinion is unqualified, unintelligent, and thoroughly wrong. That's that. You can have the last word and bravely defend the oppressed rich fellow, now.

[phleshdef]

125. He never dismissed the concerns of the working class. Thats absurd, fictional revision.

And you don't GET to decide who is qualified to have an opinion. And neither do I. But if I did, I certainly wouldn't base it on the shallow, bigoted bullshit that you are basing it on.

[tnvoter]

159. I am a working person. You don't speak for me.

Don't assume a working person can't agree with George Clooney.

I agree with George Clooney even though he in another tax bracket.
I agree with Warren Buffet on taxing the rich ... even though he's in another tax bracket.

Stop speaking for "working people." Speak only for yourself, please.

[chervilant]

152. hmm...

You forgot to mention that said ponies must have rainbows shooting out their arses. That's the most ridiculously dismissive and derisive slam I've heard from the sycophants who decry even the slightest criticism of their Most Amazing and Unassailable POTUS. Perhaps these intractable Obama fans would benefit from a reminder of Teddy Roosevelt's famous quote:

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."

[Richardo]

83. Yet he belongs to a union.

[tonybgood]

97. As do most of the pundits on TV who bash unions!!!

Not to mention all the technicians in the studio where they broadcast!!!

[greiner3]

8. "George Clooney is an actor."

I think that there are so many different types of people who do/might make recs for and against political types.

I would like to know why you are so against the actor type when it comes to giving political advice?

Would you rather go with pundits, CEOs, current and/or past holders of political office, sports figures, comedians and people on the street?

My sister is also against the actor type, mostly because she takes the opposite views of most actors.

I grant you may be against following the views of ANYONE, as I hope the vast majority of DUers do, but I am talking of the vast majority of the under and uninformed public.

The billions of dollars being raised to use as 'propaganda' as ads to 'educate' this same potential voter class.

I for one welcome the progressive attitudes of such a liberal, intelligent and admired, for whatever reason, actor as Mr. Clooney.

[Gman]

16. +1

[rustydog]

61. Bingo. He is an American citizen who happens to be Democrat and politically active

If asked, he has as much right to voice his opinion and beliefs as we have voicing ours here!

We are American citizens who happen to be doctors, lawyers, teachers, bus drivers, nurses and yes the dreaded "actors".
Our opinions count, all of them.

[tonybgood]

95. What, you'd rather have the opinion of Joe the Plumber?

The occupation of an individual has little bearing on their political views. That's just as bad as Gingrich and his comments about public employees!!!

[hfojvt]

142. What progressive attitude?

The attitude of sneering at all the poorer, non-famous "little" people for not supporting the great caveman? Yeah, that's a great progressive attitude. Clooney's out there fighting for a DLCer and looking down his haughty nose at people who are angry at the DLC.

Now, that's NOT progressive.

[chervilant]

153. hmm...

I don't think Mr. Clooney's fortunes OR fame should elevate his opinions or politics over those of the Hoi Polloi.

His opening salvo: "I'm disillusioned by the people who are disillusioned by Obama..." lumps every single person who's criticized even one scintilla of Mr. Obama's performance in a single category, and tars those critics with a negative brush ("Democrats eat their own.&quot . How arrogant, and how wrong.

(edited for spelling error)

[liberalmuse]

11. And a humanitarian....

and someone whose opinions I and others respect. I think his visibility and the fact that he's well-educated, well-traveled and has met a lot of heads of state and has conversed with them adds a bit more weight to what he has to share.

[trumad]

12. So fucking what if he's an actor.

He's also a tax paying citizen of the United States and has as much right as you to state his opinion.

And you know what---he's exactly right.

[seabeyond]

22. actor yes. what he said is true, too. it is a fact

he didnt put anything out there that did not happen.

[Hugabear]

50. What is your profession? Should we discount your opinion because of what you do?

So what if he's an actor? Does that make him any less qualified to give an opinion? Does that make what he says any less valid?

[Union Scribe]

80. Yes, it does.

If you're spoiled rich and talk down to the plebes who are upset with the government, hell no you're not qualified to do so. If you say you support OWS then say "I'd like to help, but I don't know how," when money is falling out of your pockets, then hell no, you're not qualified to give the opinion in the OP. Hell no.

[tonybgood]

98. When did you become the decider of who is qualified?

[bitchkitty]

131. No. What I meant, is that he's an actor.

If he wants to talk about his acting, or movies, I'll accept his authority. If he's going to take me to task for being unsatisfied with our faux liberal President, then he needs to come live in my shoes for a day. He needs to try and get by on the disability payment that I get by on, and he needs to listen to politicians bargaining what little he has away.

FUCK GEORGE CLOONEY. Have I made myself as clear as I possibly can? I hope so.

[tnvoter]

160. and...what do you do that qualifies you to speak for me?

you are entitled to your opinion - state it freely. But don't push it out there like you are speaking up on behalf of an entire social class.

You are not entitled to bash someone else's opinion on behalf of a class of people, that includes people like me who do NOT agree with you.

I happen to agree with George Clooney. And I speak only for myself, a working person. Not for the entire class of working people... only me. You should try that.

[bitchkitty]

177. I did state it freely.

And evidently that is not acceptable to you. I don't know what to say to you, except get over it.

I am entitled to state my opinion. I did. Where do you get that I'm speaking for an "entire social class?"

FUCK GEORGE CLOONEY. I am speaking for myself.

[GoneOffShore]

58. Yes and? What difference does it make what he does for a living?

He's got the public eye and some ears. That's a good thing. And he's smart.

And indeed, one is either with us in electing (hopefully progressive ) Democrats or fighting against us.

[hunter]

70. Ronald Reagan was an actor too.

Clooney would be a much better president than Reagan was.

I think his opinion carries some weight.

Obama IS a much better president than anyone in the current Republican clown troupe and Democratic ankle-biter society could be.

[RBInMaine]

140. And he is also an AMERICAN, a SMART one, and 100% correct. Enough of the purist BULLSHIT !

[ProgressoDem]

175. And you're a what?

Who gets to make political statements?

[liberal N proud]

2. I so agree with that message

[JNelson6563]

4. He's intelligent AND gorgeous.

Do want.

[spanone]

5. k&r...

[Gman]

6. I believe in exactly what Clooney says about

sticking with someone you've elected. You stick by and stick up for someone you worked your ass off for. I wasn't for Obama originally as I supported Hillary. But once it was over I was all in for Obama and nothing will deter me in doing everything I can do to get him reelected.

[just1voice]

134. So you think insulting people for their firm democratic beliefs = reelection?

It doesn't. Democrats vote for our beliefs, not idol worship. We vote issues, not sloganeering. We vote with our hearts, not some party line we're told to follow by the likes of you.

[Number23]

137. What in sweet Heaven does your post have ANYTHING to do with what that poster wrote?

It sounds like you picked those trite responses out of a brown paper bag and decided to post them, regardless of what you're responding to.

[hfojvt]

144. so if I work my ass off to elect somebody who says he will end the Bush tax cuts for the rich

I am supposed to keep sticking by him, even when he fails to do the very thing for which I worked my ass off?

That does not make any sense. I elected him to do a job, and he CHOSE, quite deliberately, to not do it.

Why should I stick by him if he is not sticking by me?

[Gman]

183. No problem, vote for Newt

[Bluenorthwest]

9. DUer H2oMan starts hugner strike today. Disappoints multi millionaire jet setter....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002174661

[dionysus]

20. this is relevant to the thread, how?

<-- this is for you, not H2O Man, whom i respect

unless you want to blame the existance of fracking on Obama, which you probably do

[Number23]

138. Watch yourself! Or you'll be accused of "dishonoring the president" for your post

Poster has a new trick for 2012. Too bad it's not particularly clever, interesting or even the faintest bit relevant.

[chervilant]

154. Oh, yes...

Let's see Mr. Clooney participate in activism that actually challenges him--like using some of his $ to uphold his 'liberal ideals.' And, I'd like to see him do it without fanfare.

...

I'm not holding my breath.

[CTyankee]

10. Thank you for this! How nice to open DU and find George Clooney on my computer screen!

What he says has real merit. I have had my disappointments with Obama, particularly on the public option in health care reform and on Sebalius' going against her panel of experts on Plan B for girls under age 17. But then I hear Rick Santorum talking about how terrible ANY contraception is and I remember that I live in the real world. These Republican scums would set us back at best or send us into oblivion at worst.

I'm not gonna let that happen...

[Fumesucker]

13. I've heard that line before..

It sucked then too..

[izquierdista]

14. If (Obama) was a Republican running?

Bush tax cuts are still with us, Guantanamo is STILL open, drones are still raining death from the skies, the Pentagon budget still increases over the previous year's, and Boner crows that he gets 98% of what he wants in negotiations.

I think we know the answer to "If Obama was a Republican running" -- he is; he's part of the Republicans' "less crazy" team.

[Gman]

18. This is exactly what Clooney is talking about

The "I didn't get everything I want" crowd that can't see the forest for the trees.

[izquierdista]

54. One small edit

They are the "I didn't get anything I want" crowd.

[Ilsa]

15. I'm glad he's out there. He leads

his life fairly quietly and with dignity, trying to remain private. He doesn't brook stupidity or vapid interviews. He does what he can to further Democratic and humanitarian issues. I appreciate his help.

[progressoid]

17. Firm believer in sticking by and sticking up for the people whom you've elected?

That's a ridiculous statement. There are still 23% that support GWB. Apparently that's what Clooney wants us to be? Stand by your man no matter what? And no, I'm not suggesting that Bush=Obama or that I don't support Obama.

It's just that the sentiment "sticking by and sticking up" is too absolute. There are times when you should admit your mistakes. For example, I supported John Edwards in 2007. Today, not so much.

So sorry he's disillusioned. Maybe his Golden Globe will give him comfort.

[Gman]

19. Sorry but that makes no sense

W's 23% is completely irrelevant to anything Clooney says here.

And if you can't stick up for and stand by someone like Obama in this world today, you pretty much don't stand for anything.

[dionysus]

21. you're never going to convince people who have these bizarre, deeply personal, permanent grudges.

good on you for trying though.

[progressoid]

28. Oooo, are you one of them internet psychiatrists?

"bizarre, deeply personal, permanent grudges".

Now, see if you can figure out my unresolved issues with my mother.

[dionysus]

31. criticism of policies and decisions is fine in my book. some people spend their entire DU career

campaigning against the guy. if someone voices complaints about how things are going, have at it. the people i'm talking about have been on a three year mission to turn as many people against the guy, as in; don't vote for him. those are the people i have a problem with.

carry on.

[Gman]

42. It actually starte less than 48 hours after election night in 2008

It was less than 48 hours before I saw the first post on DU by an angry DU member that resides in a far southeast state with a peninsula. It hasn't stopped since. They feed off each other.

[progressoid]

25. Well, let me expand on it.

Or more accurately, Roosevelt can expand on it:

"The President is merely the most important among a large number of public servants. He should be supported or opposed exactly to the degree which is warranted by his good conduct or bad conduct, his efficiency or inefficiency in rendering loyal, able, and disinterested service to the Nation as a whole. Therefore it is absolutely necessary that there should be full liberty to tell the truth about his acts, and this means that it is exactly necessary to blame him when he does wrong as to praise him when he does right. Any other attitude in an American citizen is both base and servile. To announce that there must be no criticism of the president, or that we are to stand by the president, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public. Nothing but the truth should be spoken about him or any one else. But it is even more important to tell the truth, pleasant or unpleasant, about him than about any one else. "

I spent days walking door to door to help elect the President. And even more days making phone calls for the campaign. I supported him with time and money. I'll support him again in 2012, but that doesn't mean he gets a pass when he screws up. I do the same for all my elected officials.




Oh, and regarding this, "And if you can't stick up for and stand by someone like Obama in this world today, you pretty much don't stand for anything"
Thats:

[treestar]

41. That refers to good and bad conduct, not political support

Obama's conduct is always good.

Do you ever get a pass when you screw up? I hate that judgmental attitude. We all make mistakes, and sometimes we deserve a pass, given the situation.

[progressoid]

67. You're contradicting yourself

"Obama's conduct is always good" & "We all make mistakes"

Which is it? Does he make mistakes like the rest of us or is he always good?

[Gman]

43. That's OK. We will get Obama over the top in spite of you

and others like you here.

[progressoid]

68. Actually, you'll do it with my help.

Just like in 2008.

You're welcome.

[Gman]

72. I'm glad to hear that

and thank you

[chervilant]

156. + a gazillion n/t

[hootinholler]

76. Interesting. I see it the other way aound...

Why isn't Obama sticking up for and standing by me? Sticking up for and standing my those who are on Medicare, who choose monthly which meds they will forgo to eat, or which meals they will miss for medications.

Those are whom I stand with, why can't my president stand with us? Why must we stand with him?

[arely staircase]

23. he has a capacity for abstract thought. nt

[chervilant]

157. Wow...

Does he play 12-Dimensional chess?

[arely staircase]

161. Gopher, Everett?

you missed the joke

[chervilant]

185. No

Actually, I was being facetious, which never helps.

While everyone is entitled to their opinions and we all HAVE opinions, people with demonstrably honed critical thinking skills are increasingly rare. The fact that most of us continue to participate in the Kabuki Theater which is our system of government co-opted for decades by Corporate Megalomaniacs (who've usurped our media, our politics, AND our global economy) is quite distressing. The entire system is broken, and those of us who are capable of discerning this are only now coalescing into a powerful movement. #Occupy is a glimmer of hope that critical thinking is still a vital part of a species which overwhelmingly manifests the scourges of overpopulation, pollution, depression, resentments, and fear.

We are like hoarders, incapable of letting go our 'stash' of historically remarkable moments of profound creativity and inventiveness. Much easier for most of us to point to our species' successes and ignore the ginormous elephant under our living room rug (no pun intended). As we teeter on the brink of catastrophic economic change, we can no longer ignore the behaviors and decisions that have landed us in this fine mess, Ollie.

We must be the change we hope to see in this world.

[Kalidurga]

24. Politics is a complicated game.

This is all I know for now no one could possibly understand all the rules both written and cultural. Obama has met opposition from the get go and make no mistake about it, he never had a majority even if a majority had D's after their names. I forget how many blue dog dems there were and how many are left, but saying he had a majority at any point in time is a bit misleading.

I agree with much of what people say about being disappointed, but my practical brain says that no matter what we didn't get or what we got that wasn't enough, Republicans at this point would be a disaster of epic proportions. We have lost so much ground over the last 30 it boggles my mind. The fight for civil rights is not over, in fact it has barely begun. We are fighting for our freedom of speech. We are fighting against people being detained without trial. We are fighting to save our environment from big oil. There is absolutely nothing we are fighting for that Republicans will help as a matter of fact they are the road block to getting any of this done. If we don't want to be pushed back to the 50's (the 1650's that is), we have to stop Republicans in their tracks and hope for a better day.

[chervilant]

186. + 1

I applaud your post, but would change the last sentence to read "we have to stop our mentally challenged brethren, and work for the survival of our species."

[Iggo]

26. And you had me...

...right up until "You are either with us or against us."

[Gman]

44. That's the way it is

sorry

[Iggo]

46. Nope.

[Puglover]

135. Sez the anonymous poster on the internets.

I'll take that about as seriously as George Clooneys latest pronouncement.


And for the record before you freak out, I think Obama for the most part is a pretty good Prez.

I just really could'nt give a flying shit what celebraties have to say about pretty much anything.

[T S Justly]

29. Clooney's lost a fan. (nt) (nr)

[liberal N proud]

32. This is our problem

We don't like something someone had done, so we don't like the person. Never mind all the good things they have done, but because they didn't do that one thing, that we wanted them to do, we throw the whole thing away.

Life is much bigger than that and requires us to swallow many things we don't like to get the things we do. There is no such thing as Utopia, to expect anything close is setting yourself and those around you for failure.

[T S Justly]

36. No, Clooney has made an error in judgement on a large subject.

He should know his voice has an unfair advantage, and that using it to advance the conservative
agenda of the present administration would and should rankle progressives and bonafide
liberals. George, who was great in Brother, Where Art Thou, lol at remembering the movie, should also know that George, the political player, has no "bonafides" anymore.

[MicaelS]

57. Let's try this with a few words changed...

"No, Clooney has made an error in judgement on a large subject. He should know his voice has an unfair advantage, and that using it to advance the Liberal agenda of the present administration would and should rankle Conservatives and bonafide Republicans. George, who was great in Brother, Where Art Thou, lol at remembering the movie, should also know that George, the political player, has no "bonafides" anymore."

I guarantee you someone posted this exact message on some RW site somewhere. The fact is, if you're an entertainer in this country it seems that people on both the Left and Right seems to think you don't have a right to speak about politics.

Two words "Dixie Chicks".

Until the Dixie Chicks spoke out against Bush, many on the Left didn't give a shit about them, because they played "Country Music", and that is perceived ONLY as the music of RW'ers, then they became the instant heroes of the Left.

The Right automatically assumed BECAUSE they played Country Music they shared the same values as the Right and were horrified an entertainer might have a different viewpoint from them. So they got called every name in the book, and even threatened them with death.

I don't give a shit if an entertainer speaks out, no matter Left or Right. If I were in Clooney's position I would NEVER hesitate to speak out on the things I believed in.

You go George.

[T S Justly]

65. Well, as long as you admit to changing my words ...

Please admit to changing the meaning of my post. But, you know, nice of you to try merging Progressive criticism of BO with the fascists'. Here's a hint: Leftists oppose both the Right Wing
AND the conservative agenda of this president.

[sarcasmo]

30. Selling a candidate is what the Republicans do better than the Democrats.

If Obama was a Republican he would already be on Mount Rushmore.

[Gman]

74. Republicans are excellent at getting elected

and horrible at governing once they've won.

[Bucky]

33. "If Obama was Republican, they'd be saying God wanted him, or even God elected him"

Sorry, but no sale, Mr Clooney. Democrats' core competency lies in questioning authority and demanding action, not mere lip service, to the issues we care about. We'll all vote for Obama again. But don't ask me to fall in line like some little goose-stepping Republican ditto-head voter. That's not our values and that's not our culture. If you can't stand some good old fashioned American style bitching about the leaders we elected, frankly, you're just not tough enough to be a Democrat.

[gratuitous]

34. I stand with the Constitution

So I guess I know where I stand on the "with or against us" line of reasoning.

[joeybee12]

35. Very disappointed in George Clooney...unreccing...

Oh wait, I can't.

[xchrom]

37. 'You're either with us or against us.' -- that sounds familiar -- where have i heard

something like that before?

oh yeah -- george bush. george? is that you?

[Gman]

45. Sorry if you've never heard that before W

it's an old saying. Bush doesn't own it. I'd like to say we do now.

[WillyT]

59. So Is This The Start Of Loyalty Oath Season ???

I wonder if we'll make it to the play-offs.



And yeah... it isn't Bush's... neither is... "America... love it, or leave it."

But they both come from the same idiotic place.

[Gman]

75. No problem... let it begin

I'm all for it.

[just1voice]

133. Let what begin, blacklisting like Bush and McCarthy?

You sure seem anxious to engage in the exact same behaviors, why is that?

[Bonobo]

181. On the other hand, it is entirely consistent with this:

10 reasons the U.S. is no longer the land of the free

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/is-the-united-states-still-the-land-of-the-free/2012/01/04/gIQAvcD1wP_story_2.html

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

39. Opinion from one of the "Men Who Stare at Goats"?

Ok, despite that movie, he somehow got it right with this rant. But posting it here is sorta like preaching to the choir. Or should be.


On DU, the last line should be "You're either with us or tombstoned". "tombstoned" being an obsolete word, frequently used on DU2.

[HopeHoops]

40. Okay, but he was still a shitty Batman.

[Capitalocracy]

47. I'm automatically against anyone who says "you're either with us or against us".

And a little constructive criticism here, I've noticed that Obama and his supporters have a tendency to talk about all he's accomplished, and tend not to talk about a plan for the future. There are people who believe he could've accomplished a lot more, and you're not going to energize those voters by talking about what Obama's already done with nary a mention of what he's going to do in the future.

That's what the Dems did in 2010, and it didn't work out too well.

[Surya Gayatri]

51. George's nail hits the left-wing head...

[harmonicon]

55. Rich people are ADORABLE!!! nt.

[Cameron27]

60. lol

[just1voice]

56. "With us or against us" is EXACTLY WHAT BUSH SAID

It's moronic and oppressive, it tells people to close their minds instead of sharing and learning. It creates angry resentment in being told to shut up. It requires a cult-like allegiance to sloganeering and blind faith. It makes it obvious that whomever says it is only interested in their own political agenda and not interested in people.

[chervilant]

187. + a gazillion!

Well said, thank you.

[redqueen]

63. When bush said it he was referring to the country...

which means shutting out and ignoring most of the world.

This poster is talking about the democratic party, which means shutting out and ignoring the only party (the GOP) that is capable of beating the subject of the graphic in the OP (Obama).

Therefore, K&R.

[SomethingFishy]

69. Well I agree with Matt Damon

and my celebrity is better than your celebrity.. SO THERE!!!



And this:
"You're either with us or against us."

If it's either or, then I'm fucking against you. Guess I need to find somewhere else to use my vote. I'm sure the Democratic party thanks you.

[hootinholler]

71. "You're either with us or against us."

Where have I heard that binary thinking before?

[raouldukelives]

73. Makes sense to me.

Your either for drone strikes on civilians or you're against us.
I was sure I could find drone strikes reprehensible and still hold out some hope that my President will come out strongly against them. Sorry if that makes me a bad Dem.

[Union Scribe]

77. Fuck Clooney

I'm sure it's easy to sit on a pile of money and wonder what all the peons are upset about. He's as detached from the people as any of his rich spoiled brethren.

[Richardo]

86. I'm sure many here agree with that sentiment. But not in the way you mean it.

[Richardo]

104. !!

[Maven]

150. Fuck anyone who uses the phrase "you're either with us or against us"

when it comes to party politics.

[Hippo_Tron]

167. There's quite a few 99%ers that share Clooney's opinion

There's also quite a few 99%ers that vote Republican. Discounting somebody's opinion as "out of touch" because they're rich and comfortable doesn't work when many non-rich share that opinion.

[chervilant]

188. And,

you know this because you've done defensible research on a random sample of 99%ers such that you meet or exceed the criteria established by the Central Limit Theorem? Why don't you post a link to the data that supports your assertion that "quite a few 99%ers" share Mr. Clooney's opinion?

(I won't be holding my breath...)

[Hippo_Tron]

191. Not being a 1%er, I don't have 15-20 grand laying around to poll test Mr. Clooney's statement

However, I can extrapolate from the fact that President Obama's approval ratings among liberal Democrats is in the 80's, if you posed Clooney's statement to a good subsample of liberal Democrats and asked them if they Agree or Disagree, a good number of them will agree.

It's kind of like polling Rick Santorum's supporters to see if a good number of them are against gay marriage and abortion. Sure, you could spend the money to do it. But you could also just as easily figure that out using basic logic.

[chervilant]

192. Interesting...

Clearly, you are not a social scientist, which is not altogether surprising, given your leap of faith about liberal democrats agreeing with Mr. Clooney. I, on the other hand, remain hopeful that the majority of liberal democrats do not subscribe to the either/or, black/white, with us/against us thinking articulated by Mr. Clooney.

Furthermore, "basic logic" will never be a good substitute for defensible research (something that has become far easier, cheaper, and faster using the internet).

While I acknowledge that I'll likely vote for Mr. Obama in the upcoming election, I refuse to march in lockstep with him. Some of Mr. Obama's decisions have been worthy of criticism--for example, his appointment of Arne Duncan as SecEd, and his rather condescending assertion that veteran teachers who protested this appointment are "resistant to change." I can assure you it is not "change" that motivates me to criticize Duncan, or this administration's egregious policies regarding public education.

Mr. Obama said himself that we should "hold his feet to the fire." And so we should. Deriding or vilifying those of us who criticize some of Mr. Obama's decisions is both disrespectful and disingenuous. Sad that we cannot have this dialogue without such divisiveness and negativity.

[Hippo_Tron]

193. I am indeed a social scientist

I also know that in the real world, financial constraints prevent you from getting a random sample of 600 people so you can get a number that's within a margin of error of plus or minus 4 percent 95 times out of 100, every time you're curious about what some demographic thinks about this or that.

And no the internet is NOT making it easier or cheaper. It's virtually impossible to get a random sample over the internet for political research, because people who respond to internet polls are not a random sample of just about any demographic that it's useful to conduct political research on.

What internet polling is doing is making it easier for media outlets to do a "poll" to fit their story and claim that it's actually scientific.

[chervilant]

194. hmm..

Cross-cultural analyses of existing data, literature reviews, and meta-analyses are all greatly facilitated by the plethora of research and data now posted on the internet. I concede that most online journals charge more than the GP can or is willing to pay, but one can spend time in the stacks of any reputable university. I much prefer the contemporary 'windows' version of SAS to the antiquated version on which I did my graduate research. Don't EVEN get me started about SPSSx!

I was a stats geek in graduate school specifically BECAUSE I recognized how easy it is for 'researchers' to create survey instruments that net the results they want, rather than the results they would have obtained with solid methodology (Babbie remains one of my fave resources regarding validity and reliability...)

BTW. I would never presume to achieve a random sample via the internet, for any type of research.

[AtomicKitten]

79. Actors with opinions --

What made me laugh this morning was the complete 180 some are making who fawned all over Damon because he shares their views but George Clooney is just an actor and who cares about his opinion

Oh DU. I just can't quit you.

[GoCubsGo]

100. I am having that same laugh when I read this thread.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

126. Get out of my head. That's exactly what I'm thinking. Damon was the best thing since sliced bread.

Ironic that he and Clooney are close friends. I'd love to be a fly on the wall during one of their debates.

[Fire Walk With Me]

81. Support the man who killed the bill of rights? Interesting philosophy.

Let me know how it turns out.

[Kablooie]

84. "You're either with us or against us." doesn't apply.

You will either vote for Obama or not will apply but that won't be decided until election day.

Seeing the world simply in terms of black or white is the mark of extremism.

The world is made of shades of gray with very few incidents of pure black or white.

Gray is where thinking comes in.
Gray is where decisions must be made.
Gray is where the the world is made.

"With us or against us" a simplistic view that denies personal choice and thinking for one's self.

You are either with us or against us or not.

[Richardo]

87. I agree with his sentiment, but not the 'with us or against us' add-on.

I find that statement simplistic and offensive.

[vaberella]

90. George Clooney is talking about his dear friend Matt Damon.

Ultimately I find both to be fools; since I find actors worthless. But it's interesting how this has come about.

[Rex]

91. So when is he running for POTUS?

nt

[girl gone mad]

94. But what does Ryan Gosling think?

[Enrique]

96. I hear similar things from people at DU

I respect that point of view, even though the people at DU don't post their handsome pictures along with the posts, and even though the people at DU aren't rich and famous.

[merkins]

99. Cult of Personality

sorry George but you got to fight for it and not accept the new position the goalpost have been moved to.

[Honeycombe8]

103. Hooray, GC! It WAS a successful three years. As I and others have said...

we've had disappointments. He didn't get some of the things done that I wanted that I care about most, but he got some of them done, and he got other, important things done that are good for others and the country.

[1stlady]

107. What happened

in 2010 is irrelevant as it happens to all presidents and is not a good indicator as to what will happen in 2012. The president's party usually takes a beating in midterm elections. Anywho, George Clooney is right on the money, we eat our own. Which is why we lose more elections than rethugs and they get more accomplished because liberal still don't know how to play the game. George Clooney is not just a typical arm-chair political hobby hollywood actor. He's a huge humanitarian and is actively involved with helping Darfur.

[hfojvt]

108. What about Obama?

Is he either with "us" or against "us"?

After he spent 3 years being against me, or ignoring me, am I supposed to be for him? Why shouldn't I be for me, and people like me?

BTW: Clooney is not a person like me.

"I didn't get everything I wanted"

No, I did not get the ONE simple thing that I wanted - a President fighting on MY side. No amount of disgust from a pretty rich boy is gonna change that.

[MissDeeds]

130. The "with us or against us" BS was offensive

when Dimson used it, now we're supposed to embrace it? It's wrong when their guy said it, but it's rock solid when used to pump up our guy? WTH? DU has changed rules of engagement so fast I have whip lash.

BTW - That kind of thinking was wrong then, and it's still wrong - and dangerous.

Que the "You want Romney to be president" chorus.

[chervilant]

158. Not to mention,

the imminent posting of Teh Hallowed List...

[hughee99]

110. A good argument with one little flaw... We're NOT FUCKING REPUBLICANS!

Oh, if only we thought like republicans... be careful what you wish for.

[Fearless]

117. "You're either with us or against us."

Yeah! Group-think!

[deacon]

121. ...and he's right. n/t

[hwmnbn]

127. K&R

[malaise]

128. Ditto

Rec

[Scurrilous]

129. K & R

[FSogol]

132. K&R. n/t

[Number23]

139. Rec And I'm glad to see that no one who supports this thread felt the need to post a pic

of George Clooney with MLK in order to somehow make his comments "more legitimate."

And yes, I know that MLK has been gone for a long time but never underestimate the desperation of people who are so determined to slam this president that they will do and say anything, and Lord do I mean ANYTHING, to prop up those who criticize him.

[closeupready]

143. Clooney is a member of the 1%.

So, his ideas are predictable.

[tpsbmam]

147. Not necessarily. Matt Damon is very disappointed with Obama, and has said so.

So has Harry Belafonte. will.i.am has voiced frustration with him. Angelina Jolie said she was disappointed in him. I don't keep track of this stuff, but I do remember these 4 speaking out, Belafonte most recently.

[closeupready]

151. Good points. Nonetheless, I don't trust them to advocate for my interests.

So while I like reading that these celebrities are liberal and do good works, I read about such things with a jaundiced eye, if you know what I mean. Cheers.

[1stlady]

166. Angelina

was never for Obama, her and her racist dad, John Voight accused him of being a terrorist. So I don't know why would she be disappointed in Obama when she was never for him. I'm disappointed that she slept with a married man. She is the last person that should be disappointed in anyone. She has no morals and adopts kids like she's picking out puppies from a pound.

[Hippo_Tron]

168. And there's plenty of 99%ers who agree with them

Furthermore there's plenty of 99%ers that vote Republican. Bashing somebody as having an out-of-touch opinion because they're in the 1% only works if that opinion is shared mostly by 1%ers.

[AnOhioan]

145. "You're either with us or against us."

Now where have i heard that before....oh yeah..now I got it.

[tpsbmam]

146. I was an am a Clooney fan. He is, though, part of the 1%. It's very different when

one is viewing this presidency from the cheap seats. When one is part of the liberal class that has been demeaned and otherwise ignored by this president and this administration, it's a whole different perspective. George Clooney can get Obama on the phone. Liberal Dems who are 99%ers can't get this administration to even show us a modicum of respect, much less listen to us. We've been shut out at every turn, starting with Obama's refusal to meet with single payer healthcare advocates.

Sorry George, you do good work. IMO, you miss the mark on this one. And, even as a 1%er, I get your point but I think you're wrong. Obama was right when he expected us to hold his feet to the fire, and you're wrong now for expecting us not to.

[Bonobo]

163. I LOVE this part of your post. It is so very well done:

"Obama was right when he expected us to hold his feet to the fire, and you're wrong now for expecting us not to."

[momrois]

148. One question

So who are all you angry birds going to vote for?

[NNN0LHI]

149. George Clooney is correct

[scarletwoman]

155. I agree in that if you're selling a product, you ought to do a good job of it.

I mean, I'm a Democrat and have always been one. So I'll vote Democratic in the next election - not because I'm "sold" on Obama, but because the thought of a Republican winning the White House is utterly abhorrant.

However, Obama is going to need a lot more voters than just dedicated anti-Repblicans like me. And to get those other votes it's going to take a hell of a sales job.

So yeah, Clooney is right. The marketing of Obama for 2012 is going to take some serious flogging of his selling points to convince the independent consumers. I hope the Party is up to it.

[webDude]

169. George should talk to Matt Damon and see if he still thinks that way.

[woohooman]

173. Matt has spoken and ahhh it wasn't pretty

Interview in Elle magazine, blasted Obama's leadership qualities and saying he’d prefer “a one-term president with some balls who actually got stuff done.”

He adds, “If the Democrats think that they didn’t have a mandate – people are literally without any focus or leadership, just wandering out into the streets to yell right now because they are so pissed off.”

“Imagine if they had a leader,” wonders Damon.

[woohooman]

171. Since when did being a Democrat mean following an ALIEN off a cliff?

Since when did being a Democrat mean NOT holding our President accountable?

Since when did being a Democrat mean ignoring the fact that Obama continued the same war mongering agenda of George W Bush?

Approaching four years you look at what he promised. Then you look at what he delivered. It looks as if Obama has a problem with telling the truth.

[Gman]

182. You must not have read the quote

It tells you all you need to know

[DonCoquixote]

172. K and R

Democrats DO eat their own, while the GOP does give their fallen second,third, fourth chances.

[woohooman]

176. I have some questions for you Mr Cloney

George so you are a believer in sticking by the people whom you've elected, even when they clearly aren't whom they said they were? Even when they lied about who they are.

Hitler started out as Germany's own version of Hope and Change back in 1934. He has great oratory skills and was a charismatic leader. He was Time magazines "Man of the Year" not once but twice! But at what point would have been ludicrous to follow a monster?

Obama signed the NDAA bill into law on January 1 that allows our government to legally make any US citizen disappear. No charge, no lawyer, no phone call to family. No rights, no judge, no jury, no due process.

Just indefinite detention, legalized torture, and murder. Of course the bill is Unconstitutional. Obama being a Constitutional lawyer knows that. That should be especially bothersome to any American, whether Democrat or Republican

[Darth_Kitten]

179. Clooney goes through women like toilet paper, but wants everyone else to be loyal?

I'm writing this too early in the morning, but so be it.

[tomp]

180. the "pony" argument again. meh. nt

[DocMac]

184. I must have missed the part

where George is sending heating oil to the Northeast.

Or I missed the part where he scolded the government for cutting aid to those people.

[flamingdem]

195. Clooney is correct

One of the good guys who luckily has a microphone with the media