The filbuster sell-out kind of explains Obama's "surprisingly liberal" inauguration speech.

[Marr]

I'll admit I was surprised at how liberal Obama's inauguration speech was. He sounded more like Campaign Obama than President Obama, and it left me wondering if he was actually sincere about pursuing the items he talked about.

But once Reid reversed his position on filibuster reform, it all made sense again. It was exactly the same thing as Rockefeller promising to fight for a public option when it had no chance, then deciding he was against it when Reconciliation became the means of passing the bill and a public option was actually achievable.

This is what corporate Democrats do. They support all the right things-- but only when they can't actually pass them into law.

[NightWatcher]

1. Yep, cause nothing's getting passed now. Gun control? No

Any other reform? Nope

I guess it is easy to talk big game when you know you won't have to sign anything.

[OKNancy]

2. yes, because his second term is a week old... that's enough time to get it all done

[elleng]

3. Thanks, OK.

[appal_jack]

22. Yup, too soon go judge!

I mean, if Obama in his first term had nominated corporatists like Tim Geithner after the biggest financial theft in our nation's history...

If he had nominated authoritarians like Eric Holder to the 'Justice' Dept., where he would spend more time & resources pursuing medical marijuana dispensaries than banksters...

If he had at least tacitly (and likely quite actively) presided over the national security apparatus as it treated peaceful Occupy protesters as likely terrorists...

THEN we might have an idea of Obama's direction and priorities.

Oh, wait, that's EXACTLY what he did during term 1. This filibuster charade sure seems like a tip of the hand about term 2...

Of course, the filibuster fiasco might actually serve to help keep the Second Amendment more intact for a while longer, so we've got a bit of a silver lining there...

But basically, military/corporate hegemony is in effect. If you've got any data to the contrary, I'd love to see it. Might cheer me up a bit.

-app

[madokie]

36. Rain on Tim all you want

but the fact of the matter is he helped to steer us away from certain disaster.
Like the man said he didn't feel like it was his duty to be the policeman too. He pretty much had his lap full.

But thats alright just keep on raining on anything that is President Obama's agenda that you can find. I don't care.

[Sekhmets Daughter]

81. Yes, he did a great job in engineering a recovery...

and an equally great job in making sure none of the real culprits were ever made to pay a price for screwing up the global economy.

[AverageJoe90]

30. Thank you so much, Nancy!

[FSogol]

51. I saw a post here yesterday, that said something along the lines of...

"Obama is well into his 2nd term." Sadly, they weren't using the tag.

[MADem]

102. What the hell is WRONG with him? Jeez!!! He should have checked off a few blocks on that list

before Michelle put the damn red dress on!

The NERVE of that guy.....


Why I oughta.....!





Some here are happiest when they are angry!

[NOVA_Dem]

4. It exposes Feinstein too and her assault weapons bill

she knows the bill won't pass the Senate without filibuster reform and she helped to ensure there was no reform.

[woo me with science]

16. Well said. nt

[SidDithers]

5. *cough* bullshit *cough*...nt

Sid

[leveymg]

10. So, you think this helps the chances for passage of progressive legislation in the 2nd term?

And, Obama was totally taken by surprise by Reid's decision? Hmm?

Granted, I doubt there's a one-for-one relationship with the Inaugural speech. Probably, there wasn't really 51 votes for filibuster reform - Conservative Democratic Senators wouldn't have the 60 vote requirement to hide behind so often if the rules were changed.

[SidDithers]

11. I think that a post slamming Obama, for a failure of Reid and the other Senate Dems...

is a complete and total bullshit post.

Sid

[woo me with science]

18. Right on cue: Try to make it about "slamming Obama."

Corporate Democrats will *always* try to make it about hating Obama, rather than the systemic problem of corporate corruption we are facing here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1240&pid=193458

Obama is temporary. He is as much a part of this problem as any corporate Democrat in Congress, as his actions and appointments have clearly shown. But our most significant problem is not any *particular* politician in the White House or in Congress. Our problem is that the direction of policy does not change from administration to administration, or from Congress to Congress. Our problem is that we have a systemic problem of entrenched corporate money and power in Washington, driving predatory corporate, neocon, and police state policies by both parties. And it just keeps getting worse.

[Bonobo]

21. Reminds me of a kindergartener who only eats PBJ with the crusts cut off. nt

[SidDithers]

37. Because it is...

And here you are, right on cue, defending it.



Sid

[MADem]

103. I don't mean to be rude, but RIF--that's what the OP is doing. nt

[woo me with science]

105. Obama is temporary. He is a current manifestation of a much larger problem.

But he is the President, so it is hardly possible to talk about these things without talking about him.

It is vital that we talk about these things.

See post 86: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2265780

[MADem]

106. You should really start your own thread to "talk about these things" rather than hide them in the

subthreads of someone else's OP. No one's preventing you from so doing.

Basically, you're saying "Let's not talk about the filibuster matter, let's talk about what *I* want to talk about."

I don't think that's very good form.

[woo me with science]

107. That's just silly.

It's not a separate topic by any stretch of the imagination, and you know it.

Nice try, though.

[MADem]

108. No, it isn't silly, it is a separate topic, and you know it. Nice try, though.

It doesn't really matter at this stage, anyway--this thread is a train wreck.

[woo me with science]

110. LOL. Oh, it's been polluted with mockery by the usual corporate defenders, for sure...

That's usually a sign that there's something very important in there...

[MADem]

112. Yeah, haul out that "corporate defenders" canard, too, when you don't get your way!

You could grow some great flowers in this mess--but not much else.

[ohiosmith]

47. This post was alerted on. The jury voted 5/1 to let it stand.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

At Sat Jan 26, 2013, 10:28 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

*cough* bullshit *cough*...nt
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2260381

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

disruptive to respond to a thoughtful post this way, especially when that is all this poster does

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Jan 26, 2013, 10:31 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: What a waste of time.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: The post is an opinion of the OP. Leave it!
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: *cough* bullshit *cough*
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[SidDithers]

48. Thanks for posting the results...

Sid

[ohiosmith]

49. Happy to SD!

[Cha]

79. Yeah, I wasn't sure if we were allowed

to call bullshit when we see it or not.

Good to know.

[AndyA]

6. Reid has a good ranking with the NRA, and likely didn't want to screw that up

But since he decided to take Mitch McConnell's word, and agree on a hand shake, which I think was extremely foolish given the Republicon's track record, Reid can't complain that the right is blocking the Senate from doing business.

I think Reid's the one that should get the phone calls if the Senate isn't getting anything done. He made his bed with McConnell, so he can just sleep with him the next couple of years. Reid could have made this a very successful period, but he chose not to, so he deserves to take the heat for his foolishness.

[MjolnirTime]

7. Do you need a tissue?

[arely staircase]

8. or alternatively the president intends to fight for these things he firmly believes in

he may or may not succeed, but i believe him when he says the progressive goals and values put forth in his inaugural will be the guiding philosophy behind his second term. i think your denunciation of him as a "corporate democrat" - with all the negative implications about his character that affront is impregnated - is irrational.

[TwilightGardener]

9. The Senate's chickenshit ways do not reflect on Obama.

They want to keep their jobs and not have to vote on anything that will come back to haunt them (like Obamacare supposedly did for some Dems in 2010). That's not Obama's fault.

[chimpymustgo]

12. It's such a simple ruse, and we fall for it EVERY time. Yes, I loved Obama's speech.

Was surprised by its ferocity (Obama Unchained!).

Hope everyone REALLY enjoyed that moment.

Because then the same-o same-o appointments began. And the "cave" on the filibuster. And all the "knowing" wise men and women shaking their heads that, really background checks are all that can possibly pass for new gun safety laws.

Maybe. If we cross our fingers and hold our breath.

Now, y'all haven't forgotten the healthcare reform charade ALREADY, have you?

Yeah, that's what they're counting on. And all that hope.

[earthside]

54. I think you've got it.

"We fall for it EVERY time."

It boils down to this: Sen. McTurtle still has all the power he needs to demand 60 votes to bring anything to the Senate floor for a vote. Period.

What amazes me are the number of folks here on DU who defend Reid and shrug their shoulders and argue that everything is just fine and that ain't the future bright and rosy.

Frankly, I would like to see a revolt among new and 'younger' and progressive Democrats in the Senate ousting Reid and selecting a more dynamic leader ... like Merkely or Tom Udall or Sherrod Brown ...

[ProSense]

13. Loved the President's speech?

Here are some good reads:

The Morning Plum: Obama as the anti-Reagan
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022251090

President of the Whole Country
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022237431

Obama Reboot
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022250933

[woo me with science]

14. K&R This is a tremendously important OP,

because nothing changes until we, the people, are clear about what is really being perpetrated here.

The corporate kabuki, the script, is familiar and insulting. And, of course, we are already seeing attempts to reassure us that Reid and Democrats might take more meaningful action in the future. As always, the people will be gloriously represented at some time in the future...

The outcome here was easily predicted months ago by anyone who has been paying any attention at all to the game:

So now we are mysteriously falling short of Democratic votes for filibuster reform.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021809132

The truth is that the outcome is predictable every time. The one percent win, and the people lose. And this outcome, for the filibuster, was *especially* predictable, because it sets the stage for another *entire term* of excuses. There would have absolutely been no way to justify the forthcoming betrayals on policy related to economics, war, and the police state, had Democrats truly fought for the power to override Republican obstruction. The stagecraft is brilliant. The propaganda is masterful. But the outcome shows the truth, every single time.

The Democratic Party's Deceitful Game
http://www.salon.com/2010/02/23/democrats_34/

That's why this OP is so important. Nothing will change until Americans look clearly at how the game is rigged from the start in every single negotiation, how the possible options are artificially narrowed from the start, and how every negotiation moves us rightward. Every. Single. One.

We have a systemic problem of corporate power and money driving policy in both parties, against the will of the people. Democratic and Republican corporatists are colluding against us. Rather than arguing about *whether* it has happened, we need to figure out what we are going to do about it, because change is clearly not coming from those who claim to represent us.

____________________

Obama, Democrats Push to Make Bush Spying Laws Permanent
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022084702

The Enemy Expatriation Act - another attack on legitimate protest and dissent like NDAA
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022072450

FBI Investigated 'Occupy' As Possible 'Domestic Terrorism' Threat, Internal Documents Show
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022061578

NDAA 2013 - Indefinite detention without trial is back
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014342985

Congress, at Last Minute, Drops Requirement to Obtain Warrant to Monitor Email
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014348022

Democratic-controlled US Senate approves...new $633 billion war bill
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022060449

Purposely aiming bombs at children: "It kind of opens our aperture."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021931748

The Pentagon's New 30,000-lb MOP Bomb Is Ready To Go
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022200058

Obama Administration To Offer More Than 20 Million Acres in Western Gulf of Mexico for Oil/Drilling
http://upload.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1896005

Obama's (Corporate) Education Reform Push is Bad Education Policy
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x221922

Obama's 'Race To The Top' Drives Nationwide Wave of School Closings, Teacher Firings
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2183810

Trans Pacific Partnership is NAFTA On Steroids
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1914478

NYT slams the government for choosing not to prosecute HSBC top-bankers
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021965407

Why is Social Security Under Attack from Obama, when it ADDS NOTHING to the deficit???
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022065493

Obama: "Too many of us have been interested in defending programs as written in 1938."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid

Surely every American must realize any cuts hereinafter made to social security, Medicare, or Medicaid...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022191730

Health insurers raising rates by double digits
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014358823

So now we are mysteriously falling short of Democratic votes for filibuster reform.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021809132

Why Harry and the Democrats gave away filibuster reform
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022251878

Nine Democrats signed letter urging quick approval of Keystone XL pipeline
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022250081

[ProSense]

15. .

[HiPointDem]

27. you really think anyone cares about that stupid visual? you really think you're changing any minds?

you really think ridicule is a winning tool? you really think you can make people back down by making fun of them? you really think you can fool and manipulate people with such arrogant weaponry?

you just make your posts irrelevant because they're so...

sickening.

[ProSense]

33. Do you really think I give a shit?

I was laughing, and still am. Joke: This is an important OP, the one that links the filibuster vote (http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251280680) to Obama's speech.

Still laughing:

[HiPointDem]

69. likewise.

[SidDithers]

38. You're a riot, Hannah...

Comedy gold.

Sid

[JTFrog]

42. !

[Bobbie Jo]

100. Apparently

you did.

[Bonobo]

19. Plausible deniability and a culture of mutual back-washing.

It is ALL about the senate and congress and yes, the President, maintaining their base while conspiring to maintain the status quo. That is what you get when 2 parties hold ALL the cards.

They will ALWAYS agree on some things and work together, by mutual agreement to:

1) Keep out any 3rd party challenges
2) Help the other side maintain plausible deniability by "preventing" anything from happening that would affect the status quo too much.

They know explicitly what their constituents demand --down the the smallest percentage point -- and, if they want to maintain deniability, it is child's play to "switch votes" with someone so they will take the fall instead of you. So a congress critter who doesn't want to face the heat for a particular vote (but who still wants a vote to go down) will simply cut a deal. That way they get both. They get to say they voted for something AND they get to have the bill fail. THAT is what happened in this fillibuster reform.

[woo me with science]

68. Great post. nt

[Bonobo]

20. I highly recommend everyone educate themselves about this or nothing will ever change.

From that article in Salon:
--------------------
In other words, Rockefeller was willing to be a righteous champion for the public option as long as it had no chance of passing (sadly, we just can’t do it, because although it has 50 votes in favor, it doesn’t have 60). But now that Democrats are strongly considering the reconciliation process — which will allow passage with only 50 rather than 60 votes and thus enable them to enact a public option — Rockefeller is suddenly “inclined to oppose it” because he doesn’t “think the timing of it is very good” and it’s “too partisan.” What strange excuses for someone to make with regard to a provision that he claimed, a mere five months ago (when he knew it couldn’t pass), was such a moral and policy imperative that he “would not relent” in ensuring its enactment.

The Obama White House did the same thing. As I wrote back in August, the evidence was clear that while the President was publicly claiming that he supported the public option, the White House, in private, was doing everything possible to ensure its exclusion from the final bill (in order not to alienate the health insurance industry by providing competition for it). Yesterday, Obama — while having his aides signal that they would use reconciliation if necessary — finally unveiled his first-ever health care plan as President, and guess what it did not include? The public option, which he spent all year insisting that he favored oh-so-much but sadly could not get enacted: Gosh, I really want the public option, but we just don’t have 60 votes for it; what can I do?. As I documented in my contribution to the NYT forum yesterday, now that there’s a 50-vote mechanism to pass it, his own proposed bill suddenly excludes it.

This is what the Democratic Party does; it’s who they are. They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).

The primary tactic in this game is Villain Rotation. They always have a handful of Democratic Senators announce that they will be the ones to deviate this time from the ostensible party position and impede success, but the designated Villain constantly shifts, so the Party itself can claim it supports these measures while an always-changing handful of their members invariably prevent it. One minute, it’s Jay Rockefeller as the Prime Villain leading the way in protecting Bush surveillance programs and demanding telecom immunity; the next minute, it’s Dianne Feinstein and Chuck Schumer joining hands and “breaking with their party” to ensure Michael Mukasey’s confirmation as Attorney General; then it’s Big Bad Joe Lieberman single-handedly blocking Medicare expansion; then it’s Blanche Lincoln and Jim Webb joining with Lindsey Graham to support the de-funding of civilian trials for Terrorists; and now that they can’t blame Lieberman or Ben Nelson any longer on health care (since they don’t need 60 votes), Jay Rockefeller voluntarily returns to the Villain Role, stepping up to put an end to the pretend-movement among Senate Democrats to enact the public option via reconciliation.

[HiPointDem]

26. yep. my senators rotate taking the unpopular votes when necessary.

[ProSense]

43. Maybe they

This is what the Democratic Party does; it’s who they are. They’re willing to feign support for anything their voters want just as long as there’s no chance that they can pass it. They won control of Congress in the 2006 midterm elections by pretending they wanted to compel an end to the Iraq War and Bush surveillance and interrogation abuses because they knew they would not actually do so; and indeed, once they were given the majority, the Democratic-controlled Congress continued to fund the war without conditions, to legalize Bush’s eavesdropping program, and to do nothing to stop Bush’s habeas and interrogation abuses (“Gosh, what can we do? We just don’t have 60 votes).

...were waiting for a Democratic President to get credit for ending the war. Chess, and all.

The End of the Iraq War: A Timeline



http://www.whitehouse.gov/iraq

[woo me with science]

65. Absolutely. I repost sections of it everywhere I can,

whenever it is relevant, which is depressingly often. It is a good, clear explanation and summary, with excellent examples.

I think a lot of people smell something rotten in our government, but they still are blinded by propaganda and not really sure how the scam works, and they don't necessarily want to believe that both parties could be complicit. We are constantly fed the myth that the two parties are so at odds that they cannot even be in the same room together, so it takes some watching to realize that they are working in concert more often than not on the most important issues. The stagecraft can be extremely convincing, until you start paying attention and realize that you've seen the game before...and you can start predicting the outcome.

I think this is a critically important OP. We need to start talking about corporate collusion across party lines. Circling the wagons is exactly what we are propagandized by the one percent to do.

[HiPointDem]

25. kr

[uponit7771]

17. Yeap, not even 24 hrs and somehow Obama becomes complicate etc

[Coyotl]

23. You begin with the assumption filibuster reform is bad

because you did not get the reform you wanted, then you turn your false assumption into a false flag assault on Obama and "corporate Democrats" for saying the right things. OK

[stultusporcos]

24. Fewer people voting will be the end result of this week

Pres Obama got everyone fired up Harry killed any chance of change.

Harry did not do it in a vacuum, Pres Obama had to know and be in on it from the beginning.

Rule #1 in Washington, never surprise your boss in public, yes Pres Obama is Harry's boss because he is the party leader ya know.

The speech is ALL liberals and progressives are getting the next 4 years, I hope you really, really enjoyed it!

Now STFU and eat your peas.

[graham4anything]

28. I agree with sid's response...cough cough bullshit cough cough

I personally hope Harry Reid stays another decade.

He knows how the senate works, past, present, future

and is always looking out for the little guy.

when you think Harry has one pulled over him, that is when Harry has knocked the other side out.

so not surprising Harry has haters. Because like they don't see President Obama's 10 steps ahead, they don't see Harry's past/present/future vision either.

Not that I am surprised they don't see it. But they don't see it.

[AverageJoe90]

31. Good post, Graham.

I'll admit I've had my doubts, but these guys do ultimately know what they're doing.

[ZombieHorde]

29. I guess we'll see. nt

[Scootaloo]

32. I would hold Harry Reid responsible for what Harry Reid does

But that's me, I guess.

[ProSense]

34. It's eleventh dimension chess.

[BlueStreak]

56. A strong President doesn't let the Majority Leader do his own thing.

A strong majority leader doesn't let the Senator from California do her own thing.

This is all coordinated. It is called grandstanding. They have no interest in moving progressive legislation forward. That isn't what they are being paid to do.

[woo me with science]

59. Thank you. The outcome is consistent, because the process is coordinated.

We are continually urged to attribute losses to flukes or personal idiosyncracies. This senator "caved." That one is "spineless." For some reason, that one just didn't vote with us. The Democrats are mostly voting our way, but there are always just enough defections to ensure the continuation of the agenda of the one percent.

Of course it is coordinated. We call it a game, but it is deadly serious. Those votes reflect billions of dollars in corporate power and influence. At a certain point we need to be honest about how serious and deep and pervasive and professionally orchestrated the corruption of our government by Wall Street really is.

And the same goes for the media and propaganda that enable it. These people are playing for money and power beyond our comprehension. They have deep pockets, and they make sure we marinate in corporate messaging telling us that what we see in front of our faces is not happening. Propaganda is everywhere, down to internet political boards.

It is very, very refreshing to see people calling out the game overtly. Note that this OP was ignored until it garnered a certain level of interest. Now it is being swarmed by the usual defenders of anything corporate. This subject...the possibility that people will wake up to the game and refuse to accept it anymore... is very threatening to them.

[BlueStreak]

64. +1 None are so blind as those who will not see

[Scootaloo]

70. I have some questions.

One, Harry Reid displayed a distinct lack of spinal support during the Bush administration. Nancy Pelosi was also awfully wobbly, what with taking impeachment "off the table," and all. Since we cannot hold Reid nor Pelosi responsible for their own actions, should we blame Bush for what they decided to do in the senate?

Was Bush a strong president, coordinating the Senate as you describe - even Senators from the other party?

If so, do we then hold Obama responsible for the actions of Republican senators under his administration as well?

Doesn't that mean Clinton coordinated his own impeachment? Speaking of...

If Obama is this awful, this grotesquely committed to screwing America, shouldn't you be seeking his impeachment? Granted, since he controls the senate with an iron fist it's futile, but we really can't tolerate this sort of thing, can we?






...Or we could just hold Harry Reid responsible for what Harry Reid does.

[BlueStreak]

74. I don't understand any of those questions. Are you aware of the party concept?

Reid isn't responsible for Republicans.

The normal state of things is that the President is the leader of the party. The Speaker and the Majority Leader, if they are of that party, most certainly do not freelance. Occasionally Senators and Congressmen are allowed to "leave the ranch" when it is politically necessary for them to cast a vote contrary to what the party is pushing.

A Senator is not allowed to introduce a bill that is out of line with what the president wants. It is really stupid to let Feinstein get out there with a bill that is certain to lose, at the same time that Biden is trying to push for the things that have a chance of passing. Extremely poor leadership. Foolish strategic planning. Overall inept execution. Just pathetic.

Yes, the Bush administration had better discipline.

[uponit7771]

73. Yeap, it's Obama's fault Reid is a wimp...lol

[BlueStreak]

75. Obama should be driving everything. Yes, it is Obama's fault.

It is Obama's fault that the "cliff" talks broke down to the point that Biden bypassed Reid. This is a party breakdown of major proportions. That should never happen as it allows the GOP to divide and conquer.

These guys make the Keystone Cops look this a well-oiled machine.

Completely incompetent, at least right now.

[bigtree]

35. crap

thought I had you on ignore.

fixed.

[ShadesOfBlue]

39. typical whining

from my fellow liberals and progressives. But then this isn't a surprise, I knew this theory would take flight as soon as it became clear this week that Reid would not follow through with full filibuster reforms. I'm curious though why it took Reid's decision to make people like the OP come to their predictable conclusions. After all the House is still ran by the GOP last time I checked and Obama knew that when putting together his speech. Regardless of what went down with the filibuster the House was always going to be an obstacle, right?


Look, I think Obama is more center-left or moderate; obviously he is not far-left. I'm okay with that and frankly the country is okay with that too considering that the goals he brought up during his inauguration address are those that are supported by a majority of the country. Therefore I am not cynical to think Obama was using those talking points as some sort of ruse to cover his true feelings and intent. The reality is that even if true filibuster reform had been put into play this week, it would still have been very difficult to push all of that legislation through. Not impossible, but very tough. Odds were laws were not going to be passed for all of these major challenges. But should that stop the President from fighting for them or stop him from laying out his vision for both his second term and America in his speech?

Here's something to remember: when politicians are not campaigning they hate bringing up promises or strongly addressing challenges that in the end they can't follow through on. That's egg on their faces. That's a blow to their political credibility and strength. That's a blow to their egos. So....I think Obama will still fight for immigration reform and the gun law changes regardless of this week's decision by Reid. For the latter he is going to get demonized by the right no matter if he wins or loses that battle so his his boldest move was asking for reform of gun laws in the first place.

I have a wait-and-see approach regarding Obama tackling climate change. His administration has done some positive things on that front but overall I think most of the folks who care about this issue are disappointed with the administration's record concerning the environment. Worst of all I don't think there is much collective will in Washington to come up with solutions NOW and to be honest the public keeps allowing this issue to slide down the list of must-dos every time other concerns bubble to the surface (like gun control). So if there is one area for one to be "cynical" enough to think Obama is looking for the easy out it could be on climate.

However I feel Obama will do whatever he can in all the other issues he addressed. That means avoiding wars when possible, protecting so-called "entitlements" from being privatized, trying tom get reasonable gun-law reforms, protecting the health rights of women, taking care of the immigration problems, etc. It won't be easy and some compromises may have to be made along the way which of course will lead to hysteria from those on the far-left (who are just as intolerant to the idea of compromise as those on the far-right).

But forget about all of that because in the end I think the speech was less about any possible promises contained within (that's more for the State of the Union anyway) and more about an affirmation that all of us Americans are cherished members of one collective national family. Tell a LGBT person that Obama's speech is merely some Corporate Democrat bullshit meant to cover all the basic Democratic talking points. Decades from now, generations from now, there will be people saying that that speech was the moment in which their life changed. Changed because they felt they were finally felt accepted or that they finally had their eyes opened and became sympathetic to the plight of others. Words matter. Speeches matter. To some people at least. Thankfully not everyone is as misanthropic as many here tend to be. Maybe there is something to be said about naivete.

[great white snark]

40. This absolutely serves no purpose.

I say that begrudgingly because you obviously put a lot of something into it.

[bluestate10]

94. It's unadulterated bullshit. nt

[malaise]

41. Huh? n/t

[cali]

44. ooh, cute little conspiracy theory. so Obama knew that

filibuster reform would largely fail and thus he was free to give a liberal inaugural speech.

do you even realize how spectacularly dumb this sounds? Never mind. That was rhetorical.

[Marr]

58. I think it's spectacularly dumb to think that the

party leadership operates without any coordination, and that the political system of the most powerful nation on the planet is just a day by day, figure it out as we go operation. Yes, I think all of these things are coordinated, and that stagecraft is a big factor.

[woo me with science]

63. +100000

[Marr]

66. Thanks.

It's the mocking cries of "conspiracy theory" that are making me laugh most. As if the thought of a small handful of political leaders coordinating their actions is so far-fetched.

[uponit7771]

77. You don't believe Reid is an asshole...got cha

[eilen]

45. I didn't bother listening or reading the inaugaration speech

and I won't bother with the State of the Union. Mostly because these are designed to manipulate my emotions. What matters to me is what actually gets done. So far, the actions have pretty much said "business as usual" in the United Corporate States of America.

The real changes are happening on the state level and they are not good. Washington continues to breathe rarified air--too far above to take notice of the states and behaves as if they are operating on different planets.

Washington, the place where nothing really happens except for big checks being signed to keep everyone where they are and the decks stacked for the big contributors.

Outside of an individual or two, there is literally no difference in that behavior (besides some etiquette breaches and natural propensity for dimwittedness and batshit crazy which is generally excused by their peers as eccentricities) between either parties. In fact, I watched Bill Maher last night and they were saying ok, Republicans are 49% nutcakes and Democrats are 10% nutcakes. But does this really matter as they do the same things every day, fundraise and meet with lobbyists and gin up outrage for the latest distraction the news channels are paid to yammer on about.

The opportunity for some change in SOP is rarely taken by Democrats in leadership.

And oh goody, now women will get paid for being in combat zones in the wars that keep on going and going, the wars no one cares about or feels any compunction to stop. It's just noise in the background to most people. Drone attacks? Hello? I can't remember anyone at work bringing up the war or that people were killed on the news. The only thing people get passionate about is what their media tells them to-- abortion rights and gun rights. And guess where they are pushing the electorate.

[JoePhilly]

46. So it was Obama in the Kitchen with the Candelstick?

[onenote]

50. Can you explain the logic of the OP?

The assumption seems to be that Obama knew that the filibuster rules weren't going to be changed so he went out and made a more aggressively liberal speech since he didn't have to worry about having to follow through.

Why, exactly would Obama do that? He's not running for anything ever again so he doesn't need to make bold liberal pronouncements as a means of drumming up support for his own electoral prospects. Moreover, it does nothing for his legacy to make a bunch of bold pronouncements and achieve none of them. It only makes his presidency look weak and unsuccessful.

The only remotely possible scenario in which the OP's theory makes any sense is that the President and Reid conspired to have the President set an ambitious agenda and Reid to allow the repubs to use the filibuster to frustrate it in order to build a stronger case in 2014 for electing Democrats to the Senate, with the hope of eventually recapturing the House (a tall order for 2014 given gerrymandering). That's a pretty attenuated bit of gameplaying.

Anyway, maybe there is another explanation and if so, I'd be happy to consider it.

[Marr]

62. Why do you think?

Did you pay any attention to Rockefeller during the healthcare debate? When the so-called Public Option was a political impossibility, he said he would "not relent" in pushing for it. When the political winds changed, and it became clear that the bill would be passed via reconciliation, making the inclusion of a Public Option not only possible, but quite simple, he suddenly did a 180 and said he couldn't support it.

We're talking about politicians. They want to excite their base and please their big donors. The base gets promises, the donors get policy.

[woo me with science]

82. Excellent post,

and excellent example.

[geek tragedy]

88. DU declares: Obama second term already a failure, and on purpose

Oy.

[MADem]

111. He borrowed Stewie's Time Machine, went forward to see what would happen with the filibuster, then

went back in time to write that rousing speech!



Yeah....that's the ticket!

[FSogol]

52. Pathetic.

What an embarrassing OP!

[quinnox]

53. well, my expectations for Obama's second term were already low, so this

Is all par for the course, because I didn't think Obama would do anything to get excited about in a second term anyhow.

I knew when I voted for Obama, it was mainly a vote to keep Romney out of the White House, who would have been even worse. It's not as if I had any illusions about what Obama means, a placeholder status quo president. As long as he doesn't give away too much of the farm in any of his compromises with the republicans, that is about the level of my expectations regarding the president. The bar can't get much lower.

[BlueStreak]

57. Exactly. But the geed news is that

we were able to upgrade about 8 Senate seats on the progressive scale. Our challenge is to get rid of as many of the DINOs as possible before the honest progressives get totally corrupted by the system.

If we can get 20-25 real progressives in the Senate, and pick up 16 seats in the House, it is a whole new ballgame. We are not that far off in the Senate with people like Warren, Brown, Harkin, Sanders, Kirk, Goodwin, Whitehouse, Franken, etc

If we can add another 5, we may reach a tipping point.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/11/us-senate-just-got-lot-more-progressive

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/11/07/14993545-a-new-more-progressive-senate?lite

[alcibiades_mystery]

55. Yes, there's always some plot afoot

[leeroysphitz]

60. They aren't even hiding it anymore.

[99Forever]

61. And now the CorpoDems can...

... prepare their poutage and finger-pointing at "those damn liberals" and "professional leftists" when they get their collective ass handed to them in the midterms.

And the circle is complete.

Same old phony shit, over and over.

Lather, rinse, repeat.

[upi402]

67. agree

enjoy the former democratic party that used to oppose corporatism

talk is cheap, ignore politicians saying things.
duh

[woo me with science]

71. Kick

[SidDithers]

72. Kick for the fucking lulz...

Sid

[Cha]

76. Oh you poor thing. Bernie Sanders on the Ed Show: "Reid had 47 votes for Filibuster Reform."

But, don't let facts get in the way of your paranoia.

[Still Sensible]

80. + 1 n/t

[MessiahRp]

84. I hope Bernie outs the Traitor Dems that fucked the process over.

After all, some of these Democrats aren't Dems at all, they're corporate hacks.

Remember just a half decade ago Schumer and Emanuel spent a considerable amount of time recruiting rich Republicans to run as Democrats and while a lot of the Blue Dogs saw their careers bite the dust, there's still a lot of DLC/New Democrat recruiting of Republicans to have positions of power in our party and thus, we get a lot of traitors in our midst.

[obnoxiousdrunk]

95. + 1.

[name not needed]

96. He's obviously in on it.

[bluestate10]

99. Facts don't mean a damned thing to some people. Some on DU love to attach

conspiracies to every thing. I keep seeing the Robert Kennedy thought the Jack Kennedy was assassinated via a conspiracy brain dead OP staying on the first page, when it should have been in the shitter days ago. The Kennedy thread just confirms to me how far out a select few DU members are, they are the left hand of Freepers right hand.

[Buzz Clik]

78. Wow! This is exactly the kind of intelligent insight that keeps me at DU.

I added these ^^^^ because I was uncertain if my contempt for the OP was clear enough.

[Cha]

83. I know.. best to add the

sarcasm thingy on this one since there's never a shortage for that kind of "insight" on DU.

[DCBob]

85. You do realize President isnt campaigning for reelection anymore.. right?

There is no need to fake being liberal to motivate the base. I am convinced he truly believes in these things and will try his best to get them enacted into law. Your conspiracy theory is ignorant.

[woo me with science]

86. Corporate Democrats will always feign naivete and try to make it about Obama.

Last edited Sat Jan 26, 2013, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)

This isn't about Obama, or any single politician. The real power behind the scenes is Wall Street, and the purpose of the game is to use government and the purchased two-party system to build and perpetuate a long-term system that feeds, protects, and grows the wealth and power of the one percent.

Obama is temporary. The parties aren't, and neither are the corporate forces that orchestrate policy and the means by which to implement it. There is tremendous corporate interest in maintaining the illusion of the Democratic Party as a representative of the people, while simultaneously rigging the game so that the people's interests can never really be achieved. That is the game that Marr so importantly outlines in this OP, and we see it used against us, elegantly, over and over again...even as the names and faces involved change.

Our problem is not Obama or any single politician. They are all temporary tools of the oligarchy and merely symptoms of the larger problem. Our real problem is the deep and systemic corruption of our political process and the two-party system by corporate money, and the fact that the direction of policy never changes from administration to administration anymore, no matter which party is in charge.

[DCBob]

89. I dont dispute the power of money in politics but..

I do think Obama is the real deal and trying to make a difference.

[woo me with science]

90. His administration has worked persistently and effectively for corporate interests

Last edited Sat Jan 26, 2013, 09:17 PM - Edit history (4)

since Day One. To argue otherwise is to ask people to deny a reality we have witnessed, consistently, with our own eyes.

Corporate and bank-cozy appointments, over and over again
Bailouts and settlements for corrupt banks (with personal pressure from Obama to attorneys general to approve them),
Refusal to prosecute even huge, egregious examples of bank fraud (i.e, HSBC)
NDAA to allow indefinite detention,
"Kill lists" and claiming of the right to assassinate even American citizens without trial
Maintaining Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act,
Expansion of wars into several new countries
A renewed public support for the concept of preemptive war
Drone campaigns in multiple countries with whom we are not at war
Proliferation of military drones in our skies
Federal targeting of Occupy for surveillance and militarized response to peaceful protesters
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for warrantless surveillance
Fighting all the way to the Supreme Court for strip searches for any arrestee
Internet-censoring and privacy-violating measures like ACTA and the new CISPA-like executive order
Support for corporate groping and naked scanning of Americans seeking to travel
A new, massive spy center for warrantless access to Americans' phone calls, emails, and internet use
Support of legislation to legalize such spying
Militarized police departments, through federal grants
Marijuana users and medical marijuana clinics under assault,
Skyrocketing of the budget for prisons.
Supporting a bipartisan vote in Congress to gut more financial regulations.
Passionate speeches and press conferences promoting austerity for Americans, while the
Bush tax cuts were extended for billionaires.
Support for the payroll tax holiday, tying SS to the general fund
Support for the vicious chained CPI cut in Social Security and benefits for the disabled
Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid offered up as bargaining chips in budget negotiations, with no mention of cutting corporate welfare or the military budget
Multiple new free trade agreements, including The Trans-Pacific, otherwise known as "NAFTA on steroids."
Growth of the power of lobbyists to prevent government regulation of corporations.
Support of drilling, pipelines, and selling off portions of the Gulf of Mexico
Corporate education policy including high stakes corporate testing and closures of public schools

Obama's administration exemplifies the problem we face....in particular, the chasm between the public rhetoric that is so carefully crafted to suggest that Democratic policies will represent the 99 percent, and the corporatist policies that are inevitably orchestrated anyway. We are and remain solidly on the trajectory we witnessed under Bush, and that is our problem. Prevention of filibuster reform is the latest, most glaring example of how the bipartisan corporate game is played. It is also critically important...not merely just more example... because it ensures, deliberately, the voting conditions necessary for an entire second term of continued betrayals.

This administration is not functioning in opposition to the systemic problem we face. It is a glaring example of how deep and systemic and pervasive across policy areas and party the problem really is.

[DCBob]

92. Many things you list there are not so easily defined to be bad or good.

I give the guy the benefit of the doubt on those things. I trust him.. thats why I voted for him. Clearly there are some huge problematic issues that still need to be addressed. I do think he has his sights set on some of those in his next term.

[brush]

87. Reid didn't have the votes.

Several blue dogs, including Feinstein, were not supporting the filibuster reform Reid wanted. Guess her reelection race is coming up and she doesn't want to endanger that. It's deja vu all over again (my apologies to Yogi Berra), but these blue dog dems are just as destructive as the repugs. If you can't depend on people allegedly in your own party . . . WTF? It's not all Reid's fault. I just hope these sorry ass blue dog dems don't do this shit all over again like they did in '09 and '10 or we'll lose ground again in 2014. These blue dogs need to be exposed. They're more worried about keeping their job than turning the country around. And Feinstein is rich, what's she worried about her job for? Guess she likes the power and notoriety. And she's submitting an anti-assault weapon bill that she knows won't pass but won't back the full filibuster reform bill. God! It's all for attention and show.

[woo me with science]

98. They never have the votes, by design.

That's the point.

[bluestate10]

101. Yeah, that is true. If a person is infatuated by conspiracy theories and are convinced that they

are nobodies that can't make a difference. So, raging against the man and the bought-man with one's fist waving in the air becomes an impotent substitute for reasoned action. It is always easier to lay the blame at the feet of imaginary schemers than it is to accept our own lack of perspective.

[woo me with science]

104. See posts 58 and 62. nt

[woo me with science]

91. Kick

[woo me with science]

93. Kick. This is important. nt

[Zorra]

97. Yep, that is exactly what corporate Democrats do. The game is totally rigged. nt

[kudzu22]

113. Filibuster reform is like playing with fire

It wasn't that long ago that the Repubs had both houses and the President. What could they have done without a filibuster to stop them? It might look attractive now, but you have to look down the road -- they will be in power again someday. Do you want to have no checks on their ability to enact radical legislation?

[NYC Liberal]

114. A) Reid cannot force people to vote a certain way; he can only try to persuade or pressure

B) Obama's speech was progressive, but not "surprisingly" so. He reiterated what he's been advocating for and working towards for a long time. It was only "surprising" to people who have not paid attention.