General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsYour anti-Obama memes are wearing thin.
First of all, I don't always agree with the man. Sometimes I have been right, sometimes I have been wrong. So don;t hit me with that whole "cult of personality" meme because yeah, he makes pretty speeches but actions always speak louder than words. But his actions have won my trust.
First of all, let's cut the guy some slack. No other President in the history of the US has inherited TWO wars along with a major Recession threatening to become another Great Depression, while battling the image of the unconstitutional "Unitary Executive" dictatorship that Bush's leadership was leading to. Seeking a consensus from the American public, All the time fighting opposition from the opposition party because "he was a Democrat" and also because he was black - while fighting opposition within his own party because "he didn't make thing's happen quick enough" - which seems ironic because the only way he could have dome it "quick enough" was to be a Dictator under the "Theory of Unitary Executive" which he had promised to undo.
Regardless of the over-whelming opposition that he has had to overcome, he has still managed to get through some land-breaking legislature.
Under this President, DOMA ended. True, it was a SCOTUS decision, but he's the one who declared that the administration position was that it was unconstitutional, which kept the admin from successfully defending it. So, I count that as an Obama win for LGBT rights. Using the Constitution.
Under this CiC, DADT ended. And he did it purposely and slowly, to make sure that it won't be back.
And that is a mark of this administration - he "could" issue XO's that could be easily overturned by the next President - or he could have the Law changed, which not only is constitutional but binds the next President to follow the rules.
This President has done more for Liberal values than any other President in history.
Accept that, and then let's accept what the next Liberal President will do to advance our cause.
Baby steps.
If you want it all now, then you want it to fail. You are anti-Progressive. Yes, you heard me, you are anti-Progressive. Because real change TAKES TIME.
Real Liberals have patience. Actually, patience is a part of the Liberal definition - because we wait until understands our point. We are against forcing our opinions on anyone.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Safetykitten
(5,162 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)Slowly but surely things are changing.
I'll say this again, my favorite cousin got a double organ transplant within the last six months because of Obama. His anti rejection drugs are almost free and boy does he need them.
My cousin just married his boyfriend yesterday.
Troops are coming home where they belong.
My friends aren't being deported.
This would not happen under McCain or Romney.
Hekate
(90,674 posts)bravenak
(34,648 posts)I'm happy.
Vanje
(9,766 posts)But complacence is not.
Patiently, NEVER stop actively working against stuff that is wrong.
bravenak
(34,648 posts)And be loud and proud about our accomplishments.
I'm proud of our progress.
nikto
(3,284 posts)Conservaives get to run.
Progressives must always walk sloooowly.
OK, that's the way it is in Amurka.
I'll stay super-patient.
But I don't have to like it.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)
LukeFL
(594 posts)The constant whining of the majority here us really sickening.
If the think they can do better than the President , they should run for office.
Daemonaquila
(1,712 posts)No, we don't need to run for office. We have some good candidates that have run. Candidates that are far to the left of Obama. Or Kerry. Or the recent others. The weenie "left" DNC establishment won't dare nominate a real left-wing politician. So get off the high horse.
MH1
(17,600 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)you're on a roll...go for it
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)AZ Mike
(468 posts)Nice.
I don't get the persistent histrionics, hand-wringing, and pearl-clutching astonishment on this site. I view politics (and the resulting policy) like I view the boa constrictor strategy employed by Royce Gracie against much bigger opponents 15 years ago. You could watch his fights and see him literally inch up someone's side until he had them in a triangle choke, or something like that. It may have taken 5 minutes of slow PROGRESS, but in the end, his opponents tapped out.
So many people on here need to take a cue from Royce Gracie.
BlueToTheBone
(3,747 posts)
Many of the people on the site seem to be new to politics and are more of the activist nature than political worker. But in the end it is patience and persistence.
sheshe2
(83,754 posts)Real change does take time. However we are moving forward one step at a time.
Thank you~
Hekate
(90,674 posts)Very well put.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I just calls 'em likes I sees 'em!
Silent3
(15,210 posts)...military and police forces, pro integrated schools, etc.?
Those are worthy and necessary goals. Anything less is immoral. That's completely true. I understand the disgust with accepting anything less. Every moment that a slave remained a slave was a tragedy. Every moment African Americans were denied equal standing in society was a grave injustice.
Nevertheless, the only way any of that eventually happened was in slow steps. The hellfire anti-slavery Lincoln I imagine never would have come close to winning the presidency, or yielding any sort of significant political power at all. Lincoln only ran against the spread of slavery beyond where it already existed, not for it's immediate cessation. Emancipation came only as a strategic move in the war with the South. I'm pretty sure Lincoln would have been shocked by blacks marrying whites. By modern standards, Lincoln would likely be considered a bigot.
That made him the right man for the job at the time. Just ahead of the curve of the American public, and not so far ahead that no one would follow.
There are times when too much patience is wrong, when waiting for tomorrow has got to stop. What's difficult is knowing when patience is a virtue and when patience is a vice. It's always more complicated that simply knowing what's right.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)I agree. It's a thin wire.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)An incredibly well-written OP, followed by an insightful and articulate reply.
I don't necessarily agree with all you have said, but you've said it very well.
OK - who stole DU, and replaced it with thoughtful discussion?
Skraxx
(2,972 posts)Obama's done pretty damn good. The guys got an uncanny sense of timing and political acumen. And he accomplishes his goals, again and again and again, and in such a way that people scratch their heads and wonder how he did it. He confounds everyone because they underestimate him and are not used to his style and temperament. He's focused and not ruled by his emotions and ego, so he keeps his eye on the ball, on the goal, while others are caught up in "getting" him. He's smart enough to know this and uses it to his advantage.
tblue
(16,350 posts)There was nothing easy about championing emancipation. There's no other politician who can touch the risk he willingly took and the price he paid for it. I don't compare President Obama to President Lincoln, and I don't expect the same of him. I just expect a president to upholds the Constitution by not giving immunity to war criminals, not holding innocent people in indefinite detention, and not assassinating people without true due process, especially using drones that cause the deaths of innocent people. Obviously your and my priorities are not exactly the same, and I respect your opinion. I'm not putting it down and I would never ask you not to express it. Third Way Democrats are generally liberal on social issues and conservative on fiscal ones. Obama has done some real good on the former, but not so much on the latter. For me, that is not enough. It's just not. If it's enough for you, God bless ya and so be it. But it falls way short for me.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)You know what Sherman did right?
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)Excuse the obvious pun, but what you are arguing and arguing against, is the concept that he is either black or white. Either he's done "all he could" or he "hasn't done enough". The problem is that this is a tad bit of a false dichotomy. He can be "both" depending upon ones standards.
When I got out of high school and went to a high powered college, a professor once explained that it was tough teaching there because all of his students had been in the top 10% of their class in high school. Now, 90% weren't. 90% were always going to be out of the top 10%. Obama took a job where the expectations are very high. The competition is very tough. You'll be compared to folks like Washington, Lincoln, FDR, and LBJ, not to mention the folks like Jefferson, JFK, Truman, Eisenhower, etc. And in some sense you are up against the LEGENDS of these folks, less than the reality.
None the less, this is the job. This is the standard that many candidates establish when running for the job. Being in the top 50% isn't seen as being successful. Heck, being in something less than the top 5 can be seen as failing."To those who much is given, much is expected". You can set the standards low, and anyone with a D after their name will be successful, or you can set them so high no one will every meet them. The entire argument around here really tends to be about which end of the spectrum one believes should be used as the metric.
He's missed alot of opportunities to do better, heck to do things upon which he campaigned. Alternately, he's been presented with an usually combative congress. Some will suggest that was as much of his own making as anything. No discussion is going to come to a black or white conclusion. Everyone has facts on their side.
But as I keep saying, in many cases the problem is that one can make a 100 gallons of really great punch. Drop one turd in the thing and no one is going to drink it. Obama has dropped alot of turds in the rather large bowl. His supporters want to focus on the punch. It's hard for me too not see the turds floating on top.
jazzimov
(1,456 posts)zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)You're saying he's good because he has met a minimum standard. You're arguing against the "bad" because he hasn't met the maximum standard. He is what he is and there is alot to criticize. There is much to be thankful for. How one chooses to characterize that is based upon what their standards are.
blue14u
(575 posts)I agree with much of what you say. I like the POTUS.
I think he is a great guy.. It's the policies I am upset about..and the people he surrounds himself with...
and as you say... "the missed opportunities". Some of us don't
have time for patients anymore...we are drowning..
I have seen more of my FB friends post suicide notes than ever before.
So I see it very differently. He needs to hurry up imo. I expect him to do more and do it
quicker. Using the past about slaves to make a point is not ok with me either.
sorry if I ranted to much... 
Blanks
(4,835 posts)snort
(2,334 posts)'Cause I was thinking about Preznut Palin. Ughh.
Jamaal510
(10,893 posts)in a mixed-bag nation like the US of A. Though Obama won, roughly 47% percent of all voters casted a ballot for the other guy, while just enough people voted to keep the bums in Congress. So yeah...the big changes won't happen overnight. The GOP is gasping for their political lives, and they are damn sure not going out without a fight.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)126 million voted, 93 million did not. So if the bag is mixed, it is not mixed just 'our guy and the other guy' it is 'our guy, the other guy, and nearly half the voters who reject them both'.
Get those people to vote and we win. How to do that? Stop with the 'moderate bipartisanism' routine that makes people sick.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/11/08/report-shows-turnout-lower-than-2008-and-2004/
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)You seem to think that the 43% of the electorate are all also Far Left. I beg to differ....
uriel1972
(4,261 posts)Is to be immediatly branded, anti-Obama and a Romney-loving racist. I have found these attempts to shut down discussion disturbing.
There are policies I disagree with and I think there are situations that could've been handled better, but I like to believe he is a decent person, very capable and is trying to do the right thing by all under very trying circumstances.
That being said, I don't always agree with what it seems he believes the right thing to do is. There is much to this debate which is not a binary, 'all or nothing' situation.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...your post. I think the insulting manner plays into digging in heels and attempting to get people with opposing views to STFU.
Instead of discussion, immediate and first line of that post is an insult. Setting up not a discussion, but a verbal altercation. It's an old MO, and as tiresome as the MO in the message in the OP.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)every turn. Gen Clapper, Gen Alexander, etc. This president has done nothing to prosecute Wall Street crime. This President has appointed Penny Pritzker the female Mit Romney. He has embraced the Patriot Act, domestic spying and indefinite detention. This President put SS on the table, extended Bush tax cuts for the super wealthy. He settled for less than single payer. He has appointed more REpublicans than Democrats.
This President isnt liberal. And liberals arent patient. The so-called New Democrats are patient, willing to accept anything the Republicans dish out because they are basically cowards.
No liberal would try to sneak the TPP thru.
I would be very curious as to the demographics of the boosters vs. the site's population in general. Maybe it's the same, but for some reason, I expect they skew a bit younger. They seem to identify the word "liberal" more as a brand than anything concrete. It's just a word to be affixed to a product.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)If people can't remember anything before the Reagan era, then they might be more inclined to think of Obama as "liberal" even though he actually compared himself to an "'80s moderate Republican" and had seemingly more praise for Reagan than for JFK and RFK during his campaigns. Those of us who can remember the time before Reagan when there actually was strong liberal representation in Congress, as well as liberal or at least moderately liberal presidents, tend to think of him more as a centrist/right-of-center President.
Skittles
(153,160 posts)
Douglas Carpenter
(20,226 posts)that way things have progressed a great deal over the last few decades. My goodness when I was a kid major city newspapers still separated their "Help Wanted" classified adds from "Help Wanted Women" and "Help Wanted Men." It was considered liberal to consider homosexuality a treatable illness instead of something psychopathic and criminal. So we have seen miraculous strides in those areas. But in the mean time we have seen enormous steps backwards on the economic front. No matter how one spins it -on economic issues Richard Nixon was well to the left of Barack Obama or Bill Clinton or any other prominent mainstream Democrats who were even taken seriously as possible presidential contenders over the last twenty to thirty years. And Nixon was considered a conservative at that time. When was the last time we had a real old fashion New Dealer that even came close to leading the Democratic Party who was actually proposing real changes that would expand the safety net and move boldly to eradicate poverty and build a more economically equitable society? Well, I would say it has been more than forty years. Since then - although we have leaders taking strong positions on social issues - I remind people that social issues don't generally cost a lot of money. The Chairman of Starbucks strongly supports marriage equality while he wants to slash Social Security. I'm sure lots of hedge fund mangers feel the same. Simply wanting to protect what has already been under assault for the last three to four decades is now considered far left. There is no doubt that the only reason that we have been able to hang on to what little remains of the New Deal and the Great Society is because people speak up and won't let it happen. If people stop complaining about the economic policies of these hedge fund Democrats like Obama and Clinton that would be the end of all that was accomplished from the early 30's through the late 60's.
Melinda
(5,465 posts) 
G_j
(40,367 posts)a lot of truth in what you say.
And certainly we have to protect what we have left from the New Deal and has been under relentless attack for decades.
FredStembottom
(2,928 posts)... If you haven't already.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)and would have to agree with you.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Skittles
(153,160 posts)people tend to be true supporters who can critique when warranted
Response to Marr (Reply #19)
Vanje This message was self-deleted by its author.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)They're equating "liberal" with "anti-Republican" and divorcing the term from its historical roots.
blue14u
(575 posts)
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)It's pretty much that you aren't allowed to be.
joshcryer
(62,270 posts)Dawgs
(14,755 posts)
Liberals cannot recognize liberal progress even with centrists?
Response to rhett o rick (Reply #16)
Post removed
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Skraxx
(2,972 posts)Teach me oh wise one! How can I live up to your standards of perfection! I doubt my worthiness to follow in your Liberal footsteps and match your doubtless myriads of important accomplisments!
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Skraxx
(2,972 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)Skraxx
(2,972 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)somebody would toss you an anvil. You're just that kinda...whatever it is you are. 
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)It's apparent.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)put a donation in the plate. On second thought, stay on your knees, just cough up and crawl out.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Liberal can mean a lot of things. It has different meanings in different spheres, such as in religion, economics, philosophy, and political science. Its meanings in each those aforementioned areas is more or less well defined.
In a political sense, liberalism, at the least, insists that the government not dictate morality. By that standard, the administration has upheld liberal values on many occasions.
But people also use it in a broad, general sense to try to describe a consistent outlook on a wide range of unrelated political questions and public policy positions. This runs into problems quickly. The choices for every issue don't always fit well into a "liberal" frame. The entire spectrum of questions about government, politics, and society aren't always sensibly understood in terms of "liberal" and "conservative". Party politics gets into myriad questions of public policy and governance that have little or no direct relationship with conservatism or liberalism in any truly meaningful way. For instance, questions about whether or not to allow the SEC to regulate derivatives, or whether to increase or decrease funding for diplomatic missions overseas have scarcely any connection to traditional definitions of liberal or conservative.
What's the "liberal" perspective on the TPP? As you would have it, the liberal position is clearly against it. This is exactly the kind of amorphous definition of "liberal" that renders the word practically meaningless today.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)you respond to his apparent misunderstanding of "liberal"?
If he thinks the site he sourced is liberal, he is crazy.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Repeal of DOMA and support for LGBT rights are sharply-defined, traditional liberal values. I'm done arguing over the meaning of labels.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)it much harder for them to over turn it. The Executive Branch is supposed to defend all laws. When he refused, the SCOTUS had to figure out if they could rule on it with no one defending it. It took them more time to work that out than it did to over turn DOMA.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)The president also announced that he won't be enforcing immigration law on people who were brought into the country as minor children. What do you make of that?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)some kind of credit.
cheapdate
(3,811 posts)Last edited Wed Sep 18, 2013, 01:19 PM - Edit history (1)
for an increase in violence against black people in the South during the civil rights movement.
Hotler
(11,421 posts) jazzimov
(1,456 posts)to impose their own ideas on someone who doesn't accept them.
In other words, a Liberal relies on changing someone else's mind rather than forcing their will on that same person. A Liberal also is willing to admit when they are "wrong".
I disagree with Obama in this, because although I understand that he wants to "compromise" with Republicans which would have been my own choice in the past, he has misinterpreted the hatred and opposition to anything He proposes as a Democrat primarily, and as a Black man secondarily.
By saying this, I am not accusing Republicans as racist as a broad-brush. However, I think that some of them are, and the ones who are not have found that racism can be a unifying and strong motivator in some cases and are taking advantage.
I could address each of your concerns individually, and I have in other posts. But as for your assertion
"liberals aren't patient"
I strongly rebuke this assertion - I say that Liberals ARE patient.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)He's a pragmatic centrist, and always has been. Obama haters are throwing temper tantrums because they're realizing - just now after almost six whole years - that he's not going to turn out to be the liberal messiah that he never claimed to be, but which they deluded themselves into believing he was.
It wouldn't be so painful to watch if they weren't so eager to push most extreme loony RW memes, generated by the very same fascist Teabaggers they pretend to be fighting against.
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)is used to explain away his bad deals with Republicans.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Cite a single instance of your claim.
Thanks in advance.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)NEXT!
AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Errrr, ummmm.....huh?
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)AgingAmerican
(12,958 posts)Reading is fundamental.
blue14u
(575 posts)what the DLC asked for.. Third way, Centrist..just like Hillary.
Blue_In_AK
(46,436 posts)because that was always my view. That's why I haven't been terribly let down. It goes with my usual philosophy of "Expect the worst and you won't be disappointed." 
That's not to say, however, that I don't wish he were more progressive. I just knew that he wasn't/isn't.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)agree 100% Spot on...
MADem
(135,425 posts)People make assumptions about how others feel and what they believe based on how they look. They spend less time listening to what they say, and more time focusing on how their appearance fits into a paradigm or a desired representation. Obama is cool. He plays basketball, he can sing Al Green, he's smooth, he dresses sharp, he doesn't let bullshit get to him. Oh, of course he's got to be left of Stokely! Never mind what he says, he isn't really a moderate, he doesn't mean it--he's WiNKING at us, don'tcha know....
Oh wait--that winker was Sarah Palin!!!!
And she was another individual whose appearance belied her attitudes. Just because Sarah Palin said she was a "hockey mom" didn't make it true. It's pretty obvious now that she's a power hungry nutcase who spent little time with her children (one of whom had a sleep-over boyfriend as a young teen and ended up a "teen mom" as a consequence) and failed to adequately supervise their development. But, oh, didn't she play the part of the "MILF" (I do dislike that term, but I believe she was shopping the theme), your next-door-neighbor, "I'm just like you" in designer clothes--and stupid people believed her--wink, wink!
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)Iraq is a "dumb war"
Single Payer
Patriot Act
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2013/08/02/sen-obama-warned-about-patriot-act-abuses-president-obama-proved-him-right/
We had no idea that he would appoint Wall Street types like Summers or Geitner.
Yes, many of us might have had high hopes after having W for eight years, but suggesting that he would be this far to the right is just moronic.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)"because first we gotta take the White House....and then the House"
end quote...
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)And when you ridicule those that disagree with you by calling them "haters", you completely destroy your credibility.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)which is not very Liberal at all. I knew that when I voted for him in 2008.
What I didn't know was that he is a Neocon when it comes to foreign policy.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)And, as with everything else from the ignorant, childish, moronic anti-Obama left, it's a non-starter.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I said he has a Neocon foreign policy.
If you'd care to refute that point, please do. Simply calling me ignorant, childish, moronic and anti-Obama doesn't do much but make you appear recalcitrant. I'm not that concerned with your opinion of me.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)But then, anyone claiming that Obama is a neocon defines "unreasonable".
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I'm saying his foreign policy is taken from the Neocon playbook:
http://www.newrepublic.com/blog/jonathan-chait/94211/are-obama-and-bush-really-the-same
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/06/06/18804146-obama-continues-extends-some-bush-terrorism-policies?lite
http://adambsullivan.com/?p=1062
http://www.buzzfeed.com/bennyjohnson/things-democrats-would-have-freaked-out-about-if-bush-had-do
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/24/obama-george-bush_n_3145804.html
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/apr/24/bush-policies-still-alive-in-obama-white-house/?page=all
I invite you to counter with your own examples, rather than insult me and avoid the debate.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Your 'excluded middle' argument is not coherent.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)He didn't just charge into Syria like a bull in a China shop...therefore your Obama is a Neocon on foriegn policy is bogus indeed.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Then your assertion is false. It is in pnac isit not? Still wrong
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Still waiting for counter examples to the links I posted...
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Your point is no longer valid.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)And there are some people who really do want it to fail. Their motives may be different, but their goals are the same.
BillyRibs
(787 posts)Harry S. Truman We were still At war in Europe April 12, 1945, (Shortly Over) and Japan. A Post war Recession. And a Do Nothing Congress as well.
DRoseDARs
(6,810 posts)
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)is the ACA "land breaking legislation"?
Hard for me to tell. It's pretty complicated. It seems to do some good things, and it seems to do some bad things. Unlike some here, who are hung up on single payer that never would have passed, I only wanted two main things from health care reform. First, I wanted "no mandate", and second I wanted a public option.
Now, it appears to me that I got the opposite on both of those.
So, it's kinda hard to be happy about that.
But there are a string of actions on the Bush tax cuts that show Obama to be serving the top 20% rather than the bottom 80%.
First, because of the economic meltdown (or it made a handy little excuse), Obama opted to not deal with the Bush tax cuts. Let them go for another two years when they are gonna expire automatically anyway.
Okay, I was patient. Having waited 8 years to see the Bush tax cuts die, I could wait two more.
Except Obama did not let them die. Instead of that, and even instead of using the THREAT of that to get something good, Obama instead capitulated to Republicans, refused to fight, and kicked the can two years down the road, promising to fight next time.
But not before Obama peddled some lies about how great his 2010 deal was. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x30476
Then two years down the road, having won his re-election, Obama "fights" to make 85% of the Bush tax cuts permanent.
That is an action. An action which benefits the top 20% far far more than it benefits the bottom 80%.
To create permanent tax cuts favoring the rich, does not mean that Obama is moving too slowly in the right direction. Rather it means, fast or slow, he is moving in the WRONG direction. How long am I supposed to wait for him to fucking turn around, bright eyes?
Once upon a time there was hope in my eyes, now my soul is blackened and dark. Nothing I can do, a total sell out of the heart.
lexington filly
(239 posts)posts which are attacking a person---in this case, Obama---rather than an issue or policy. That just impedes a decent discussion or exchange of ideas. Personally attacking a person, either a politician or one another doesn't further understanding and is a waste of time. Unless, it's a Tea Party type. lol
Ford_Prefect
(7,895 posts)You seem to forget little things like the New Deal and The Civil Rights Act, among many others.
Your version of Liberal History is quite narrow and selective, sadly.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Unless you happen to think having more affordable and accessible health care for all is no biggie.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)it's always "no biggie".
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Whisp
(24,096 posts)get up to speed, hobbit.
dust off your hairy feet and run with the rest of us. 
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Not health CARE.
and I don't run unless I have to. Right now there's nothing behind me.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)While I do think getting health care reform will be the legislative change Obama will be remembered for long after he leaves the While House, the ACA was essentially the Heritage Foundation's counter-proposal to HillaryCare in '93.
Having a Democratic president pass an old warmed over Republican idea (in the face of current Republican frothing-mouthed opposition) shows just how far the country has been dragged rightward. I think some of the disappointment with Obama is that instead of trying to pull the country back to the left he has let it continue the rightward drift, even as he had tremendous popular support in his first term to move boldly left.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)and previous to ACA she had a lifetime cap on her insurance her days would be numbered if I wasn't rich enough to pay the enormous care bills.
I wouldn't give a flying fuck if ACA was a Republican idea or Atilla the Hun's idea.
The slipping rightward didn't happen over night, thanks to that wonderful charming man most everyone loves here, Bill Clinton, that slippage might have been prevented if not for that 'democrat' and his rightwad ideas.
But it's here, and that is what Obama had to deal with.
And did. And it will make great and good changes to millions of people.
Deal with it.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)And your wonderful perfect President continues to embrace ideas that would make a Republican happy.
Deal with it.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)that have already had enormous benefits from ACA and have posted it here.
I am happy for them. It must be such a relief for so many to finally get a break.
I don't understand why that would upset some, but that's the way it is. Too bad, so sad.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Skraxx
(2,972 posts)Legislature.
But it was somewhat modelled after a plan supported by Bob Dole, back when Repubs actually DID have some sense of responsibilty and desire to actually create policy that was workable, but business friendly. It was their response to the Dems single payer proposal during Clinton's admin.
So, it's not exactly a GOP plan. Like many types of bullshit, what you say has a grain of truth distorted beyond comprehension to support your anti-Obama objective.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)Applies to your post
Skraxx
(2,972 posts)
kiva
(4,373 posts)It isn't Medicare, it isn't Medicaid, it isn't any form of universal health care, it is insurance. And no, the ACA doesn't rank right up there.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)and you tell them they are wrong and they shouldn't accept that help.
kiva
(4,373 posts)I'm saying that help should be available for everyone, and it is not. It is not available because the ACA doesn't provide health care, it provides health insurance.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)word it any way you want - it is helping a lot of people right now and will help a lot more soon.
call it Gwkkzmsinki if you like, the bottom line is Americans will be healthier and happier for it.
kiva
(4,373 posts)Any way you slice it, it is not health care, it's not comparable to Medicaid or Medicare. Some will benefit - absolutely.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)Parenthood anywhere and everywhere they can.....begs to differ.
But do go on...
kiva
(4,373 posts)in various places I've lived, through both private and government grants - what do this have to do with the ACA?
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)Good post.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)He also spoke of the fierce urgency of the now. How would you address his urging others to act in the here and now as he most constantly did?
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)rights or justice since the beginning of the nation. It had already been 100 years since the end of slavery. De-segregation had been the law of the land for just a few years. Dr. King understood the slow pace of change more than anyone.
Every African American leader speaks of the urgency for change because their very lives are at stake, but we didn't get to this point overnight and we still have a very long way to go. Change comes slowly.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)It is one thing to understand the obstruction and blockage of progress but to actually advocate for slower change to injustice is another thing entirely and something Dr King never, ever did. Nature teaches that change comes as change wishes, slow as evolution and swift as a flash flood. People die over years or in an instant. Change comes as change comes.
Justice delayed is justice denied. Those who advocate delay of justice are advocating denial of justice.
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)It's just reality, it's just democracy. Fast change comes with tyranny and revolution. I wish it wasn't so, but there it is.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I believe were his words.....
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)and I'm right there with Dr King, but I've lived long enough to see some of the change he spoke of and for that I'm grateful.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Something you were actually critical about before it was finalized-- not a "I don't like it, but oh well, it's over, move on".
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)but I am also realistic. We got more from this President than I would have thought possible, and he did it with manners....in spite of the rudeness of the opposition and the lies they told.
I loved him when he first ran, and I still do. When things go wrong, I don't feel bad for me, I feel for him, because he cares about us.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)
omg.
This is someone who will never have to worry about retirement, never have to worry about paying the mortgage, never have to worry about having enough food, and never have to worry about insurance costs. This is a person who will never have a problem with his children getting the best schooling available in the country. This is a person who has no personal concerns.
You feel for him when the weak and the poor get kicked and abused more? You feel for him when protesters get pepper sprayed and abused by a militarized police force for peaceful protesting of illegal and immoral acts by this government? You feel for him when the 80 y/o man had his home taken away by capitalist scum for 150$ in back taxes? I can go on, but I think you get my point. There is certainly something wrong with this type of thinking...
SammyWinstonJack
(44,130 posts) 
MuseRider
(34,108 posts)Exactly. A person with those advantages who is a liberal, a TRUE liberal of the old style that worked for ALL the people, would never stop shouting and working against making certain everyone had at least enough advantages so that their children were clothed, housed and fed in some kind of home, not the car or a cardboard box. He certainly would not have allowed the treatment of protesters that we have gotten.
It's like the poor fellow did not know how it would be. Poor Obama, we never loved him anyway, it hurts him so. ALL of this is just reheated, pre-chewed BOG chaw to pat each other on the back with and yell at those who are not in the PomPom fan club.
Smug and lazy. Reheated garbage. For those people who really agree with Obama and are true centrists I am sorry. I never would want to include you in this group. I may disagree with your centrism but I would never say anything that would suggest you belong to the cult of personality this group is.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)
OMG
...is right. Phew.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)have any other personal concerns to be worried about. I feel for him because there are people who denigrate him in every possible way. Strange that he would be linked with everything that is wrong in this country just because he is financially secure. Just a cockeyed new batch of arrows to sling at the President, 'he's well off therefore he doesn't care'. Maybe you may think in those terms, but that's your problem.
Obama did not create the ills that exist in this country. They have been a long time coming. And what have you done lately to help people in need ?
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)But, he does have the ability to work in fixing them. He has the ability to stand in support of betterment of society. He has much more political capital than any of us here at DU. I am not slinging arrows at the POTUS here. I never claimed he did not care. But, If I am going to feel sorry for anyone, it will be those that are in more desperate circumstances than the POTUS.
What have I done recently to help people in need? Honestly, the only thing I have done recently was rebuild a laptop computer for a lady in a homeless shelter, so that she could use it to look for work. It was only a used hard drive and some time. But, I think she appreciated what I did.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)Then you make hay while saying Obama doesn't have a financial care in the world. What does have to do whether Obama cares about us ? I can care about people who are suffering and I can care about and feel for Obama's struggles at the same time I care whether my kids are doing OK. That is not wrong, even if you think it is.
You say there is something wrong with people who think like that? Because someone feels for Obama because he cares about us ? That is wrong ?
Look, you don't know how anyone feels about all that is wrong in this country.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)In stating
I read, "when the weak and powerless get trampled on, my concern lies with Obama's feelings." Maybe OP does not fall into the category of weak and powerless. Maybe they are as secure as the POTUS. But, there are many 100s of thousands of people in this Union that deeply feel the effects "when things go wrong."
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)That's like saying you cannot feel empathy for me that I broke an arm.....because there are people still dying from Cancer.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)I feel for the insurance agent who denied coverage to the pre-existing condition cancer victim who died.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that would have quickly solved all of that.....
its a fairy-tale....some like to tell.
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)Allowing BP to decide when the gulf was clean enough, permanent tax cuts for the wealthy, extending the Iraq war, claiming the right to assassinate Americans with no congressional or judicial review or oversight, absolutely no prosecution of Wall Street criminals, the most aggressive prosecution of whistleblowers in American history...
What's not to love?
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)... message board, permanent lies for the message board, permanent lies for the message board, permanent lies for the message board, and permanent lies for the message board!
PowerToThePeople
(9,610 posts)MichaelKelley
(55 posts)I think that Obama is a good president for USA because for any leader it is really very tough to manage all his opponents and overcome their them to make it work and he has managed to do so.
NBachers
(17,108 posts)I wanted to get this welcome in before someone else cut loose on you for whatever imagined offense you may have committed.
bowens43
(16,064 posts)99Forever
(14,524 posts)Wow, talk about cognitive dissonance.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)No one is 'anti-Obama'
Plenty are anti-Obama's policies
They make the subject Obama, so the policies can be ignored
Th1onein
(8,514 posts)You have no right. And many of us "not real liberals" have been liberal for longer than you have been breathing. And, really, I am tired of hearing this "baby step" bullshit, while whole swathes of our constitutional rights are being taken from us.
I voted for this president. I campaigned for him, and I donated to his campaign. He's MY president, too, and I have the right to criticize him and his policies, just as I have the right to criticize a Repug and his policies. You get the government you deserve. It's called participation, and neither you, nor any other "true-believer-I'm-a-liberal-and-you're-not" jerk is going to tell me to shut up about things that I find wrong with those policies.
This president has done many good things, but he's also been caught furthering Bush's policies of spying on Americans. He went on national TV and lied to the American people about it, and he has allowed Clapper to get away with lying to Congress about it. If you think we're going to let that pass, you are sadly mistaken. He's pushing for the TPP, which will devastate this country's middle class. If you think that we're going to go quietly into that good night, you are wrong again. Eugene Debs and Emma Goldman never talked about baby steps. The history of this country, and the rights of the poor and the downtrodden is rife with the STRUGGLE for equality, the STRUGGLE for rights, the STRUGGLE for empowerment.
YOU GET THE GOVERNMENT YOU DESERVE. Stop crying about people picking on our president. Get out there and raise some hell, kick up some grass, and do something to stop the encroachment of the corporate police state.
Caretha
(2,737 posts)Stupefacto
(36 posts)Do you disagree 1% of the time?
SidDithers
(44,228 posts)Sid
muriel_volestrangler
(101,312 posts)Drone attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan: yes, he 'inherited' Afghanistan, but he has increased the use of drones - and that includes in Pakistan, where there is no 'war'. He was not pressured - in public, anyway - by others to do this; he does his best to hide the extent of it.
NSA spying on Americans: Yes, this happened before, but he could have decreased it without consulting Congress or anyone, and he could have been honest about how extensive it was. Instead, he has done all he could to cover it up, supported the lying officials in charge of it, and prosecuted (and persecuted) whistleblowers more than any previous president.
Intervention in Libya: I happened to agree with what he did there, but it was not about 'having patience' - it was an active decision by him for a new policy.
Intervention in Syria: Again, a new policy, decided by him.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)We are against forcing our opinions on anyone. Yes, you heard me, you are anti-progressive.
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)endless ridicule and name calling about?
cali
(114,904 posts)what a bunch of nonsense you cobbled together complete with your phony disclaimer about how you don't always agree with the President. You offer not a single specific. Your purpose in posting that is clear.
Whatever else he is, this President is not a liberal when it comes to economic issues. At most, he's a moderate. Just because the repubs are so insanely far to the right, doesn't make President Obama a liberal
You want to play the game of defining who is and isn't a liberal? Fine. I'll play. In my book, people who pen screeds likes this are NOT liberals and NOT progressives.
Not even close.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)It has given me a lot a peace to know that after 59 years I am not a "real" liberal because I can be an impatient SOB.
Cripes the codswallop people applaud around here is astounding.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)is spur the left into action and energy opposing him. THAT is what he has done for "liberal values;" violated them far enough to energize opposition.
Your opinions are just that; opinions.
You can express your own opinions all you like. You aren't an authority about what others want, or are, and going on the attack will get a response:
You can take your asinine "want it to fail" and "anti-Progressive" pragmatism, Chuckles, and stick them back where the sun don't shine.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)much strife on DU. The first paragraph whines about criticism that is leveled at some who claim to be 'the supporters of Obama' while others are 'anti Obama'. Others who voted for him 4 times and donated and made calls. You call them 'anti Obama' because they criticize YOUR actions. This is a twisted exploitation of the President as if he was chattel owned by the self declared sole supporters.
When a criticism is leveled at YOU and you claim it was leveled at Obama, there is a confusion and a great hubris in evidence.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)and a Thread Win for succinctly exposing the underlying flaw in the argument presented by the OP.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Too accurate to cope with.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)How many god damn fucking threads are we gonna have on this cannibalistic "fight"?
Are you people sharing the same ruler when you measure your junk?
mick063
(2,424 posts)Can't wait for his term to end.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)get right on that will ya!
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Elaborate on this some more, please. I'm curious how this applies to anti-discrimination laws, for example.
I am perfectly happy to force my opinion that people should not be discriminated against for their color, race, religion, national origin, gender, sex, pregnancy status, or sexual orientation in housing, employment, public services, etc.
Is that illiberal of me?
MrMickeysMom
(20,453 posts)So far, our first, fourth amendment rights seem to be worse, plus all of his campaign lies have really gotten me down.
I think taken separately, Obama is a good man, based on everything you see in his immediate family. What I think we all seem to get lost during these "debates" are that the man, or any man thus far, can have all the well intended changes in the world, and fail miserably.
He's failed in these things and he was never liberal, as I have now seen for quite some time. He has been progressive to the LGBT community. However, how are all of our freedoms going?
Not so well, say I.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)offering my own backing. The biggest drag of the Obama era have been the ugly manners and lack of political nuance on the part of a group who coopted the entire notion of 'support'. The man got millions upon millions of votes, but about 40 DUers claim they ARE the supporters everyone else is 'anti'. As if their 40 votes won the WH for Obama.
In life, I don't know anyone who does politics fandom style. It's tacky and servile.
FredStembottom
(2,928 posts)I can't tolerate the small group of bullies who spam DU 24/7 with their nastiness because.... Why?
We don't like a particular president enough.
I need the policies that will stop the bleeding and dying. The degradation and humiliation that now plagues millions of Americans.
Heck, it's been applause all 'round for this particular president the last couple of days because doing something like letting Larry Summers disappear is real progress. One very clear, definite step on the long road to ending The great American self destruction.
And, you know what? I put 0 amount if time into worrying whether such very new, very positive steps makes this president more popular or not. I predict it will... But who cares? Just help my suffering freinds and family.
MuseRider
(34,108 posts)Very nice Bluenorthwest.
Tacky and servile and immature IMO.
Puglover
(16,380 posts)have adopted this insane meme. It's made DU almost irrelevant. It's a pity.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)But the OP does not agree with Dr King.....
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)How about Sen Warren, Sen Wyden, and Rep Grayson? I think they are the most liberal in Congress and they are far from "patient".
There is a time and place for patience but not when our children are suffering from lack of proper health care and proper diet. Not when our bridges are falling down and we continue to give Wall Street huge profits. Not when our defense budget is sucking the wealth of the middle class and putting SS on the table.
The President campaigned on change. The liberals supported that quest but are now being told it's too hard, to have patience, to accept baby steps.
There is also some disagreement whether or not you consider Pres Obama as "liberal". Please clarify.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)It wants this thread back.
You forgot the thing about the ship.
QC
(26,371 posts)Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)
QC
(26,371 posts)
TBF
(32,058 posts)IronLionZion
(45,438 posts)But there is a strong tendency around here to be against everything and have a generally negative cynical pessimistic attitude. There was a time when liberals thought things could be better and worked towards achieving it rather than pointless complaining. Some folks are so accustomed to fighting they can't accept even the most significant victories on anything.
Even if we passed single-payer nation-wide, cut our defense budget in half and stopped all foreign military intervention, fixed all our roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, and built nation-wide high speed transit systems with renewable energy on everyone's home and office, outlawed fracking and guns, raised the minimum wage to $15, DUers would still find some issue to complain about. There aren't enough women playing in the NFL or something, so its patriarchy.
Gratitude is a great attitude. Notice the difference in these two quotes:
We learned about gratitude and humility - that so many people had a hand in our success, from the teachers who inspired us to the janitors who kept our school clean... and we were taught to value everyone's contribution and treat everyone with respect.
Michelle Obama
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/keywords/gratitude.html#65dLOTipAlvKg0pw.99
Gratitude is a sickness suffered by dogs.
Joseph Stalin
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/josephstal155813.html#b0KIJrgUCooWRzVM.99
Too many folks here seem to think that anyone who is grateful for any of the reforms so far must be intellectually inferior and weak.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)now we can set out the traps.
like flies to honey - say anything positive about the President and they arrive like it's the biggest rock concert of the year.
Build it, and they will come.
great white snark
(2,646 posts)If not for anonymity I doubt anyone would be that shameless.
sheshe2
(83,754 posts)Shameless indeed!
They should try asking these people.
Children can remain on parents health care until 26.
Pre-existing conditions/ no longer disqualified for care.
No lifetime caps.
VAWA.
Doma.
Don't Ask Don't Tell.
Lily Leadbetter Act.
And what they love to forget!
BIDEN: OBAMA AND I TURNED U.S. FROM ‘WORST RECESSION SINCE THE GREAT DEPRESSION TO 38 MONTHS OF PRIVATE-SECTOR GROWTH’
Jun. 29, 2013 11:13pm Dave Urbanski
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/29/biden-obama-and-i-turned-u-s-from-worst-recession-since-the-great-depression-to-38-months-of-private-sector-growth/
Astonishing indeed great white snark!
macspanicattack
(36 posts)Very curios the same people who show up.
As Alice said..."Curiouser and curiouser!".
Skraxx
(2,972 posts)"PRODUCTIVE Liberals have patience. Actually, patience should be a part of the Liberal definition - because we wait until understands our point. We should be against forcing our opinions on anyone."
Just my opionion.
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)used to dissuade civil rights activists 50 years ago. It failed then, and it will now. Progress is about results, not opinions, and is the result assertive and strategic activism, not long suffering and patience.
lumpy
(13,704 posts)sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)it was posited as a statement of fact. It can be proven true or false. Don't wave it off as "just" my opinion. Prove it wrong.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)I think you forgot that part....
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)he was murdered for supporting striking garbage men. I haven't forgot a thing. Moses didn't make it to the Promised Land either, but his people did.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)So it took patience
sulphurdunn
(6,891 posts)
libodem
(19,288 posts)Thanks for putting it in black and white. Very challenging times. (Big understatement.)
He is up to the challenge. 
TBF
(32,058 posts)I'd advise you study some history. Conditions will dictate what happens in this country, and once enough people have lost it all things will change. One way or another ...
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)for a violent overthrow of the government? That appears to be your point of reference.
leftstreet
(36,108 posts)As in, observable history
Not possible to conclude what the poster advocates
TBF
(32,058 posts)you will see I am advocating that folks study history. I'm not sure how you misconstrued that.
bvar22
(39,909 posts)That was a funny as listening to Hannity try to defined what a "Real Liberal" is.
How would you know what a Liberal is?
freshwest
(53,661 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)By ordering summary executions of Americans without trial?
MisterP
(23,730 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)I am convinced this is use of patience, is ultimate path for universal or socialized health. It was the path for Medicare and SS....some great leaders (and I count Obama in that), have a long term perspective many of those with vocal histrionics simply lack.
Bobbie Jo
(14,341 posts)
BumRushDaShow
(128,940 posts) 
shenmue
(38,506 posts)whose rants sound exactly like those of the Republicans. It's ridiculous.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)Time to throw the corporatists under the bus. Then drive it back and forth over them. Then, to be sure, drive stakes through their hearts. Draw and quarter their corpses. Incinerate them. Spread their ashes to the four corners of the earth. And we still have to be on guard they don't come back.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)it's total hyperbolic bullshit. If he was any kind of decent Neocon...we would be in the midst of bombing Syria right
Have you not noticed Lindsay Graham and John McCain having a sad?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Hardly. If we want to stick to this century, how 'bout FDR? Or the Great Society programs under LBJ?
That being says, he has done more for liberal values since the rise of the modern Republican party. 'Course that only gives him two Democrats to compete with.
markpkessinger
(8,395 posts)Yes, things like the labor movement and civil rights took a long time. And it was often a case of taking two steps forward and one back. But that didn't mean that the activists who led those movements sat patiently by while their demands were slow-walked. But they continued fighting, and fighting damned hard, for the causes they believed in, and they certainly weren't 'patient' with 'baby steps.' Patience comes into play when those activists have to find a way to not become discouraged when there are setbacks. But the notion that real social change has ever occurred in this country through slow, patient, deliberative democratic process is a fantasy rewrite of history.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)Obama has been a mediocre president. The health care insurance is not liberal, it forces people to buy crappy insurance from the greedy for profit insurance companies. That should be said a million times again and again, even if it has already been said many times, because it doesn't seem to ever penetrate into the heads of the kool-aid drinkers.
It is not a liberal idea to do this, it was developed by a republican think tank. Those are facts. The kool-aid drinkers who overdose daily either ignore it or pretend it is something else, but as always, they don't face reality.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)to say that "This President has done more for Liberal values than any other President in history. " is crazy. More than Jefferson, more than FDR, I don't think so.
Remember too, he failed to allow even the discussion of single payer.
BumRushDaShow
(128,940 posts)when people conveniently distort and gloss over the fact that the government was about to shut down without a budget deal - because, you know, there are 3 branches of government, not one, as is often assumed here. 
News Flash - the "Bush Tax Cuts" expired despite the insistence on DU that this would never ever happen. And when they did, the faux prognosticators managed to slink away to find another distraction for their minions to wallow in, full of more made-up poutrageous bullshit.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Many here have studied that.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)The Bush tax cuts expiration - the first round, would have gone a long way yo balancing the budget.
Poutrage. pathetic reframing. Americans are outraged because Chained-CPI is an attack on seniors. Outraged because pushing the costly trade agreements cost Americans, not just their jobs, but their livelihoods. Outraged because our own war criminals are given a pass, while other war criminals are used as an excuse to promote a neo-con agenda.
Thank god he's finally giving in to our side.
Gothmog
(145,195 posts)At the time of this decision, we were still coming out of a recession and raising taxes on people making less than $200,000 would have been bad for the recovery. This was not a bad deal. In all transactions or negotiations, one does not get everything that they want. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good
WI_DEM
(33,497 posts)given how sure some were that he was going to.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Hint: Those of us who opposed it aren't the ones disappointed.
frylock
(34,825 posts)that is some stupid fucking shit right there.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)It works in both directions.
SCantiGOP
(13,869 posts)
rivegauche
(601 posts)You said everything I've been thinking so well and so perfectly. Thanks for bucking me up today.
Gothmog
(145,195 posts)Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. There are things that President Obama could do better but he has accomplished a great deal. I shudder to think about where our country would be if Romney or McCain were POTUS
Grateful for Hope
(39,320 posts)Excellent post. K&R
rury
(1,021 posts)Where I am concerned, it has gone past the point of wearing thin.
It has completely worn away.
It is like the affected joint (s) of a person who has severe, degenerative osteoarthritis.
The cartilage has COMPLETELY WORN AWAY and it grates like bone-on-bone in its excruciating ignorance.
But my painkiller is faith in this remarkable leader and the few real allies he has.
He - and we -will prevail!!!!!!!!
mstinamotorcity2
(1,451 posts)I do not always agree with him or his actions. Sometimes His actions make me very angry, and some kind of flip action happens and he gets some things done. some very progressive things. But on other issues I feel left out. And so do a lot of people in communities across the Country. Though, He has made some broad efforts, it hasn't paced in a good deal of those who are in the bottom 90 percent. the recovery is really too slow. And if things don't change fast with the election in 2014 it will be an all out fist fight to get a quality President for 2016. Too many hateful laws in place and being enacted to stifle the vote and shave points.
BlueJac
(7,838 posts)equals unhappy liberals. Wake the F__k up!
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)It's the President's actions that matter. He deserves credit for the good things he has done. He also deserves criticism and condemnation for the bad things he has done.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)and tossing the same "anti-" charges/turds like you have some unassailable standing to be trying to shame his critics on this and that. Hell, you don't even have any material with sufficient merit to get the job done. It's our duty to "hold his feet to the fire" as he requested.
Oh my, what's next, the guy chose to run for pres while wholly ignorant of what the political environment and topography was, so we can't make mention of the diffs between the candidate and the reality?
—”Too many of us have been interested in defending programs as written in 1938″
http://americablog.com/2012/05/obama-2006-too-many-of-us-have-been-interested-in-defending-programs-as-written-in-1938.html Does that sound like someone who's done more to advance the liberal "cause" than any "pres in history" or one who wants to turn the clock back on gains already made?
Some of us voted for him with our eyes wide open realizing he wasn't the "liberal" you paint him as, http://www.policymic.com/articles/13232/top-5-reasons-obama-is-not-a-true-liberal and primarily because he was preferred over the alternative. And speaking only for myself, always the biggy, SCOTUS appointments.
Gee, who but a "unitary exec" kinda guy would claim the right in defiance of the congress, the UN, and the will of the American people if need be, to start bombing another country, or to assassinate American citizens? Even Bush didn't go there.
And it's not been a question of "wanting it all now" but rather keeping what we once had or have, which is hard to reasonably expect with the "third way" types who need to evolve in a conveniently timely way on things like gay rights.
If real liberals lack "patience" it's with people like you that seemingly think "liberalism" is defined as being satisfied with whatever form and frequency the bones come in, and without complaint.
Defenders of the policies of President Barack Obama have correctly pointed to the difficult circumstances he and ‘the nation’ faced when he entered office and the dim intransigence of Congressional Republicans while they fail to address that his actual policies have derived almost exclusively from the political-economic theories of neo-liberalism—the economics of the radical right. And as Mr. Obama moves his policy proposals for his second term forward what is once again apparent is that both the policies and his articulation of them are from the radical right. His proposals to shutter Federal housing agency stalwarts Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, his use of dubious legal opinions to consolidate the power of ‘the Executive’ and to justify the murder of citizens and non-citizens without due process, his support for trade agreements that effectively hand domestic governance over to multi-national corporations, his growth of an intrusive surveillance state and pompous dismissal of criticism of it and his stuffing his cabinet and likely the Federal Reserve Chairmanship with neo-liberal ideologues all confirm that the policies of his first term were not a product of circumstance, but rather the coherent implementation of a radical-right agenda.http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/08/16/barack-obama-and-the-neo-liberal-coup/
liberal my ass. The only "baby steps" most of us older lefties are concerned about are those that drug the ideological center line so far to the right, leaving so many young guppies thinking it was always where it is today. If you don't like us standing in the way of that with our "complaints", too bad. We welcome opportunities like this to "force" our "opinions" on you.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)It doesn't really take that much strength to stand for what you believe in and not get swallowed up by others. Especially for the 101st Chairborne life.
Unless you mean others that have an alter opinion of yours actually state that opinion, that might be what you mean. That you just don't want to hear others opinions and feel assaulted by them.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)my pointing out (or mocking of it) that their effort is/was identical to that which it whined about in terms of the "forcing of an opinion" characterization (and admonition) doesn't give me ownership of it
the only thing unfortunate here is that you had a point, but tried to feed it to the wrong poster.
It would be reasonable to conclude that without similar rhetoric being directed at them and their whine about real or percieved efforts at "forcing critical opinions" of BHO on them and others, that you might be a hypocrite.
Agnosticsherbet
(11,619 posts)But the worst and laziest meme is the accusation of "hater."
HomerRamone
(1,112 posts)Okay, sort of three words...
xocet
(3,871 posts)You have achieved comparability to Sarah Palin:
--Sarah Palin on "Real" Americans
Source: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-may-17-2010/on-topic--in-the-news---the-real-america
Real Liberals have patience. Actually, patience is a part of the Liberal definition - because we wait until understands our point. We are against forcing our opinions on anyone."
--Jazzimov on "Real" Liberals
Source: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023681677
great white snark
(2,646 posts)I can't even imagine how miserable a third party person's life must be where they exist to attack Democrats while giving Republicans a pass.
Rex
(65,616 posts)They are very anti-progressive, just look at how they foamed at the mouth over Summers getting slammed by the Left and ultimately removing his name for consideration.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)and a constant, unrealistic increase in the ratio of corporate-spouting personas versus traditional Democrats coming in.
The number of recs for posts attacking traditional liberal policies (and traditional liberals) and defending corporate, predatory policies has been steadily, gradually, and unrealistically increasing since DU3 was launched.
What is being done to DU is also being done to other political websites across the internet.
Governments that build surveillance states also build lying propaganda machines.
How the NDAA Allows US Gov to Use Propaganda Against Americans
http://nsnbc.me/2013/07/23/how-the-ndaa-allows-us-gov-to-use-propaganda-against-americans/
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)
Hope!
Change!
Baloney!
Cha
(297,196 posts)Prediction: the "memes" will continue and President Obama will keep doing what he's doing and mow them down like always.
http://theobamadiary.com/
Cryptoad
(8,254 posts)Thank you Mr President!
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)That is not an accomplishment to be celebrated. It's the modern equivalent of bleeding a patient who's already on life support.
Cha
(297,196 posts)he's managed it anyway.
Removing money from the economy, which is exactly what the budget deals did, is stupid when the economy is sputtering. There was no inflationary pressure whatsoever, so there was no reason to worry about a deficit. It was a great political point to score, if you're the other team, but it's terrible policy.
WorseBeforeBetter
(11,441 posts)DECADES of progress in a matter of months. There's so much "real change" going on in this state it's hard to keep up. And this "real change" is going to last a very long time.
How did it happen? Republicans know what to do with power when they get it. They view politics as war (once upon a time a certain Democratic Party did, too.) We needed *revolution* after 8 miserable years of Dubya, but Captain Bipartisanship and the post-Reagan Democratic Party didn't see it that way -- they blew it.
Ooh, look...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/09/17/the-typical-american-family-makes-less-than-it-did-in-1989/
Thanks Republicans and patient Circle D Dems!
I truly love these "let's just wait and be patient like good little citizen" posts. Screw complacency, and your made up definition of "Liberal."
NRaleighLiberal
(60,014 posts)
adirondacker
(2,921 posts)Response to jazzimov (Original post)
Name removed Message auto-removed
frylock
(34,825 posts)certainot
(9,090 posts)no organized response to the the right/1%'s best weapon- talk radio.
the closest thing the last 25 years is the limbaugh boycott, which is specific to limbaugh and mostly related to sexism and racism.
otherwise the left gives 1200 think tank-scripted radio stations a free speech free ride to attack anything dem or obama and blanket the country with unchallenged lying, reaching 50 mil a week.
to ignore that and then blame a dem president (ANY dem or progressive pres) for not marching into the billionaires white house and kicking ass is as politically naive as it gets.
there will be no major reform until the left can fix that major advantage for the right- doesn't matter who's president.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)There's only like 5 of these threads a day or something, so I don't really see the value in yet another one.
Capt. Obvious
(9,002 posts)More than tripled the ignore list from this thread alone.
MFrohike
(1,980 posts)I guess that's a goal of sorts.
uponit7771
(90,336 posts)MFrohike
(1,980 posts)I'm not sure if ignores and alerts are quote unquote productive, but to each his own!
Bigredhunk
(1,349 posts)Agreed!
georgew
(15 posts)
Scurrilous
(38,687 posts)