General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsObama stood more firmly than he ever has, showing balls of steel
THAT is the man I voted for twice.
Well done.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Orrex
(63,216 posts)Nice catch.
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Personal pet peeve.
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)plus, "nerves of steel" is dignified, befitting the excellent President of the United States, who is dignified.
yuiyoshida
(41,832 posts)dut tada daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahh!!!
and a little music to go with the picture..
Jackpine Radical
(45,274 posts)to acknowledge the same pet peeve.
And I'll add "cojones" and any other references to testosterone-producing organs as applied to courage, fortitude and the American Way. That stuff always grates on me.
NRaleighLiberal
(60,015 posts)uppityperson
(115,677 posts)And thanks. I will be checking DU tomorrow the the Big Day team signup, yay!
Blue Owl
(50,427 posts)flamingdem
(39,313 posts)through all the BS. Excellent job!
he always plays the long game , with the long view , and in the end , HE WINS !
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)NO MORE playing games and giving in to Republican demands in return for them doing their job. And it's paying off for the president. He'll be just as tough come January and February when the House of Teapublicans will get to do a do-over again, and most likely will try this shit again, not seeing that we'll be in an election year by that time which will hurt them at the polls.
geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)He hasn't acknowledged it, but his decision to play ball with Boehner on the debt ceiling in 2011 will easily go down as his biggest mistake. But he recognized it, learned from it, and most importantly cleaned up that mess.
AnneD
(15,774 posts)I wish he had chosen his cabinet better. Too much WS influence. And taking Universal Care of as a bartering chip before the negotiations???? He has bargained very poorly for four years, maybe he has finally gotten the hang of it. Hope he doesn't give away Social Security in the process.
elleng
(130,974 posts)these 2 make a great team.
CaliforniaPeggy
(149,639 posts)ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)May he continue and truly understand that WE will stand with him, if HE stands with us!
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Call it cheerleading or apologism or whatever else, some of us always know who the REAL enemy is.
Now where is that "Can't trust Obama" thread that got +100 recs just a few short weeks ago?
Ah yes...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023622685
We'll see if those who were on this bandwagon stay consistent. Not to attack you, but the situational celebrations are a bit trying for people who consistently support (not worship) the President against unprecedented opposition.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)The real enemy doesn't get half the grief here the good President does.
ChiciB1
(15,435 posts)For me it's kind of like this. This will be weird to some.
I like almost every vegetable you can imagine, and will eat some I don't like. So when I'm offered one that I really like and start eating it enthusiastically, say maybe tomatoes, I want my tomato to be one I really enjoy. But then I get a tomato, which I still like, but get half way through and it turns out to be mushy with a bad texture. That does not mean I then dislike all tomatoes, but I will try to remember where I got that tomato at that point in time. So, since I would prefer my nice tomato, I know there are still good tomatoes and my preference is to find one. Can't find good tomatoes all the time though, some aren't going to taste as good in winter as they are in summer. Still I don't give up on tomatoes, I eat them regardless but not with any zest.
So along comes summer and even THAT place that had the kind of mushy tomato has some really good tomatoes. And that place is closer and more convenient than having to look further, well then I go back and say I'm so glad you have good tomatoes again, I REALLY missed you.
Make any sense to anyone?
Robbins
(5,066 posts)Both he and Reid deserve credit.
They got 98 percent of what they wanted.The tea party lost.
If they try this crap In January/February what makes anyone think now obama and reid will cave.Trying this crap again only helps a
2014 democratic wave.
DireStrike
(6,452 posts)It is provable that they engineered this shutdown, that they refused 18 budget conference requests, that they were quite happy about this shutdown and the leadership thought it was a stupid idea.
Next time they will all be on the same page from day one. All they have to do is claim "democrats won't negotiate" again, and it will work next time.
We're talking about a month and a half here. Americans generally can't remember what they had for breakfast 5 minutes ago.
Swede Atlanta
(3,596 posts)While I wish they had pushed the dates much further out...at least a good 6 months....
Obama said if you re-open the government and give me a clean debt ceiling increase we can talk
Now we have to see if the Republics take him up on his offer - i.e. negotiate in good faith.
The question will be if the Republics in the Senate will actually block attempts to go to budget negotiation conference with the House and if discarding the sequester in favor of a more targeted, understandable, deficit reduction framework can be accomplished.
Time will tell....
BluegrassStateBlues
(881 posts)libdem4life
(13,877 posts)protect future Presidents from this skullduggery...said so many times. He believed in himself and his actions. Yet, he did not once negotiate his legacy accomplishment, the ACA, created for the benefit of the people here and now and into the future.
Cruz swashbuckled Boehner into a position where he, and the Tea Party, have lost not only political legacies, but looked stunningly selfish with their "Me and Mine" and "Too bad for you and yours".
frog64
(40 posts)yes, a real leader does this. He was protecting future presidents from blackmail. I will put him in the top ten for that right now, regardless of how the economy or AHCA turns out.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)the chances of a repeat anytime soon, after the political dust settles, pretty damn low. The Moderates are coming out of the bunker and I think they will listen to the overwhelming success stories and the online glitches will fade into the dustbin of media hype.
mac56
(17,569 posts)TrogL
(32,822 posts)Up here where it gets to -40, steel-toed boots will freeze your toes.
TBF
(32,067 posts)Courtesy Flush
(4,558 posts)PBass
(1,537 posts)ruffburr
(1,190 posts)The Second Stone
(2,900 posts)He's handling it right so far.
GoneFishin
(5,217 posts)Snake Plissken
(4,103 posts)Please proceed baggers,
Good analogy.
Dopers_Greed
(2,640 posts)He lost a lot of my support because of the NSA and drone policy, but I don't have a single bad thing to say about his handling of the Teabag Party and their fake crisis.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)"Balls" implies that a positive trait (i.e. courage or strength) is related to manliness or emanates from one's testicles, and that by extension women are unable to be as aggressive or courageous because they "lack balls"... or if used in context of a woman, they are less like a women because they convey these traits.
</soapbox>
Patiod
(11,816 posts)Having said that, I admire the President's backbone in this matter!
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)or something similar.
Silent3
(15,231 posts)Let's not discriminate against them either!
VWolf
(3,944 posts)Besides, having balls of steel would be quite uncomfortable.
On edit: He's happens to be a man, so he has balls. He's been unwavering, so he has balls of steel. If he were a woman, the phrase "ovaries of quartz" would be more appropriate.
deutsey
(20,166 posts)Not everyone with balls (steel or otherwise) has courage. And plenty of people without them do.
yodermon
(6,143 posts)SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)llmart
(15,540 posts)Love Betty White and what she said is the truth!
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Thanks for the laugh. And SO true!
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Here on DU
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Whining about political correctness doesn't change that.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Tell em what you think about their patriarchal ways.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)So your point is if commentators and figures we agree with do or say something wrong, that makes it alright for the rest of us to as well?
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)And I've seen plenty of members be aghast at one non-pC remark and then cheer other ones.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Are you fucking kidding me?
Also, bullshit. Most who stand up against bigoted and insensitive crap here do it universally, and I'm willing to bet a lot who do otherwise let something slide do so because they weren't aware of it.
You on the other hand tend to proudly and vocally post offensive or insensitive crap.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Oh wait. That is you.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)When someone mentioned how that term is insensitive, you could have just heard them out and learned why. If you had disagreed, you could have politely said so or asked for clarification.
Instead, you went with the tired old equivalent of "why won't you feminists just relax" and acted like a fool. This is all on you.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)I disn't even check your profile to know if you were male or female.
I know PC when I see it. It is evident all over this thread. My point was larger than this thread or use of "balls" which I do find overly crass myself. I am just fed up with the constant sniping and "reeducating" that goes on here when the post itself was not an offensive sentiment.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)There has to be constant reminders about offensive terminology and language because it's so culturally ingrained. People who refuse to change snipe at the people who take it on themselves to do the reminding.
And whether I'm male or female doesn't have a thing to do with this in the slightest. Whether the OP was intending to be offensive or not, the language is. Even gold people can screw up, but they cease to be good people when they refuse to correct themselves.
It's not "crass", you're just uncomfortable with offensive crap being called for what it is, for whatever reason.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)denbot
(9,900 posts)Besides, it should have a male inflection since the President is currently a man.
whopis01
(3,514 posts)and ring like a bell in the same way balls of steel would.
Or did you mean something else when you said "doesn't have the same ring to it"?
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Do NOT fuck with them.
denbot
(9,900 posts)PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Patiod
(11,816 posts)I just think backbone is less overtly sexist. Of course guys don't understand why it's sexist. They think "having balls" is naturally better than not having balls.
"Balls" means, frankly, that you're a guy and not a woman, and I just don't find that to be superior to NOT having balls.
Spine or intestinal fortitude, courage or guts - that doesn't rely on not being female as a good thing. I know Colbert and Stewart love those phrases, but what do you expect from people who rely on mostly-male writers' rooms? It doesn't upset me to the point that I'd turn it off, but it's just sort of obnoxious.
It's kind of like saying "mighty white of you", assuming that white is better and wondering why a non-white person might not care for that phrase
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)Most men, and even many women, really are blind to the barrage of sexism that exists in our society - slight or obvious all the time. And, yeah, I'll call it out when I hear it in real life or read it online in a community from which I expect better. It doesn't make me a killjoy as is stated in this thread. It doesn't mean I was 'aghast' or that my 'nose was bent'. I saw it and I stated how I felt.
So... thanks for 'getting it'.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)leftstreet
(36,109 posts)Giving you the benefit of the doubt, you may be too young to know this
The term's original meaning was quickly snarked into a coded wink-nudge to dismiss social criticism concerning equal rights
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)A rebuke of Communists who were more focused on party line rather than outcomes of policy.
In the early 70's it was picked up by the New Left as follows:
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
It was not used by conservatives in a perjorative sense until the early 90's
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Because it sure doesn't seem to involve the Communist Party line or an injoke with the New Left.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)*ahem* I mean "fact-challenged".
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)But then again, you knew that.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Certainly not that I might know what I'm talking about as evidenced by proof. What have you brought to the table? Attacks on my opinion that sometimes DU resembles the Pharisees who were constantly trying to prove who was most righteous.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You reacted by screaming political correctness.
Now several people have called you on it, and you still refuse to acknowledge that. The fact you considered the post some form of petty political correctness shows you don't understand why it's offensive, or that you do know why and just don't care.
The former could've been fixed by just asking for clarification. The latter is abhorrent. Which one is it?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Were there an exceptional amount of exclamation points involved in the "screaming" post?
I think you should check yourself and thoroughly examine why you feel entitled to brazenly mischaracterize other people's communications in such a manner.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)Interesting
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)To remind one another we are too focused on keeping our language "free of impurities" and becoming ludicrous.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)What happened to 'uh no it's not' ??
And now you're suggesting that civilized discussion of equal rights is forcing 'impurities' into our language?
My, my
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)So you can quit while you're behind. You've now gone and misinterpreted my last statement to you to an opposite meaning from that which I clearly intended.
I'm done with this ridiculously PC sub-thread and hope it was as educational for you as it was boring for me.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)"So you can quit while you're behind...."
And you too could simply be respectful of others. Six of one, half a dozen of the other...
"hope it was as educational for you as it was boring for me..."
Education is often "boring" to the under-educated and the sub-literate who like to pretend they are ore clever, wise and mature that they actually are.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)By people on our side who were dreadfully serious and earnest.
Perhaps not terribly surprisingly, they weren't exactly the fun folks to party with.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)Can't even have one brief moment of celebration without SOMEONE getting their noses bent out of joint...
FYI, the President is a man. Men have balls. His happen to be made of steel.
GET.OVER.IT.
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)I gave as to *why* it's stupid, immature and sexist then *you* GET.OVER.IT.
"balls" are not required for courage, fortitude or strength.
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)And yes, balls, great big steel ones were needed to face down the teahadists and the President has been sorely lacking in them up to this point...
PeaceNikki
(27,985 posts)truebrit71
(20,805 posts)....great big shiny steel balls...His testicular fortitude was breathtaking to behold....finally...he backed up his rhetoric with actions...
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I used to rationalize the irrational too. Them, before I knew it, third grade was over and I grew up. Just a head's up that being civil, respectful, tolerant and polite is not the same a being PC, regardless og how you may justify it otherwise...
Insert distinction without a difference here...)
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)And I also know I have been judges harshly by the PC crowd. No worries. I'm not trying to justify or defend anything I've said. I am defending the "Obama's got balls of steel" comment because it is not demeaning to anyone.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)it is a complaint that goes back on du to the bush years. you wouldn't know because it had nothing to do with obama, no one had even heard of him, and people had their own thoughts, among which was the flaw in the op's language.
Pretzel_Warrior
(8,361 posts)Rebuking anyone who called women b**** . And that is a good thing. My point, proven every day here is the DU pc police apply their umbrage very unevenly.
mac56
(17,569 posts)Some people are just hell-bent to add their ingredients to it.
Politicub
(12,165 posts)florida08
(4,106 posts)Hope they see now what we've been yelling lol
Iggo
(47,558 posts)Yeah, baby!
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)If you had stood this way back in 2008, we would be in much better shape, but there was a part of you that really wanted to believe that the GOP would se reason. Doubtless the "pragmatists" are working overtime to ensure that part of you grows back, do not. Rip that out by the root!
Also ask yourself if the left was right on this matter, how many other matters are we right on? You dipped yout feet in the water, and you know the water is a lot warmer than the center, go ahead,take a swim, you might find you are in your true element, instead of being the fish out of water you were in your first term.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)Raffi Ella
(4,465 posts)Better late than never.
Skittles
(153,169 posts)yes INDEED
aaaaaa5a
(4,667 posts)In his second term he has saved the American Presidency and implemented the ACA, rivaling only FDR with SS and LBJ with Medicare in US Presidential history.
Um... not too bad!
Scalded Nun
(1,236 posts)Voted for him twice as well.
I will say, though, that I do not think the right would have been so willing to push this had he not caved on important issues in the past. Their miscalculation was thinking he would cave on his legacy.
Would sure love to see this doom the TPers.
IrishAyes
(6,151 posts)This was one of the best laid traps I've ever seen sprung. To put it mildly, quoting Biden, "Don't*Ever*Play*Chess*With*That*Man".
What looked like retreat in the past was no more than allowing the enemy to push him exactly where he wanted to go. Now they've totally unmasked themselves and committed virtual political suicide. What could be better than that, I ask?
For all who've been asleep or even napping this long hard winter, I answer: Nothing!
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Just because some latelys are just now seeing it doesn't mean it wasn't always there.
Like it or not, the VOTERS are responsible for bringing this ugly Congress to Washington, not just the MSM enablers. There was never any question for some of us who was the real enemy and the only choice.
Le Taz Hot
(22,271 posts)corporate-friendly polities, among other things, he did good on this one. There was NO WAY he could have/should have backed down on this. He done good.
russspeakeasy
(6,539 posts)indepat
(20,899 posts)everything heretofore conceded to Repukes since January 20, 2008, crushing with gusto every Repuke's political balls in the process.
FredStembottom
(2,928 posts)Now DU is united.
As I have been pointing out for years, we were only divided because the Dem leadership divided us.
edbermac
(15,941 posts)Can't argue with that.
Well done!
Isoldeblue
(1,135 posts)benefit of the doubt, to be better. Until he finds out they can't and won't - be better. Then it's "FU". He is no one's fool!!!
alfredo
(60,074 posts)Moostache
(9,895 posts)Its nice to see him finally stand firm in the face of the anarchists and lunatics in the GOP.
Now, Mr. President, about that closing Guantanamo Bay and the Patriot Act and the NSA and the expansion of the police state...at least he has removed the "always caves to Republican demands" tag...baby steps I guess...although at this rate, we would be looking at the middle of his fifth term* to get to those issues...
*Yes, I KNOW you can only be elecetd twice...its called hyperbole!! Sheesh...some people have no sense of humor!
CtDemoFarmer
(32 posts)Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)angrychair
(8,702 posts)But, as written, we still made concessions. Income verification will become a new stick for the teacups to beat up the poor. Not to mention a concession, even a small one, empowers these nutjobs to do it again. Yes, we won the battle...but we lost the war.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)I doubt they'd feel that the beating they've taken in the polls was worth it. We have at least some chance at taking the House in 2014. We had no real chance before this.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)They are not going to want to do this again any time soon.
angrychair
(8,702 posts)And, because of this, we don't start hearing stories of people who apply for healthcare and only make $12, 000 a year being dragged through an IRS audit to prove they need the subsidy. The more red tape and hoops you create the less likely people are to do it. "Income verification" could become the teacups poison pill for the ACA.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)angrychair
(8,702 posts)The "income verification" concession has not been defined yet. The implication of the wording would denote a invasive process that ensures income standards are being met but for right now it falls under the header "the how is what are to be determined at a later date".
My intent is not to piss in the pool but to make the point we made concessions when we said we would not. This was not a "clean CR" and nothing less should be acceptable. Yes, the teacups blinked...but so did we. When you are dealing with rabid dogs, a twitch, that blink, is the only response they need to know that, in the end, they will be the only one walking away whole.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)HHS gets to decide the details. HHS IG is supposed to certify the verification is effective in July.
Considering the ACA is heavily involved with the IRS, it's really not hard to see how "income verification" will work.
Send paystub. If no paystub, send last year's tax forms. If no tax forms, you're either breaking the law, or making so little money you aren't receiving a subsidy and thus are not subject to income verification.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)As Rachel Maddow explained tonight, the income verification provision is already in the ACA; this "concession" amounts to little more than a clarification that this term is in fact there and will be enforced. Rachel used the analogy of saying it is about as much of a concession as Dems letting the GOP call the day after Tuesday "Wednesday." In other words, they got nothing.
On the other hand, the Dems got a whole lot. The debt ceiling is raised and the government is back open while the GOP is finally forced to negotiate a new budget that will get away from the sequester terms (after refusing Dems' 21 separate requests to do so over the last year). What no one is talking about (only Rachel pointed it out tonight) is that the Dems ALSO got a whole list list of funding items tacked onto the debt ceiling legislation:
1. Colorado flood recovery
2. Wildfire recovery
3. Wildfire prevention
4. Ohio River Construction project
5. Payment of $174K owed to former Senator Frank Lautenberg's widow
6. Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board
7. LI-HEAP (low income heating assistance)
And that passed the House tonight with 87 GOP votes. It is a resounding victory over the Tea Party's attempted economic coup.
Be happy.
angrychair
(8,702 posts)I didn't get to watch RMS last night. I stand corrected. I hope that this is a portent of things to come.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Let's not forget what really happens as a result of this deal. And let's not forget how we got here.
Let's remember this critical point made by DUer, cui bono:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023864395
But what is in the bill being passed is a budget with sequestration. A bill with less spending than Ryan's budget.
And let's repeat a post by leveymg that also explains what is really going on here:http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3839411
67. It's because this lunacy is all a quite rational way to propel the Center-Right Austerity agenda.
That's precisely why I don't believe this BS about 40 Teahadis being responsible for the "crisis."
A partial shutdown suits the deficit hawks in both parties just fine, since it's been adjusted so it doesn't actually impact payrolls in the military and Intelligence agencies. This is simply austerity and cuts to social programs without anyone having to actually vote for it, and that's making the Center-Right smile.
Of course, they won't allow actual default of the debt - the "threat" of that just another psychological device to make this seem like a real crisis. It's not - it's simply austerity by default.
It has caused and will cause more pain to the 99 percent, and it never should have gone this far. The faux fiscal "crisis" should have been utterly rejected by a Democratic President TWO YEARS ago. Let's remember how we got started down this road of sequestrations and shutdowns in the first place. Republicans should have been slapped down hard then. Instead, the axe of sequestration was embraced by Democrats, and we got soaring speeches about eating our peas. None of this should have happened at all. It was orchestrated by corporatists in both parties, and now we have perpetual rule by shock doctrine. This is not a win, except for corporate thieves in both parties.
Every single deal, every single orchestrated crisis, every single shock doctrine scam moves us further into corporate slavery. We are being played by both corporate parties, over and over again.
leftstreet
(36,109 posts)jeff47
(26,549 posts)claiming that this is a loss that is utterly irreversible. Hint: Debate on spending levels are going to come up again in 2 months.
You should probably also understand that this:
Is false. Not only were civilians in both the military and intelligence agencies furloughed, but only soldiers got paid. That's a wee bit of an impact on payroll.
TWO YEARS ago, the Republicans had massive victories at the polls. If you win a massive victory, you set the agenda.
Don't like it? Well then perhaps whining about Obama not getting enough done in his first two years wasn't the best strategy in 2010. Perhaps busting our asses as in 2008 and 2012 would have been a better plan.
SunSeeker
(51,574 posts)kath
(10,565 posts)And thanks to cui bono and leveymg for their reality-based posts quoted here. (Soooo sick of the politics-as-a-team-sport mentality)
Whisp
(24,096 posts)this balls thing is really silly. just sayin'
DrewFlorida
(1,096 posts)valerief
(53,235 posts)trublu992
(489 posts)MiddleFingerMom
(25,163 posts)Corruption Inc
(1,568 posts)I doubt the American people will like the taste of "balls of steel" when criminal "austerity measures" come up in Jan.
Go team go, LMFAO!
kath
(10,565 posts)Wolf Frankula
(3,601 posts)When you stand up to the bullies, you can beat them. It makes me glad I voted for you, Mr. Obama.
Wolf
DissidentVoice
(813 posts)Mr. President, props and more props.
You didn't cave when the Tea Potty crybabies tried to undo what you did with the ACA.
Would that all Democrats would develop such a backbone.
livingwagenow
(373 posts)4bucksagallon
(975 posts)libdude
(136 posts)Bob Dylan said " you don't need a weatherman to tell which way the wind blows ". The real credit goes to those in Congress that stood firm against this extortion, that put the long term interests of the American people first. It was.good to have the President keep a low profile and not make this issue about him, just giving the right wing extremist more ammunition to divert the issue.
This was an important gut check for the Democrats in order to create a post-Obama approach to governance. Now the real test will be during the negotiations and will they start with the usual start in the middle offers to compromise or continue to hold a hard line fir the American people.