Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Omaha Steve

(99,573 posts)
Tue Jan 24, 2012, 11:38 PM Jan 2012

Trumka: Obama Showed He Hears People Not Heard by 1%


http://blog.aflcio.org/2012/01/24/trumka-obama-made-clear-hes-a-friend-of-the-99/

by Tula Connell, Jan 24, 2012

President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address tonight made clear that he hears the people who aren’t being heard by the 1 percent, says AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka. Obama’s speech showed he “listened to the single mom working two jobs to get by, to the out-of-work construction worker, to the retired factory worker, to the student serving coffee to help pay for college.”

By laying out a vision of an America that can create jobs and prosperity for all instead of wealth for the few, Trumka said the president “voiced the aspirations and concerns of those who are too often ignored.”

Obama also made clear that the era of the 1 percent getting rich by looting the economy, rather than creating jobs, is over.

“Now it’s time for Congress to stop standing in the way of rebuilding our country and act,” Trumka said.

FULL story at link.



22 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Trumka: Obama Showed He Hears People Not Heard by 1% (Original Post) Omaha Steve Jan 2012 OP
Every four years he hears them DJ13 Jan 2012 #1
He hears them EVERY DAY and if I had a month I could list the legislation he's passed or fought for RBInMaine Jan 2012 #8
bullshit Skittles Jan 2012 #9
not arguing for or against but doesn't everyone listen more during election time? Armin-A Jan 2012 #10
it's PAINFULLY obvious with some folk Skittles Jan 2012 #11
all politicians feign that they listen more come election time SemperEadem Jan 2012 #12
You think so...?! vaberella Jan 2012 #13
"Women in general"? CBHagman Jan 2012 #14
Would I be...I think not. A quick search on Ms. Will give you amazing insight. vaberella Jan 2012 #17
I read your post as a put-down of the Obama administration. CBHagman Jan 2012 #18
Actually the post you quote...is sarcasm. vaberella Jan 2012 #19
But at present you don't actually know what or whom I support. CBHagman Jan 2012 #21
I didn't care if you read it or not. vaberella Jan 2012 #22
True, that Stuckinthebush Jan 2012 #16
of course because of Occupy Wall St & such breaking the glass with their noise. alp227 Jan 2012 #2
Where's Robb? joshcryer Jan 2012 #3
He put up an OP earlier - he stands with the unions and TBF Jan 2012 #5
This message was self-deleted by its author JJW Jan 2012 #4
That is nonsense. TBF Jan 2012 #6
This message was self-deleted by its author JJW Jan 2012 #7
I agree quaker bill Jan 2012 #15
"voiced the aspirations and concerns of those who are too often ignored." mackattack Jan 2012 #20
 

RBInMaine

(13,570 posts)
8. He hears them EVERY DAY and if I had a month I could list the legislation he's passed or fought for
Wed Jan 25, 2012, 12:59 AM
Jan 2012

to prove it. Enough of this HYPERBOLIC PURIST EXTREMIST NONSENSE.

Armin-A

(367 posts)
10. not arguing for or against but doesn't everyone listen more during election time?
Wed Jan 25, 2012, 02:33 AM
Jan 2012

look at newts commercials the last month for an example

vaberella

(24,634 posts)
13. You think so...?!
Wed Jan 25, 2012, 07:57 AM
Jan 2012

Tell that to Native Americans, Peurto Rico, Aids research, women in general, the military, seniors, and anyone getting unemployment. That is definitely stuff he waited for election time to pass even though they happened during the first, second, and third year of his office. You'd be very alone in your prespective. Thank the Gods.

vaberella

(24,634 posts)
17. Would I be...I think not. A quick search on Ms. Will give you amazing insight.
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 08:38 AM
Jan 2012

When I listed Native American, this directly extends to Native American Women.

Tribal Law & Order Act: http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2010/07/29/obama-signs-act-to-empower-native-americans-to-fight-rape/

Obama extends birth control coverage so the health care bill makes all health insurance companies provide BC meds...this was the most recent one: http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2012/01/20/victory-obama-stands-up-to-bishops-and-protects-birth-control-coverage/

Obama admin removes definition of "foricable rape" : http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2012/01/06/finally-finally-fbis-forcible-rape-definition-is-officially-history/

Obama admin stopped funding of abstinence only program (although there is legislation to bring it back): http://msmagazine.com/blog/blog/2011/12/22/abstinence-only-its-baaack/

Repeal of DADT affects lesbian women in the armed forces.

Lily Ledbetter Act and so on and so forth. And when there is a bill put out there that is passed and benefits American citizens- half that population is women.

This doesn't even count the fact that the Obama administration has more women in high profile governmental positions than any other before him.

Yet you and a few others shit on that. You claim there are women who don't see that. If that's the case there are one too many uneducated women in America, which saddens me.

CBHagman

(16,984 posts)
18. I read your post as a put-down of the Obama administration.
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 03:51 PM
Jan 2012

Your original post:

Tell that to Native Americans, Peurto Rico, Aids research, women in general, the military, seniors, and anyone getting unemployment. That is definitely stuff he waited for election time to pass even though they happened during the first, second, and third year of his office. You'd be very alone in your prespective. Thank the Gods.

It wasn't clear what you meant. Quite a few women are angry that HHS didn't approve the morning-after pill for over-the-counter-purchase by teenagers. I thought perhaps you were suggesting the Obama administration had let women down.

If you'd just said that the repeal of DADT, the Lily Ledbetter Act, and so forth had passed over the course of several years, rather than using the term they, which could have referred to Native Americans Puerto Rico, women, et al, I would have understood the intention of your post.

However, in your second post, you write:

Yet you and a few others shit on that. You claim there are women who don't see that. If that's the case there are one too many uneducated women in America, which saddens me.

"Yet you and a few others shit on that." No, I asked you a question. There's no need to make false assertions or insult fellow DUers.


vaberella

(24,634 posts)
19. Actually the post you quote...is sarcasm.
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 05:01 PM
Jan 2012

The poster I was responding too has found all Obama has done is wrong and sees nothing good from his Presidency. That's why I took the tone. I found that your questioning my statement as someone who supports the aforementioned poster. Hence my tone in the second post. It's irritating. This volley has gone back and forth since DU2.

CBHagman

(16,984 posts)
21. But at present you don't actually know what or whom I support.
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 08:37 PM
Jan 2012

You also don't know what my position is on the Obama administration or whether I read (or subscribe to) Ms.

Now, to your latest post:

The poster I was responding too has found all Obama has done is wrong and sees nothing good from his Presidency. That's why I took the tone. I found that your questioning my statement as someone who supports the aforementioned poster. Hence my tone in the second post. It's irritating. This volley has gone back and forth since DU2.

You "found"? Do you mean you passed judgment? Or that you had the mistaken impression that I was putting down the Obama administration?

vaberella

(24,634 posts)
22. I didn't care if you read it or not.
Fri Jan 27, 2012, 04:53 AM
Jan 2012

It was an FYI comment, like googling.

As for the latter... mistaken impression you were putting down the Obama admin when I mentioned women since that has happened in the past.

Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)

TBF

(32,041 posts)
6. That is nonsense.
Wed Jan 25, 2012, 12:31 AM
Jan 2012

We have at best 10-12% of our populace right now - unions have been beat down to near nothing. Our only hope is in building them up again so we have leverage against capital. Which side are you on?

Response to TBF (Reply #6)

quaker bill

(8,224 posts)
15. I agree
Wed Jan 25, 2012, 08:40 AM
Jan 2012

This will be the basic theme of the 2012 run.

He will use his accomplishments on the defense front to quickly and with few words blunt the repugs usual "dems weak on defense" argument. He will then spend the rest of the time attacking the repugs where they can't defend, on their policies that clearly favor the 1%.

He is making them run on tax cuts for the rich.

 

mackattack

(344 posts)
20. "voiced the aspirations and concerns of those who are too often ignored."
Thu Jan 26, 2012, 05:03 PM
Jan 2012

Exactly. I for one am grateful that he listens to the concerns of the people.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Trumka: Obama Showed He H...