Median incomes are not growing as fast as they should be. This is true. And it is a serious problem.

[DanTex]

50. I agree with a lot of what you say.

I'm not sure how much opportunity there really was for more fundamental changes than we got. After all, even during the brief time that we had 60 senators, there were still a number of conservative Dems that wouldn't have gone along with anything much more radical than what we got.

The worker-owned cooperatives was just some random thing that I came up with out of nowhere as an example of what true "fundamental change" might look like. I can see how people hoping for that sort of thing (or even "fundamental change" that is less extreme than that) would be disappointed.

I also agree that Obama is probably a little disappointed in himself in not getting more done, and a little surprised about the level and insanity of opposition from the GOP. In fact, one of my main criticisms of Obama is that he wasn't cynical enough from the beginning, believing he could "change the tone", whereas he should have realized from day one that the GOP was out to destroy him, and just shoved as much legislation through when he had the chance.

What I generally object to in the "Obama wars" here (well one thing...) is the idea that people who support Obama are putting "team" ahead of "policy", mindlessly supporting the "D" regardless of what he stands for. It seems to me that, if you look at actual policy, at least on the domestic front, there's not very much to object to, and a lot to be happy about. And the more specific you get, the more this is the case. True, we haven't had a fundamental restructuring, but that hardly makes Obama some corporate apologist president for wall street and the 1%, which is apparently what a large number of DUers seem to believe.

PS on edit, I don't recall the specifics of the NAFTA discussion you are referring to.