Reply #56: In actuality. [View All]

[vaberella]

Majority of the bigger things that people found him weak on. He was also deemed not powerful by many. A compromise to many is not powerful---it's a "cave" especially on DU. Don't go around things in order to make your point. Let's cut right to the chase here. You're using the same position that many on DU found him weak on; while the pragmatists found him strong on because he was able to get a lot of good things done within the political climate he was working in. A climate that hates him, and with a Democratic electorate that has questionable support for our President. Some of us, who are deemed pragmatists realize the set up and what's going on and so for us it was politically successful moves. For those who felt he "caved" which are all the ones you mentioned---he is deemed weak and this is by the LEFT. Not by the Right. The Right think he's a socialist bastard on domestic policy and rams through legislation to hurt the nation. In foreign policy they see him as ultimately weak and a neonate who knows how to do nothing. Republicans have different view points on those two fronts. The Left think he's moving center Right to extreme Right (and we're talking about some of the bloggers and some DUers)when it comes to domestic policy and as for Foreign---it's a mixed bag for both sets. On some issues he's progressive on others he's a traitor or Bush-lite.

In regards to HRC and the PO---if he had the super majority---he would have gotten the PO...shoot, maybe even single payer. DADT---It took another legislation took get another deal that makes a review wait by Pentagon before immediate integration---another point many proponents of DADT said he sold out on, that we had to got through the lame duck on. If he had a super majority (and we're talking liberal people) ---that would have been done long before. Do you even think he would have properly prioritized. He would have rammed through everything. Bush tax cuts---where people said he was weak on (since we can't mutually exclude tax cuts from the rich and tax cuts for the poor & middle class) if he had the super majority---do you not think that he would have been able to allow the Bush tax cuts for the rich expire---that legislation failed twice in the house.

Gitmo---do you not think with a super majority he would not have closed it by now. That he would not have gotten the money to build the maximum security Prison in the US so he could close it down? Of course he would have if he had a strong super majority of people who were 100% liberal or at least Center. No he has extreme right Dems who fucked us over more times than we can count.

So when you're trying to show a sense of duplicity, understand that there are different issues going on here--who are talking about what in case of foreign and domestic policy, who is talking about pragmatism and those who think he's a caver.