I have been disappointed in Obama since he took office...

[liberalitch]

I am so tired of this play nice-nice spinelessness many of our party participate in.

The GOP is the party of white christians who mostly make their money off of the peoole who, as william faulkner said, "sweat today for what they put in their mouths tonight"

[Jersey Devil]

1. The bold "leadership" of the DLC will save the day

Has Obama been fitted yet?

[TWiley]

20. Hay, Carl Levin always Kicks some Republican Ass.

He is one of the best. I am proud of all of our Democratic Senators and Congressmen from Michigan. John Conyers is one of the few that has raised a fuss about the Downing street memo.

[saltpoint]

2. Now and again the best pitchers allow 4 or 5 runs in the first couple

innings.

By the middle of the game they steady and start manipulating the strike zone beautifully.

Their teammates sense the trajectory and produce some runs, then a couple more runs. Soon they're in the lead.

Obama has just warmed up. I say give the man a few innings. He's a winner.

[Mairead]

10. That's a poor analogy

The Senate isn't a baseball game--the stakes are higher for the spectators. We have a right to expect that Senators do their @#$%! jobs from day zero! If they don't do it, then either they're duds or a sellouts, and either way they're taking our money under false pretenses and should be sacked.

[saltpoint]

12. Well, the point was that I felt Obama was the right choice for Illinois

voters to make, and that if there's some question about his early profile in the U.S. Senate, that a fair amount of time has not passed to judge.

If you want to discard the analogy, that's ok, but a few months as a trial period is not fair in a body like the Senate, which is steeped in its own traditions. Meaningful reform has happened on the floor of that building, but rarely very quickly.

I would rather be on Obama's trajectory going into the future than Lieberman's, which seems to be heading the opposite direction.

[Mairead]

28. "I would rather be on Obama's trajectory than Lieberman's"

Apart from the differences due to age and religion, what makes you think they're any different? From the evidence to date, both are DLC sellouts, each worse than the other.

[saltpoint]

29. We disagree there. No difference between those two?

I can't accept that. Lieberman has a full career behind him as a multi-termed U.S. Senator, while Obama has not even served 6 months of his first term.

I would re-assert my wish that Senator Obama be given a fair chance.

Two Saturdays ago Afleet Alex stumbled right out of the gate in the Preakness. He finished the race first.

[Mairead]

31. "Afleet Alex stumbled right out of the gate"

Bad analogy again. We're not talking about Obama 'racing' to propose new legislation to benefit us. It's not a timed event with ranked outcome, and he's 'competing' with no one but himself. He can do whatever he likes, so if he doesn't do it, then we have every reason to suppose it's because he doesn't want to do it. There is nothing holding him back but his own choices.

[saltpoint]

57. You should take my English course one of these days, Mairead, to

enhance your grasp of metaphoric speech.

You had two to work with to establish context and you missed them both.

Maintain your prejudice if you wish. Many of us support Senator Obama with our blood and our bones, some of us even before his breath-taking address as keynote speaker to the Democratic Convention last summer in Boston.

You're giving the man only 5 or 6 months and then you're trashing him.

Jesus.

[Mairead]

75. I don't think so -- taking it evidently hasn't done you much good

since you've twice chosen inappropriately. The purpose of metaphor is to give a new and relevant insight, not to mislead.

Being willing to accept mere words, however 'breath-taking', at a political dog-and-pony show in place of substantive action on the floor of Congress does not demonstrate much political sophistication. That level of amiably uncritical acceptance is why the Roman emperors could get away with supplying panem et circenses in place of good administration. It's also why we get so many words and so little substance from Congress.

As I pointed out, the length of time that Obama's been in the Senate is irrelevant. He wasn't elected, nor is he being paid, as any sort of 'trainee senator' or 'junior non-functioning senator' or 'backup senator' or 'farm team senator'. He was elected and is being paid as a fully-functioning senator, the equivalent of any other, and should be held to the same standards.

[saltpoint]

77. Your posts on a newly elected Senator are dismissive and

as I said, you are welcome to your prejudice.

[liberalitch]

58. I know that the alternative was keyes.....

who is a freak...

[saltpoint]

68. I wish I could find something positive to say about Keyes, but I can't.

He really IS a freak. A very scary individual. Moody, falsely exuberant, totally unbalanced.

Even if you take my inherent distrust of rightwingers, my distrust of Keyes goes one better.

A very frightening, disconcerting personality.

[liberalitch]

78. I DO feel pity....

any black man who thinks that the GOP will give him the presidential nomination (except for colin Powell and hedoesn'tcount'cuzhe'snotreallyablackguy) is clearly delusional

[DemNoir]

3. It is sad

He appears to be nothing but another careerist that is turning his back on everyone who helped him succeed.

[Justitia]

14. He was a "Dean Dozen". Now he's piling on the guy who helped him.

To say I am "disappointed" that I helped support him in his Senate bid is putting it mildly.

[matcom]

4. people were quick to blindly praise Obama

fact is, exactly WHAT had Obama done? nothing. no record that I know of to praise OR condem!

i never got it. he is black, good looking, articulate as hell but other than that, i never understood why he was put on a pedestal.

just my .02

[Horse with no Name]

7. If he will step up to the plate

Those attributes will serve him well.
So far I haven't seen anything "great" out of him.
He has the charisma factor.
Only time will tell how he chooses to utilize it.

[saltpoint]

9. Yes. A few months' work is just warm-ups.

I have faith in him.

By the way, that photograph of John Kennedy is a knockout. I love it. In a dream world where all things are possible, I would place JFK in the White House by noon today at the latest and send into exile the little puke who's in there now.

[Horse with no Name]

13. I share your dream.

I love the pic too.
It strikes me as being majestic.
Talk about charisma huh? JFK had it.

[saltpoint]

15. Yes. And lots of it.

By any chance have you read Don DeLilo's novel LIBRA?

JFK makes an appearance, in Dallas, in that novel. It's a very memorable scene. The rest of the book is great, too -- it's the interior life of Lee Harvey Oswald leading up to the assassination of John Kennedy.

[Horse with no Name]

17. Adding it to my reading list now....

Thanks!

[saltpoint]

19. --

:thumbsup:

:dem:

[wtmusic]

72. Charisma?

I realize I'm in the minority here but I don't get any warm and fuzzies from Obama.

He sounds like a politician and acts like a politician. We already have too many of those, and time is short.

[Walt Starr]

67. I live in Illinois and the praise I gave him was based upon his record

Barack Obama has an incredibly liberal record in the Illinois Senate. The fact of the matter is, if Obama were proceeding along the same lines as he followed in the state Senate here, he'd be praised by all on DU.

My opinion? He's being groomed by the party power for a future national run. They are pushing him to have a strongly moderate record in the Senate and he is walking right along that path. Obama appeals to the center on all levels, and to core constituencies within the Democratic Party.

Mark my words, Clinton/Obama has strong possibilities and both are running to the center right now three years before things even heat up.

Would I support such a ticket? You bet your sweet ass I would! In fact, I'm already hoping for it! It pushes a lot of buttons and would be historical in all aspects.

Besides, a lot of the radical right won't even vote in 2008 if such a ticket were put up by the Democrats. Their brains would explode at the thought of a woman (married to the Clenis) at the top spot and a black man as veep!

[Demrock6]

5. I think he is doing a fine job...

I didn't see him play nice nice at all. He stands strong on the issues that matter to us. Have you seen him in action on the floor? Just the other day he let them have it about the Judge Brown nomination.

Barrack and Roll!

[xultar]

6. .

:popcorn:

[saltpoint]

8. liberalitch, I'm a steadfast Obama fan, but I have to tell you

that anybody who quotes William Faulkner on the world wide web is A-ok in my book.

Thanks for that. A lot of Americans graduate high school and don't even know who the man is.

[liberalitch]

59. Faulkner is one of the few reasons i don't flee the south

REM, The B52's, Tenn. Williams and north carolina pork barbeque being the others.

[saltpoint]

69. Wow. Your list keeps getting better and better.

Hard to argue with your taste in music, not to mention literature. I took a kind of pilgrimage to the Tennessee Williams Center for the Performing Arts in Key West. I'm not kidding you -- it's right next to the city landfill. Somehow, I think Tennessee wouldn't have minded that juxtaposition (he might even have requested it).

North Carolina pork barbeque?

You bet. And I'll bring the beer.

[Southsideirish]

11. He has been way "over-hyped".

[htuttle]

16. I was disappointed to learn...

...that Obama is an idiot.

Guy's from the bluest state in the Union, yet he's publically tearing down the chair of the DNC like he's in a contested red state.

Why? Doesn't he have email? Don't any of these DINOs have email? Can't they just send Dean a note, if nothing else? Do they need to criticize them through the media? I bet Dean even has a cell phone they could call him on.

Idiots. The whole lot of them criticizing Dean in public are idiots.

And don't fool yourself -- what they are doing is attempting to increase their own electoral success at the expense of the party. They are using the wrong tactic, but nonetheless, they THINK it will help them by criticizing Dean right now. Not only is that selfish, it's wrongheaded because it's not going to work.

[liberalitch]

60. These are not the days of sam rayburn....

you know "to get along you have to go along"

[Al-CIAda]

64. Well said htuttle n/t

[boohootwo]

18. I would appreciate it if you don't use "White Christians" as

party identification. It's really bad for the Democrats.

[TWiley]

21. How is that bad for anybody? White Dominionists?

That is what they are.

[boohootwo]

22. It alienates White Christians. A foolish move.

[Justitia]

23. So by correctly identifying "white Christians", they will become repubs?

This makes no sense whatsoever.

When it is an insult to be called a "white Christian"?

[boohootwo]

25. If the most important thing in my life is my church and my

Christian beliefs, which party would I most likely identify with based on Dean's comments?


Remember, most people are not obsessed with politics.

[Justitia]

30. Do you understand you are making a logical fallacy?

ONCE AGAIN: Dean accurately described the demographic OF the repub party as "mostly white christians".

He DID NOT say: white christians are all republicans.

Why are you having so much trouble understanding this?

What you keep putting forth is like saying:

"Cats are furry, therefore all furry things are cats"

Can you see where you are confusing the two?

[boohootwo]

32. I'm not confusing anything. And if you think that's not the way

the majority of people think then you haven't been around much.

[Justitia]

33. Around much what? And who are the majority of people?

I find what you say puzzling. Here is what I think you are saying, and please correct me if I am wrong:

You are a white, Christian republican. You completely identify your faith with your politics. Howard Dean pointed out an uncomfortable fact that you are a mbr of a group that is exclusive of racial minorities and religious tolerance - and this unnerves you to the point that you feel moved to post dissension on an overwhelmingly Democratic msg board.

Am I off base?

[H2O Man]

35. You are. n/t

[Justitia]

36. Thanks for joining in. Please enlighten me as to your specific knowledge.

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[H2O Man]

40. I do not think

we are supposed to be accusing people of being republicans on DU. You might want to check into that.

And, just to be clear: I was responding to you, specifically, and one of the things you asked on this forum. You are the one attempting to confuse the matter by bringing irrelevent things in.

[Justitia]

41. I simply ASKED. I want to understand where this person is coming from.

Geez! Don't put words in my mouth! I want to understand why this person is so upset with an accurate demographic description.

You are frankly, blowing this entirely out of proportion and causing trouble.

[H2O Man]

46. I didn't

put any words in your mouth. You made a rude comment. Then you asked a question. I answered. You were rude to me, and also claimed this was a private discussion between you and one other person. Actually, it is a long thread, with numerous others participating. It's not private.

I think you have made some valid points. I think you cheapen them with a tacky tactic. Hence, my first two comments to you were attempts to suggest you focus on the issue, rather than make silly personal attacks.

Thus, back to the issue at hand. Can you see circumstances where it is important to call republicans "a white christian party"? When? Why? And can you also see circumstances where it might be wise not to use that same description? When? Why?

In politics, there are always three groups: <1> Those who always agree with you; <2> Those who always disagree with you; and <3> The undecided. Consider this in determining if it is ever/always important to use a specific tactic.

The democratic party will win remarkably few state elections, and no national ones, without a significant amount of white christians. Those who are not of that group would be foolish to think that they are in any position of power without white christians.

[Justitia]

47. "Rude" is very subjective. I find your posts rude. I'm sure you don't.

And I don't appreciate your efforts to muddy the discussion.

I'm posting a singular question (to someone else): What is inaccurate in the stmt that the republican party is mostly white christians?

I wasn't looking for a discussion on the future of the Democratic Party. From you.

[H2O Man]

48. Nope.

What you said was: "You are a white Christian republican. .... Am I off base?"

Again, we are not supposed to accuse people of being republicans on DU. If we suspect that a person is a republican looking to disrupt DU, we are supposed to notify the moderators.

[Justitia]

50. I didn't accuse, I asked. You assume.

And what you quoted is exactly that.
I wasn't looking for your guidance on propriety, I was asking for accuracy in my statement! Don't you get it????

Asking is not the same as insulting - you are accusing me of insulting someone by asking their political affiliation - absurd!

You butted into a conversation, made an incorrect assumption about what you saw, and are giving me the riot act over your interpretation. I think THAT is rude.

[H2O Man]

52. No "riot act" here.

I merely have suggested that rather than resort to cheap and crude tactics -- personal attacks -- you stick to the issue. Didn't mean to get you so upset. I'm still hoping you'll find the ability to get back on track.

[Justitia]

54. For the love of God - what "personal attacks"????

I am trying to get to a serious discussion of why this demographic stmt has everyone's knickers in a twist, and instead of talking about that I'm being lambasted on typewritten tone and reported to the moderators.

The other poster has already said they don't want to discuss why this demographic stmt is insulting to them - fine. It just is, for reasons unknown I guess.

And thanks to the obfuscation of the topic, we will never know.

[H2O Man]

55. Who

"reported (you) to the moderators"? I didn't. I have pointed out that, from my understanding, we are not supposed to accuse people of being republicans, even if we think we are doing it in a clever way. I assume you were merely getting carried away. I've asked you several times questions about the issue, but you continue to try to focus on the silly business.

[Justitia]

56. You assumed and you were wrong.

In the larger context, I want to understand why some people are offended by an accurate description of the republican party being comprised of mostly white Christians.

On a finer point, I am wondering if it points to an uncomfortable truth mbrs of that party might recognize in themselves and that is why they consider pointing it out as insulting. If they do, that leads me to the belief they see it as a weakness of their party and a sense that it is not representative of all Americans or even a majority of Americans.

I am not a mbr of that party and I am not offended by accurate statistical information about either party. I want to understand why they are "offended". It might also explain much in the way they see the word "liberal" as an insult to the Democratic party.

I have been frustrated in taking this question in that direction and your interference did NOT help.

I have given up and am finished.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justitia]

43. I have read your posts. Why does this upset you so much? -eom

[Name removed]

44. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justitia]

45. No, I have read your other posts on other threads. I searched them.

I wanted to understand your point of view.

Will you apologize for calling me a liar?

I would like to get back to why you are upset about this whole "white christian" demographic.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Justitia]

53. Fine, we'll end the conversation, I'm still as confused as ever as to

your complaint with the demographic stmt.
Obviously, you don't want to talk about it.
I gave you a chance to explain why you consider the stmt so terrible and you refused.

The end.

[Irreverend IX]

51. They just might.

Pointing out the lack of racial diversity in the GOP isn't harmful and calls attention to the lack of minority representation in their party, but the "Christian" part is a problem. When average Americans hear Dean making that comment, they think, "Hmm.. he says Republicans are Christian, so I guess that means Democrats... aren't Christian?" This assertion is faulty, but a lot of people are going to make it and assume that the Democratic party excludes Christians, and that's really not a message we want to send out. I'm grateful to have one Democrat with balls, but Dean needs to think a bit more before he speaks.

[stickdog]

71. Sure, since Repukes are monolithic and Dems welcome diversity,

it makes perfect sense that Dems DON'T welcome 75% of the American population. :sarcasm:

If you are a bigot who hates non-whites and non-Christians, you already have a problem with the Democratic Party. Don't you?

[WillowTree]

74. When it is used as a pejorative.

Considering the context, Dean certainly wasn't intending his comment as a compliment.

[Norquist Nemesis]

24. That's ridiculous!

White Christians who are Democrats are not going to see it for anything other than what it is: Republicans led by the nose with Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Randall Terry, etc. picking their pockets.

White Christians who are through and through Republicans are already pissed off that Democrats breathe the same air. There's nothing Howard Dean or any other individuals can say that will change that.

[Malikshah]

27. If this alienates White Christians

then they're not ready to fight the regime.

In other words-- the war has been going on for the last generation. Folks better wake up and take notice and take our country back.

Too bad some are still sleeping.

[liberalitch]

61. 80% of all GOPers are white christians.... they even said it in a...

main stream media outlet.... CNN

[Warren Stupidity]

65. They are attempting to establish a one party theocracy

and the opposition party old guard is busy attacking its new chairman for stating the obvious - that they are attempting to establish a one party theocracy.

Have the theocrats claimed that they are not a christian party? Isn't their 'domestic agenda' to reform our republic into a christian republic? Aren't they quite open about this?

:wtf: Dean speaks truth and half of us get upset over it.

[H2O Man]

26. What would you think he should do?

He is in an organization with a long history, and a tradition that does not allow for a person to be confrontational and effective in his circumstances.

[liberalitch]

62. I'm not saying he's not acting on his convictions....

which is what I would do.... But I think that he's hasn't been the firebrand that many people who voted for him wanted.

I think that he's been a little compliant.... but then who hasn't?

[ecstatic]

34. He's just following Kerry & Co's lead

Don't hate him, hate the game! :grr:

[liberalitch]

63. Oh, I think he'll come around.... I just hoped it would be sooner...

rather than later

[wtmusic]

73. Oh cmon

Obama makes Kerry look like Abbie Hoffman

[Tomee450]

38. I have never understood

the excitement over Obama. He certainly does not excite me. Seems the type that will never go out on a limb for anything.

[burythehatchet]

66. If you want to understand Obama's politics

look at Hillary Clinton.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

70. is Obama DLC?

[leftofthedial]

76. Obama went from zero to coprorate whore and pink tutu Dem

faster than anyone in history so far

IMHO

he hasn't stood up for any tough principle yet.