You want people like me to support Obama? Here's how:

[Tyler Durden]

First off, people will say I support Clinton. They are correct, only in the way that I would rather eat my dog's feces dried with ketchup then hot, fresh, and plain.

Neither are Nazis; but neither are true Progressives. Clinton is MARGINALLY more supportive of my views than Obama, in a way that I'd rather be abandoned in the middle of Lake Michigan than the middle of the Pacific because the lake has no sharks.

SO. With that being said, here's the recipe to obtain the rabid support of TRUE progressives for a candidate:

ONE
Universal Single Payer Health Care. Neither candidate now supports anything even close to this, and both are deep in the pockets of the insurance industry. Clinton's program is one foot closer in the 1000 mile journey, but what good is that, really? Obama is on ON RECORD supporting it in the past, but his denial REALLY pisses me off. Take it back and Obama would be one step closer to getting me to change channels.

TWO
Stop supporting the GOD DAMNED WAR. The Pentagon will FUND the war, if the idiot congress doesn't pass another single solitary IRAQ WAR FUNDING BILL. They won't have the cash to pay for TRAINING, RECRUITING, NEW PURCHASES STATESIDE, AND SUPPORT FOR VETS OR FAMILIES, but they DO have money for the war: it's how the military WORKS: it comes out of current appropriations. SO, QUIT tacking shit onto FUNDING BILLS for additional money, and FILIBUSTER THEM, because it doesn't matter how anybody voted on the AUFI of 2002, because the death and destruction happened and continues to happen because WE CONTINUE TO GIVE THEM MONEY. So Stop.

THREE
Work NOW to FIX THE GOD DAMNED ECONOMY. Don't play it safe and wait until August or November: grow some spine, START NOW. IT'S YOUR JOB AND YOU'RE NOT DOING IT.

FOUR
Start supporting Equal Treatment Under The Law. YES, that includes "Gay Marriage." The constitution already supports Equal Treatment under the 14th Amendment. START DOING IT. That is ALSO your job, and you swore to uphold the constitution in your oath of office, so start keeping your word, and shut up about what your religion says about it: No TRUE Progressive gives a shit what your "faith" tells you.


Now there are other items, but take care of these...and any TRUE progressive will open up the check book and spend every waking non-working hour on the candidate that does it.

[xchrom]

1. recommend

[Tyler Durden]

2. Thanks.

Love you too, by the way.

Whatever happened to the Democratic Party by the way? It sort of went quietly went away.

[xchrom]

6. i know, huh?

:hug:

[JoFerret]

7. That is a good question

And the answers themselves - by their nature - may explain the reason.

[QC]

8. It has lately become a personality cult,

like what happened to the Republicans under Reagan.

[Upfront]

3. Excellent

K&R

[GoesTo11]

4. These views should be mainstream Democrat

What's wrong - these are all modest moves in the big scheme, and all consistent with basic concern for the people of this country. The Republican equivalent would be, oh, investment tax breaks, adding a new military airplane program, and deregulating airlines. My point being that Republicans have all sorts of radical things in their mainstream like constitutional amendments about flag burning and gay marriage, "privatizing" social security, stacking the supreme court, domestic spying, etc. Why can't Democrats even have sensible ideas that just treat people with respect as part of our mainstream?

[xchrom]

9. because they might offend the republick party voter.

:crazy:

the people know that dems want equal rights -- or universal healthcare{medicare for all} -- it's no use for anyone to try to soft peddal that shit so they don't offend conservative voters.

hell you could probably swing more conservative voters with an authentic strong stand.

[GoesTo11]

10. If they announced these views with pride, they'd win back some Repub. voters

Nobody wants wimps.

[xchrom]

11. indeed. authenticity counts. nt

[nxylas]

5. Swap Clinton and Obama's name around in the 2nd paragraph...

...and those are pretty much my views too. K&R.

[BlueIdaho]

12. I think this post proves

Many of us can and do agree on the big issues facing America. That makes it more of a shame this primary season has gone on so long. Instead of fighting for this progressive agenda, we are arguing about "she said he said" meaningless nonsense.

Great Post!

[Tyler Durden]

32. Too bad it's headed for the bottom again....

sunk by the bickering and bullshit.

[BlueIdaho]

36. Its a shame

I'm no saint, I post my fair share of jabs too BUT I really think you have articulated some truths we Democrats we need to get back to. The politics of personality may be fine for talking heads TV but fundamental issues of equality in a democracy are what makes me a democrat. Thanks for at least trying!

[Buzz Clik]

13. Durden, I'd be pleased if you simply starting acting civilized.

I'm not sure we'd want "people like you" supporting Obama. We have enough irrational zealots as it is.

You just stay with Hillary and keep up your underhanded backstabbing from her side of the fence. We're happy with you just where you are.

[Tyler Durden]

23. Took you off just long enough to save you some time: You've been on IGNORE for months.

I consider it polite to tell you you're wasting your time. Since we don't agree and I don't like your attitude, why bother posting on my threads? I don't look for yours: You're too rude.

Back on ignore.

[cali]

14. another pathetic, demanding puerile post

from you. me, me, me. it's called Narcissistic Personality Disorder. Hard to help, though

[QC]

24. How is it narcissistic to expect candidates who claim to be progressive

to advocate for progressive positions?

[Tyler Durden]

27. I don't know why cali bothers. I think she loves the sound of her own voice.

I took her off ignore long enough to suggest she stop looking for my posts. Frankly, I'd rather she put me on ignore. Rude, mistress of the "HIT AND RUN" post. Nothing to say but insults. Back on Ignore.

Guess it is my faith in the possibility for people to change that keeps me taking people off "IGNORE" once and a while. Usually I'm disappointed.

[Tyler Durden]

25. People like you will ruin it for Obama if he gets the nod, and you been on IGNORE for months now.

I don't know why you bother looking for my threads. I take you off on occasion to see if you've stopped being a nasty, name calling poster who never reads the posts, just "HITS AND RUNS," but I'm always disappointed.

Waste your time if you want...You're back on IGNORE with the rest of the nasty rude people.

[Voltaire]

15. Best post I've seen all year

Hopefully in my lifetime we will come to a place where such posts are unnecessary. That, alas, might take long.

[Fresh_Start]

16. Tyler thank you

I'm sick of listening to candidates say what they will do when......
when I can see that they aren't doing their current jobs the way I believe they should.

Sorry if you are not defending the Constitution and civil rights today, I don't believe you're going to start when all the toxic chemicals from your newly found executive power go to your head

[Armstead]

17. I agree with some of your post -- Disagree with otehr portions

I disagree strongly about whether Hillary or Obama represents the further point from a real progressive agenda.

IMO, Obama has a better grasp of the reasons we have been caught in a right-wing and corporate stranglehold for so long. And I believe that his natural inclinations are more in the direction of truly shaking up the status quo than Hillary.

IMO, the basic position of the Democratic Party ought to be Universal Single Payer Health Care. It's really just common sense, and no more unrealistic that Social Security or Medicare were at one time....However, since that is not in the cards at this point, I believe Obama's more optional approach is more likely to succeed and move us in the right directon, because the WHOLE OBJECTION most voters (not the pharmas and health care and insurance oligarchs) have to universal care is its' "socialistic" aspects....Hillary's mandates will simply give the right wing a way to use mandates as a poison pill....Obama's approach, IMO, would make passage of basic reforms more likely at the start....Then, as people realize that reform is not so scary, it would be easier to take more steps toward a public healthcare system.

The war funding and the economy? Well, both candidates ought to do as you suggest. But the reality is that we're stuck with Bush and a tiny Congressional majority until at least the election, so whatever Obama or Hillary may attempt to do in the meantime would be primarily symbolic.

[Tyler Durden]

22. Not a "He versus She" issue to me.

If either of them had a "corporate stranglehold" understanding, then they wouldn't be supporting INSURANCE COMPANY based health care. Doesn't matter how you parse it; when corporate America is in on the opening, you ain't reforming SHIT, Jack.

Moot point. The issue isn't particulars, because neither of them are long on them, but SPINE, which I have seen in one or two Democrats, neither of them the current front runners.

[Armstead]

26. I don't disagree -- But we all have to deal with the cards we're dealt

I try to take a semi-optimistic long-range view when I get frustrated by it all.

At least crap like NAFTA is an issue now. I remember not very long ago when it would have been considered heresy for any mainstream politician to dare to be critical of it.

Gephardt, for example, got trashed by The Clintons and DLC types for daring to challenge MFN for China.

I try to remember that poem about the donut and the hole. Doesn;t always work, but i figure it's better than gnashing on leather.

[EnviroBat]

18. recommended.

I agree. Would protecting American jobs sweeten the deal for you as well? An end to this insanely unfair Free Trade BS?

[TooBigaTent]

19. Great post! It's telling that supporters of Democratic principles will agree with you

while the Obamatons will trash it.

Of course, they will not address the specific points you make, but then, they never do. Their response is always on the level of a six-year old, holding their fingers in their ears and yelling, "my daddy can beat up your daddy and your daddy has poopy pants."

They would not know how to address an issue if it landed on their head.

[Jamastiene]

20. K & R &

Love ya. :hi: :loveya: :pals:

[kdpeters]

21. There's nothing to disagree with there

If Hillary Clinton were to likewise take all those same positions, she could actually get people like me to support her too. You are correct. We do not have a true progressive candidate for president.

[gcomeau]

28. Be realistic about point 2 and 3.

What you are asking them to do in point 2 is politically IMPOSSIBLE for any presidential candidate. Vote to withhold funding from the troops in a war zone? (I don't care how you try to rationalize it or claim that's not what they're doing that's how 95% of the country will see it). Require them to do this and you instantly and permanently end any prospect of their getting into the White House and your support for them becomes fairly damn academic. The only waqy this could happen is if you put together a bipartisan majority that did it together, and that'll NEVER happen. The only way we're ending Iraq is with the presidency.

Point 3... if you want to get a president into the white house they need to win the election. To win the election they have to campaign. To campaign they need to spend their time at speeches and rallies and interviews and strategy meetings and not in the senate. So you can have a Senator working on fixing the economy from inside the Senate or a presidential candidate working towards getting into the white house to work on fixing it from there, but you can't have both.

[Jed Dilligan]

33. Stop making sense

The OP is obviously having a very emotional moment.

[newmajority]

29. The first step in accomplishing all of the above

is to exorcise the corporatist DLC from this party.

President Obama, in my opinion, will listen to the people, and will do what he can to get these things done. We know for a fact that a DLC president will not, and a Repuke president will do just the opposite.

Of course it's also necessary for President Obama to have a congress willing to do the people's business. That means replacing the retiring 'Pukes and any other weak 'Puke seats with Democrats. And that means real Democrats, not corporatist DLC tools. And if you can knock out a DLC tool in the primary, even better.

And if all this happens and still nothing changes, then I guess we build another party, because then we would know for sure that there is NO good in the Democratic party anymore. But I'm not there yet. Came close in 2002, thanks to the warmongers. But Dr. Dean and Barack have kept me going.

As Mr. Lydon said, "I could be wrong, I could be right", but anger IS an energy and while it's justified to be angry at the state of this fucking country, it's better to direct it in some way that will accomplish something.

Or maybe I'm just babbling because the caffeine hasn't kicked in yet........ :hangover:

[OneBlueSky]

30. FIVE: Uphold the United States Constitution! . . .

and that includes impeaching and prosecuting those who have systematically violated the supreme law of the land . . .

[Tyler Durden]

31. That one should be a given. They still take an oath to uphold the Constitution.

I plan on leading an IMPEACHMENT drive the first time WHOEVER gets elected violates a single PERIOD of that oath.

[PassingFair]

34. Feingold, Durban and Leahy....

and many more REAL progressives are lined
up with Obama.

That weighs HEAVILY for him, IMO.

[Bettie]

35. You've articulated my feelings very well here

I'm marginally closer to supporting Obama over Clinton right now, but either one is exciting or inspiring to me.

Your points are well taken.....these are all things that bother me about both Obama and Clinton.