The Left Needs to Support Obama Now

[Tom Rinaldo]

While Obama may be far from a perfect progressive on numerous issues, he has already taken some stands on important issues that cause the Right to go bonzo ballistic. Important and significant stands I might add, like stating global warming is a crisis that America must seriously deal with, while backing some serious efforts to confront it, including finally steering the U.S toward renewable energy for our near horizon energy future (no more "drill baby drill"). Like admitting to the world that the U.S. did engage in the use of torture and repudiating it, while rebooting the justice Department with a goal to preserve and protect the U.S. Constitution. Like restoring humility and stressing cooperation in our foreign policy, as a more effective means to pursue valid national interests than the neocon cowboy mentality of the last 8 years.

Plus asserting that those who can afford to pay more should bear more of the burden as we seek to restore economic health for the entire American nation, while passing a budget that finally paid some heed to the needs of the working and middle classes after a decade of progressive retreat. And of course fighting for the most significant advance toward universal health care in America since medicare was established, countering conservative hysteria to demand that any health care reform enacted must include a meaningful public option.

Can I find any fault with Obama's major initiatives from a Leftist perspective? Hell yeah. But for the most part he's doing better than I had any realistic reason to hope for in America as we find it today. Obama campaigned as moderately progressive at best. But more so than most politicians fortunate enough to get themselves elected, Obama is actually trying to deliver on most of the direct campaign promises he made. But actually none of that is really the key point, not when you look at the bigger picture.

The Right wing has launched a do or die battle to discredit not only Barack Obama, but any and all policies that dare so much as lean toward progressive values. In attempting to destroy Obama's current health care proposals, they are trying to set back the clock on the full spectrum of progressive ideals. When a modest compromise proposal like including a public option in health care reform alongside a host of private insurance players is condemned as full blown socialism, the battle lines have been drawn. If the Right wins this battle hereafter everything even mildly progressive will be tarred as radical socialism, with socialism replacing Marxism as the right wing sponsored boogie man of the decade. Hereafter anything even mildly progressive will be smeared as big government trying to control our lives and reward the undeserving over those who (it will be claimed) made this country great in the first place.

The Right isn't really fighting now against Obama's health care reforms. They are fighting to abort any chance of real change in America for the next 8 years (minimally). It's a high stakes gamble but it is the bet they have chosen to make and this game is being played for keeps. Only one side will emerge triumphant. This is a turning point, and now is the time for all good progressives to come to the aid of our President. The agenda we save might be our own.

[Skittles]

1. he has my support

I've been somewhat disappointed but I'm not giving up

[damonm]

2. But you KNOW they won't.

Because he is not pure.

[Olney Blue]

3. I support him.

[Lorax7844]

98. Me too

[salguine]

4. Maybe Obama needs to support the left a little. It's a two-way street.

[FrenchieCat]

6. I think it's a busy highway, and the Left is about to get ran over

by the Right, and left for roadkill....
cause it doesn't matter if we win an election,
if we end up with nothing but a clear signal
to the media and the GOP that they still have the power
to influence the general public into cutting off its own nose
when it comes right down to it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

9. I think that is exactly what he has done

He has "supported the left a little" which is more, in my opinion, than any American President since Jimmy Carter has done. Yes Obama could support the left more, but that ain't gonna happen if he loses this battle for a real public option with health care reform. He would have less opportunity to move left as a result, not more. Congress is in flux, if they move to the right of Obama now our prospects are not good, and if Obama fails on health care that is how it will be perceived and perceptions have a way of becoming reality.

[Cha]

16. Thanks Tom..Obama

has to get a firm foundation to help anything. So many want him to fail and that includes the republicons' base..the corporatemedia.

[elleng]

72. I think the 'left' is bumping into itself,

and doesn't even KNOW it! 'We've' got to understand who and where we are, recognize how far we're likely to be able to go, and go for it, TOGETHER.

[debbierlus]

91. Obama has shown nothing but disdain for the left

My activism will continue. It won't be for ANY political party. It will be about exposing truth and advocating for better public policy.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

5. Sorry, it's either all or nothing.

Since we like to bitch, we'll take nothing and then whine about it.

[elleng]

71. MORE than whine, I expect.

.

[FrenchieCat]

7. Hi Tom!

Long time no hear.

Nice to read one of your pieces once again! :hi:

[Tom Rinaldo]

13. Hi Frenchie!

I may not be around as much but I haven't gone away either.

[Bjorn Against]

8. I will support him when I think he is right and oppose him when I think he is wrong.

[Tom Rinaldo]

10. Sure, but since the world is always full of greys...

...do you line up with him on close calls if defeat will embolden our enemies and threaten other progress?

[Bjorn Against]

25. I support him if I think what he is doing will lead us in the right direction

I don't stand behind politicians I stand behind issues, when politicians support my issues then I support them when they don't support my issues then I don't support them. While I can't answer your question without specifics I will say that if there is a close call then the chances are that I am most likely on his side. I tend to agree with Democrats when they fight against the Republicans, it is the issues in which they "reach across the aisle" and go along with the Republican positions in which I tend to be very critical. Close calls usually mean that he is standing up to the Republicans, I support him when he stands up to the right-wing.

[Tom Rinaldo]

29. A good, fair, and realistic reply. Thanks

It really does get hard to be more specific that what you wrote while the subject is abstract.

[saltpoint]

11. IMO Obama exceeds all criteria for outstanding public service, beginning

with his work in metropolitan Chicago communities (instead of marketing his smarts instantly to swank corporate law firms) and on through his heart-pounding clarity in the Philadelphia address on race and into this afternoon and tomorrow morning.

The U.S. has never been governed from the Left. Would that it could be, but the logistical mechanism for victory is not with the Left. When it ever is, I'll cheer louder than anybody. Until it is, I stand with President Obama because in the big picture, he's the elected agent of change. He's the agent of change that's already taken place and the guy we want in the clean-up position in our line-up. Almost 70 million of our fellow citizens voted for him and while we face immediate frustrations, the long term view is better and brighter if capable souls are working to get there right now.

Change happens when critical mass acknowledging its need is achieved.

[Tom Rinaldo]

17. We see this much the same

If Obama fails a door that is opening toward the left will once again be slammed shut. We are part of a social change process that plays out over decades with real positive turning points sometimes in reach but with the potential for significant set backs ever present also.

[saltpoint]

20. Yes. Hi, Tom. Good to see you. Good post.

Agree on all counts.

[tledford]

89. "The U.S. has never been governed from the Left."

I'm just generally down right now, or I wouldn't say this, but has anyone considered the possibility that the reality quoted in my subject line might be a reason for the *left* to start picking up rifles and shotguns? Maybe that is the only way that what's right is going to be made to happen.

[saltpoint]

93. Well I hope no one would pick up weaponry to advance a political

agenda.

Persuasion can be very effective.

Unless I'm mistaken you are advocating violence. Sorry, that's a real non-starter for me.

[avaistheone1]

97. All the important social and civil rights change has come from the left.

[saltpoint]

100. Agree. But the nation has never been governed from the Left.

There have been and will continue to be tremendous left-based candidacies for public office.

Until capitalism falls from favor, though, there will not be Left governance.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[HopeOverFear]

15. and that's so sad

For them... disabling a President who is 70% what they want is worth ending up with the next one being 0%.

For them, good IS the enemy of perfect. They forget the meaning of the word "progress", which means "little by little".

[GreenArrow]

69. progress can be fast or slow

forwards or backwards.

[depakid]

34. I guess you don't see the irony in that statement, eh?

A bit myopic, don't you think?

[mopinko]

14. we're a bunch of queer ducks

as they say. but he has my support, and i hope to show it.
he is more than any of us had any right to hope for.

[elocs]

18. Now that he has become President, Obama has come face to face with the reality of what he can do

as opposed to what he wants to do or what he promised to do. I think he now knows that even as a U.S. Senator he found it to be easy to be critical of the Executive Branch and the President and how he would do things differently. Now that the ball is in his court he must deal with the reality of handling it.

Even here at DU all of us political armchair quarterbacks find it easy to be critical of Obama, how he is not keeping his promises or doing things as we think they should be done, that he is lacking in what we perceive to be perfection. We express voter remorse as we flog what we claim as his failures, conveniently forgetting that the only alternative was John McCain. In the end we convince ourselves that in our wisdom we know all there is to be known, that every detail and fact available to Obama already abides in us so how could we be wrong? Presumptuous are we?

[karynnj]

19. Great post, as usual - great to see you again

I think the far left spent the last 8 years (or more) so angry, there natural reactions are outrage and attacks. Now, they could hurt the very things they want to help.

[Douglas Carpenter]

21. 100% Agree!! Kick and recommend!!

[Neecy]

22. hmmmmmm

Funny how everyone here refers to the left as 'they' on a so-called progressive forum.

[Tom Rinaldo]

24. "Can I find any fault with Obama's major initiatives from a Leftist perspective?"

I thought I was being clear that I consider myself a leftist with a comment like that, but maybe I wasn't clear enough. For me at least the Left isn't "they" it's "we". Count me proudly in.

[Neecy]

26. no, your OP was fine

I was referring to the comments.

[billh58]

83. There is the "Left"

and then there is the Far-Left. Unfortunately, radicals and extemists exist on both ends of the political spectrum.

[katandmoon]

23. "The left" can support Obama until the cows come home but it has ZERO influence. Influence is all

that matters. The left has none, or hadn't you noticed?

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. Actually our relative lack of influence is why I find it important to support Obama now

Of course I've noticed what you point out, but I disagree that our influence is Zero. When we keep channels of communication open, leftists influence liberals, who influence moderates etc. We do not have the power to mold this Congress into a truly progressive one, but we can help prevent it from drifting center right. That requires some of the same type of efforts on our part that helped get a Democratic Congress and Democratic President elected in the first place. And that includes talking to our neighbors, writing our legislators, penning letters to the editors, and all the rest of it. We have to help turn out Obama's base for important issues, and when we do our influence slowly and slightly increases.

[katandmoon]

30. I don't agree, and I think you are scolding the wrong group of people.

[FrenchieCat]

31. I don't think it's a scold as much as it is food for thought.......

[handmade34]

27. I support my President.

[Jim Sagle]

32. Let's all do BO jumping jacks!

:rofl:

[depakid]

33. Issue by issue

Supporting what are essentially watered down Republican policies- or worse- FAILURE to hold Banksters, fraudsters and torturers accountable deserves NO ONE'S support.

Or at leasy no one who has an ounce of integrity.

[omega minimo]

35. Obama didn't run as a progressive and hasn't acted as a progressive President

"Can I find any fault with Obama's major initiatives from a Leftist perspective?"

Is this some kind of a joke?

[ProudDad]

85. He pretended to run as a Progressive - at times.

"I'm not an actual Progressive but I will play one while on the stump."

[omega minimo]

94. Quite successfully

:toast: I stayed out of the fray and didn't want to say -- occasionally did -- that it appeared we had a choice b/w two status quo candidates....

[Number23]

36. I agree. Rec'd

[CTLawGuy]

37. I agree

I think a lot of people don't understand what Obama and the left are up against.

1. The US is only about 25% liberal at most (with a third being conservative and the rest moderate). That means the Dems in Congress were put there by a sizeable share of moderates as well as liberals.

2. Blue dog dem house members.

3. Harry Reid's insane assertion that legislation needs 60 votes to pass the senate.

4. Because of the structure of the Senate, conservative rural states have disproportionate power, and, because of the larger and less gerrymandered constituencies senators have, senators tend to be more moderate.

Furthermore, cynical expressions of disappointment (and the occasional comparison to Bush) are counterproductive and they help to legitimize the candidacy of the next Ralph Nader, which, as we all know, could be the difference between a President W-clone and a sane president in 2012.

[depakid]

38. The data shows that Americans are predominantly- often overwhelmingly progressive on the issues

So maybe we might put that old saw "conservative" and "quasi-conservative" -e.g. "moderate" majority business to rest.

[CTLawGuy]

39. it depends on the issue.

But, "liberal" is an ideological label. We would expect that moderates would support liberal positions on issues some of the time at least, while not identifying by the liberal label. So it could be true that there is overwhelming support for universal health care, for example, but only 1/4 of the population identifying as liberal at the same time.

I think pointing out that only 1/4 is liberal helps us to understand why so few members of Congress are rank and file liberals and can be counted on to go with us on any liberal agenda item.

Also, I have no idea what a "quasi-conservative" is.

[depakid]

41. It's an invalid premise- which leads to an inaccurate conclusion re: constituents

i.e., they're not conservative at all on a large set of general and specific issues (which in the end, define ideology). The biggest trouble with that old inaccurate canard is that it allows corrupt Congress critters and Senators cover for the unacceptable crap that they pull in return for "contributions."

Check it out (most of this comes from credible data sources- not cheap media polls).

Progressive Majority- Why Conservative America is a Myth

http://cloudfront.mediamatters.org/static/pdf/progressive_majority.pdf

Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007

http://people-press.org/report/?reportid=312

Summary from The Nation:

Will the Progressive Majority Emerge?

Contrary to popular belief, the majority of Americans are liberal. How long will it take politicians and the media to get that?

http://www.alternet.org/media/54914

[CTLawGuy]

44. an ideology is a set of broad governing principles

and not an aggregate of issue positions.

Let me ask you this? If America is liberal, why don't they elect a congress that is majority liberal? Why did Bush get elected (at least in 2004)? Are liberals so inept or unintelligent that they can't recognize who is and who isn't liberal? You talk about contributions, but ultimately contributions don't cast votes.

Also the 25% liberal figure comes from the NBC 2008 exit poll where people were asked to identify their ideology.

Broad consensus on progressive issues means that moderates support some liberal issue positions, which is to be expected, but it doesn't make them really liberals.

[depakid]

45. Self identification of ideology is not the same as the broad sets of principles and issues

set out this the studies. The latter is an accurate basis to view attitudes beliefs and values- as it's less subject to the exigencies of loaded language.

As to your question, Lakoff and Westen have studied and written extensively about it. Republican do a much more effective job of applying the science, framing the issues- and their opponents, and setting the agenda and parameters of debate (as often as not, intuitively, though they also have high priced consultants who actually know what they're doing).

In fact, they're so good at it that even though they're positions are unpopular and their records replete with failures- they still got elected and re-elected for years and years.

[bertman]

79. CTLawGuy, we don't elect a majority liberal congress because of groups like the DLC

who have used their power and money to support centrist and even right-leaning Democrats when there were excellent liberal Dems who wanted to run. Once the decision is made for the party to back an individual, immense pressure is put on Democrats at every level in the state and national structure to support that individual. Any liberal other than a super-wealthy liberal Democrat (how many of them are there?) who bucks the DLC and national party is going to get beaten down. Sadly, the mantra of the leadership in the Democratic party has been that certain candidates are just too liberal to win. Well, no shit. If they're liberal and you don't support them, how the hell can they win?

This is the result of a corporatist decision to take control of the party via the Democratic Leadership Council and it has been very successful. To ignore this is to ignore the reality of national politics.

Your comment about contributions not casting votes is true only in the purest sense. In reality MONEY (contributions) buys air time and advertising and face time with important people who can make or break a candidate's ability to run. CONTRIBUTIONS allow a liberal to counter the attack ads that the DLC or even Republicans use to undermine a candidacy. President Obama got hundreds of millions of dollars in campaign contributions from individual donors, BUT the biggest percentage were from individual donors who were employed by the banking industry and other movers and shakers. Thus, the money he raised was a direct result of corporate efforts to control his agenda, and not from the average Joe or Jasmine who sent in their $200 hoping it might actually help to change the way things are done in Washington--does that ring any bells from the campaign rhetoric?

[Tom Rinaldo]

40. Americans, like most people, also respond to labels and branding

Americans on the whole self identify as being more conservative than we actually are on many issues, and political framing often guides our political behavior. We are acclimated to a political culture that has wired key political language and core concepts. Hence an appeal to adhere to "sound conservative values" rather than support an "experimental wide scale government expansion of powers" resonates with some voters who would otherwise support a progressive program for a specific problem. Time and time again this has been shown to be true.

When the full right wing noise machine (the one supporting the status quo on behalf of those who benefit most from it) cranks up - not just the rightist populist demagogues who play a well defined designated role within that machine, Americans start responding to change as if that meant gambling with the paycheck we use to pay our mortgage; as if everything that we hold dear suddenly stands at risk of being lost in a bold and misguided frenzy of government actions undertaken by out of touch politicians and faceless beurocrats who think they know better than the American people how we want to spend our precious dollors. That's when most Americans start behaving more "conservative" than their world view might actually warrent. That's what we face now. And that's what we have to confront with effective "noise" of our own. If we can not break through on this now it will be worse than failing to make needed progress, it will further political regression.

[depakid]

42. Democrats claim to be the party of science- and yet by and large fail to listen to the scientists

Like George Lakoff and Drew Westen, for example- who study and understand how to deal with the perception problems.

It's also important to note that American LIKE FIGHTERS who stand up for what they believe in, even if they may not share those views. That's one reason why Republicans kept getting re-elected despite promoting and passing profoundly unpopular policies- with disastrous consequences.

[Tom Rinaldo]

47. Much to agree with

Americans do like fighters, that's an important point. We are far into this health care reform process right now, beyond the point where we can focus on debating what we should be fighting for, the fight is already upon us, it must be engaged on this battle field now. I would not rally to Obama now had he caved on the need for a viable public option in his health care reform plans. That principle must be established as falling within the mainstream, it can not be negotiated away or it will be dead for another decade or more. If Obama will fight for that than I will fight for him, that's my bottom line. If we get that then we can build on that, if we cave on that we stand for very little.

Obama has a real fight on his hands right now. So far he has refused to back down on a set of core principles for health care reform that he has chosen to support, with a viable public option being one of them. Republicans are returning once again to the politics of fear. In hard economic times people are more suceptable to that. People are worried about losing what they already have more than they aspire now to gain more. You rightly mention Lakoff and Westen who Democrats can learn from. Republicans draw on the same hired guns who market every consumer trap ever manufactured. They know where hot buttons lie and they push all of them.

If this fight is framed as can we really afford to make a risky expensive dramatic and unproven change in times that are already difficult, we remain on the receiving end of attacks. Instead the question should be framed; can we afford to remain set on a course that is clearly driving us straight over a cliff? Also; who can trust the Republicans to ever deliver real health care reform after they stopped the last real effort to do so and then sat on their hands for eight years while in power and the problems only got worse? Republicans stand for kill reform now, forget about it later.

[Odin2005]

63. I think many on our side ignore Lakoff because his conclusions are disturbingly Orwellian.

Many of Lakoff's ideas violate many gut-level assumptions about truth and political discourse we, as liberals hold, either explicitly or implicitly. Notions about "framing the issues" certainly always made me feel uncomfortable, it always smacked of Orwellian-type manipulation.

[depakid]

65. Those of us on the left are often seeped in and stuck on the ideals of the Enlightenment

In other words- how think things should be -and how we wish they were.

Ironically, researchers like Lakoff and clinical psychologists like Westen are scientists- who deal in what is, based on the evidence and theories drawn from observation and analysis.

We may not like the conclusions regarding public discourse, persuasion and political campaigns- yet to ignore reality is to risk losing. As has repeatedly been the case on issue after issue- and campaign after campaign.

Even when a substantial majority agree with our positions.

[elleng]

75. Dear Tom, this is one of the best summaries I've read!

Lets get it out there, so more will understand how this stuff works!

[elleng]

73. "Conservative" and "quasi-conservative" are certasinly NOT moderate!

So if that's what people think our great moderate middle means, they're just wrong!

So we're foolishly quibbling about 'labels,' and the result has no value, imo, when at the moment we should do whatever we can to get the ears of the blue-dogs, and keep them away from repugs.

[JNelson6563]

43. Excellent post Tom.

Good to see you, thanks for posting your well reasoned thoughts. :hi:

Julie

[Tom Rinaldo]

48. Thanks Julie, good to see you too. :) n/t

[trayfoot]

46. I definitely support President Obama!

And if the Blue Dogs do not support him on healthcare, I believe they will feel the sting come election time.

[elleng]

77. That has to be made clear to them, NOW!

.

[mmonk]

49. You can still fight the rightwing in this country without accepting things which

may be wrong such as continuing some the abuses of the previous administration or protecting them from the sunshine of truth.

[Tom Rinaldo]

50. Of course.

But now is the time to turn back right wing claims that anytime Obama leans progressive in the slightest that he is engaging in radical social experiments outside of the mainstream of American politics. Because now is the time when they are trying to make exactly those charges stick.

[Bluenorthwest]

51. I'm about issues, not about personages

And frankly it is asking much to ask people to support a politician over their own family. The health care 'reform' is written to discriminate against GLBT families, even those in legally recognized domestic partnerships. I can not support the idea of your people treating my people like we are not fully human.
In my shoes, would you volunteer for unequal treatment, higher household rates, and unfair tax burdens just to please someone's dogma? Would you really?
Or would you be trying like mad to get the bill to be fair, to cover us like it will cover you, same same, no different treatment for minorities the church crowd does not like?

[Tom Rinaldo]

52. First off, this isn't really about supporting an individual politician

It's about supporting a movement by defending a President who is more sympathetic to our values than any who has held the oval office in several decades at least, against unfair and misleading attacks against both him and whatever progressive politics he is identified with. It does not mean rolling over and playing dead rather than standing for what you believe in. It does mean fighting right wing attempts to unfairly distort the real issues regarding health care reform, even while you fight for something better still than whatever Obama is backing. And sometimes that means supporting Obama when the right wing attempts to portray what Obama is supporting as inherently unamerican and dangerous for our society, even while continuing to state that Obama isn't going far enough rather than too far in his initiatives.

Edited to add this P.S.:

If the right wing succeeds in defining Obama's current position as too radical for America, where does that leave even more progressive policies? We need to mobilize to fight right wing propaganda against the health care reforms already before Congress now. That doesn't preclude our arguing for more.

[Bluenorthwest]

53. I can agree with that

but not with much of what is on this thread about "them" and "they". Many here see standing up for my own family as some betrayal of a politician. They speak in violent terms about what's going to happen to 'those people' on the left, which is often just code speak for GLBT people. "they" just won't shut up, you see. "They" are going to be roadkill. I do not stand with such divisive and prejudiced words. Forget it. If that is what supporting the President is, just forget it. I was raised by good Democrats, who taught me to treat everyone equally, and with common decency. I'm not going to be here calling names and invoking violent deaths for 'those people' who I do not agree with. Not my way.
That sort of so called support will not be coming from me, the kind that says 'they' are the problem, and 'those people' will face violent death if they do not shut up. Read this thread. Roadkill. "they' will be roadkill. Well, heterosexuals actually kill GLBT people for speaking out on a regular basis. So that sort of language I do not take lightly. It is like showing a noose at sunset. I'm not standing with that for anyone, ever. Minimize it if you will, and you will. You can afford to. Your side has the baseball bats and knives.

[Tom Rinaldo]

54. I don't minimize it. Thank you for the reply and for standing up for all human rights n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

55. Much thanks

I'd offer that much of the hyperbole of some who see themselves as leading supporters is part of what makes others respond in kind.

[HopeOverFear]

56. You're making waaaay too much sense, there, Tom

don't you know the extreme progressive motto? "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"? So, even if the GOP has absolutely NO PLAN for healthcare reform (and they don't) why, it's still better than the "half-assed" plan Obama has. So I'm going to side with the Republicans until I get what I really want! Meanwhile, Republicans would NEVER back a single payer plan, let alone a public option, but I don't care!


Make sense, don't it? :sarcasm:

[berni_mccoy]

57. Thank you. K&R.

[RBInMaine]

58. Why isn't the left organizing BIGTIME to support Obama/Dems on healthcare?

We need to forget single payer, focus on public option, organize like hell, and FRAME the debate. People want healthcare reform, but once again the corporate propaganda and the corporate media are winning this. If Americans lose this, then they have only themselves to blame. Didn't they learn anything from 8 years of Bush/Cheney ?!

[BlooInBloo]

59. Because many would truly rather have nothing.

This has been another episode of Simple Answers To Simple Questions.

[HopeOverFear]

60. Yep. the old "My way or the highway" attitude

[elleng]

78. For one thing, 'the left' won't have an easy time agreeing

about 'single payer' and 'public option.' A big problem in health care is confusion about the terms that are used, and I suspect this will be a major reason for unhappiness down the road.

[bertman]

80. Why would we progressives support a half-assed plan that only ramps up the ranks of

the insured under health insurance companies that are already gouging, killing, disabling Americans?

We were told that the reform package would be worked out in a transparent way, with input from all groups. But the interest groups who got invited had NO INTEREST in US or our ideas.

When we did organize and burned up the phones and emails with demands for representation we got JACK SHIT.

I voted for President Obama, worked my butt off to get him elected, sent him a lot of money, and now I'm not going to shut my mouth while I watch him and Rahm kick sand in our faces. They knew from the start that they were not going to give single payer advocates and public option advocates any real chance to be heard OR TO INFLUENCE THE DEBATE IN A MEANINGFUL WAY. That is still the case. And I'm still writing the President and my reps and Senators and telling them I am pissed.

If we don't try to bend the Democratic party toward the left they will only veer farther and farther right.

We already have one right-wing party and I don't particularly care to be an active member of the center party. My goal is to push the President farther and farther to the left. Shutting up and not saying my say IS supporting President Obama and America.

[bertman]

92. Too late to edit, but my last line should have said "NOT shutting up and saying my say IS . . .

[johnaries]

61. Ditto! He's not perfect, but he's pretty darn good!

He has done a lot of important things, and he is on track to do more. He is the exact opposite of Bush, despite what some may say. We need to support him in his battle against those who are the real problems.
K&R!

[Brentlive]

62. He has my support now!

Got to get as much done as possible. However, I may or may not give support in the 2012 primary. So far, I would say NO!!! Need a more liberal Dem.

[billyoc]

64. We're busy.

You do it.

[Thrill]

66. Just like they supported him on Gitmo?

The Democrats in Congress are cowards

[pattmarty]

67. At this stage in his presidency I am disappointed but still with him....

My opinion with the majorities he has in BOTH houses he should be more aggressive (as Bill Maher said, more like W). Again at this stage I would rate him only a little better than Clinton (and I was no Bill Clinton fan). He whole campaign was of hope and change, and with signing statements, we can't see who "visited" the White House, taking the Bush legal side in some important court cases, his "handling" of the financial mess, Afghanistan, bending over to the healthcare industries, plus the shit that takes time in any presidency to come out. I'm still behind him, but if this healthcare bill turns out to be a piece of shit, that'll pretty much be it for me. I'll support him ONLY on things I feel are important (most all "progressive" issues). He really has a chance to do some great things, and I hope I'm wrong.

[Piewhacket]

68. Tom, you just don't get it... its about getting health care reform, not Obama...

Besides, are you suddenly Obama's spokes person?

Obama was elected the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!
What the F* do you think that was? A game of Tiddlywinks?
AND he has been given 60!!! Senators and a large house majority.
WTF , this is not time for whining by him that he need more
men on the job. Its time to get ON the fucking job! Geez.

Sure he need support on this progressive issue of health care reform,
and he is getting it.

But Barack needs to kick some living &^^%$ shit out of some folks to
make sure health care reform happens. And if he can't deliver,
then he ain't the man he pretended he was last November when he
asked for and got progressive votes and cash.

And if he wants to continue in the high office to which he aspired,
he needs to get health care done right, THEN restore faith in the rule
of law with some accountability for war crimes, abuse of civil rights,
and financial crimes.

Or by god, some of us are going to look elsewhere for leaders who will
not trade away BIRTHRIGHTS, our TREASURY, and OUR CIVIL RIGHTS for a
goddamn mess of potage HE gets to eat.

We straight on this now? Great. Live long and prosper.

[elleng]

70. Hey Tom!

Wise as usual!

:hi:

EllenG

[McCamy Taylor]

74. But, but...they want to join the "Obama doesn't keep his promises" bandwagon.

Because Karl Rove can fool some of the people all the time.

[happydreams]

76. A crisis of near zero expectations. You are exactly what these corporadoes want.....

someone who expects little or nothing from the politicians and will jump on their bandwagon when a bone, however meager, is served up.

Pathetic.

PS. Reducing expectations was an element of the Reagan Doctrine. It seems that is one area where his doctrine seems to have worked.

[Amos Moses]

81. I gave him all the support I could on Nov. 4th.

After that, his obligations are to the American people, not the other way around.

None of us are under any obligation to deny what is going on right in front of us and think only happy thoughts.

[bvar22]

82. I support good policy....

...some of Obama's "Policies" are not so good.

Obama is a Centrist.
I'm a Liberal Democrat.
I will oppose Obama on many policies, support him on some others.

I will continue to strongly OPPOSE escalating the War in the Middle East, the permanent Occupation of Iraq (50,00 "residual" forces PLUS contractors), and INCREASES in Military Spending.
You can make all the emotional; appeals you like.
I won't be changing my position on the above.

[waiting for hope]

96. +1

[ProudDad]

84. I don't see ANY of my agenda

being enacted.

A few frills perhaps but nothing substantial.

So this "leftist" is ready to support him when his ACTIONS begin to resemble Progressive...not until then...

[grantcart]

86. excellent post

we are in the trenches now


Once a benefit is established it can be perfected.


Get it passed and single payer will be a couple of elections away.

[chascarrillo]

87. I'll make you a deal...

When Obama supports the rights of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders, I'll support him.

When Obama supports the rights of people convicted of no crime and held indefinitely without trial, I'll support him.

When Obama supports the right of the people to know who has access to the White House, I'll support him.

Until then, tough fucking shit.

[humbled_opinion]

88. Thanks for putting into print

the exact thoughts that I have been, frustratingly trying to express on this forum for months now.

Yes he is not perfect but you only need to imagine the theocracy of wingnut driven initiatives that Sarah Palin would have put in motion to drag this country back to the stone age and then you realize we really have something good here and we should give Obama lots of backing to get done what he needs to get done..

There is no doubt its not and easy task.

[debbierlus]

90. No. I compromised myself enough by voting for him and donating to his campaign, I won't be a pawn

In this charade as well....

Mandated health insurance with no equality of coverage and utter refusal to address the biggest unnecessary cost in the health system - THE INSURANCE COMPANIES

Don't tell me to walk in lockstep with this mandated corporate wetdream.

[inthebrain]

95. He's proposing MADATED private health insurance?

I recall warning people about that during the primaries. That his health care solution would wind up looking like what the Dems in MA pulled off.

A total give away to those crooks.

[Sebastian Doyle]

99. Actually, that's not what he ran on in the primaries at all

It is what Hillary ran on, and she was deservedly slammed for doing so. Obama's plan then (while not exactly HR 676) was at least better than mandatory Romneyism.

And if he wants my support, he had better never go there.

[grahamhgreen]

103. From HR 3200 - mandated HC

SEC. 401. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
SEC. 59B. TAX ON INDIVIDUALS WITHOUT ACCEPTABLE HEALTH CARE COVERAGE.
`(a) Tax Imposed- In the case of any individual who does not meet the requirements of subsection (d) at any time during the taxable year, there is hereby imposed a tax equal to 2.5 percent of the excess of--
`(1) the taxpayer's modified adjusted gross income for the taxable year, over
`(2) the amount of gross income specified in section 6012(a)(1) with respect to the taxpayer.

[GivePeaceAchance]

101. It's bemusing the folks that think there are better options we tried the option it ain't so nice..

And should they regain office they'll be even less nice next time. It's all up to the voters to make it work now.

[amborin]

102. good post!

I see so many ghastly and truly scary political events and stunts occurring on a daily basis. The whacko faction of the right wing is both insane and dangerous.

At this point, for me, no matter what Obama does or fails to do, he's got my total support!

[grahamhgreen]

104. "The left needs to support center right policies now!" Aint gonna happen...

[leftofthedial]

105. It's time for the left to help those who help the left.

That is NOT Obama.

[David Zephyr]

106. I agree. The jackals are surrounding him. But...

That said, Obama has flirted with "bi-partisanship" at his own peril.

The Republicans are not going to do anything except look for opportunities to create a "Waterloo" for him.

Karl Rove was smart enough to know that you keep your base happy and drive through your legislation with as few as 51 votes.

Obama, of his own doing, alienated and hurt his GLBT supporters, many of whom (I am not one) who are sitting on their hands. He should have stopped the prosecution of DADT until Congress changes the law.

Obama needs to go home to his base...and that would be the Left Wing Base of his party, not the Blue Dogs who are treacherous.

Yes, we need to support Obama now, but he needs to come home.

Obama should push his healthcare, government option program through Congress with as few a 51 votes if necessary and then move on.

His pandering to Republicans, his reaching out to homophobic bigots like Rick Warren, has not gotten him one fucking vote in Congress, has it?

Obama needs to remember who his friends are, who got him where he is and be their champion. When he does, he will have people working for him when the chips are down out of their heart.

[WatchWhatISay]

107. I agree and I do.

I expected some disappointment with some of his policies before he was sworn in. I have been more disappointed, more often, then I expected. All of that said, he is still a breath of fresh air compared to ANY republican president, and an ENORMOUS improvement over what we've just been through with the Cheney presidency, and I am grateful for that every day.