"President Obama has a couple of months to turn his failing administration around"

[Better Believe It]

Obama's Narrowing Window of Opportunity
by Dave Lindorff
September 2, 2009
Dave Lindorff is a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist. He is author of Marketplace Medicine: The Rise of the For-Profit Hospital Chains (BantamBooks, 1992), and his latest book "The Case for Impeachment" (St. Martin's Press, 2006)


The way I see it, President Obama has a couple of months to turn his failing administration around.

The war in Afghanistan is going south, and within a couple of weeks, Gen. Stanley McCrystal, Obama’s version of Lyndon Johnson’s General William Westmoreland, will be coming to him asking for more troops. Things are getting hairier in Iraq too.

His signature health care initiative is foundering, with Republicans working in lockstep to see to it that it fails.

Pressure is mounting for an honest probe into the criminality of the prior administration in its authorization and promotion of torture against captives--most of them innocent--in the Bush/Cheney "war" on terror.

The stock market, which by climbing back 50% from its collapse and the bottom it hit on March 9, gave the president a breather, is showing signs of exhaustion, and is likely to start sinking again, as investors realize that there is no end in sight for the recession in the real economy.

If all this continues into December, which is after all only a couple of months away, Congress will go into recess, and when it returns, it will be an election year, with all House seats up for grabs, and a third of the Senate also facing re-election. Republicans will be in an all-out campaign to reduce the Democratic majorities in both houses, with history on their side (in almost every off-year election, the party of new presidents lose support in both houses of Congress).

So, what's the president got to do?


To find out what the author thinks President Obama has to do, read on at:

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/02-12

[Teaser]

1. how long will DU let this fail parade go on?

.

[earth mom]

37. Quit living in denial. nt

[alcibiades_mystery]

40. I've stopped contributing

Somebody contributed on my behalf, but this site has essentially been taken over by people who want the administration to fail, mostly because they lost the primary. It's a disgrace.

[Splinter Cell]

55. PUMAS

It's that simple.

[JohnnyLib2]

79. What's a PUMA?

I haven't seen that anywhere but DU since late 2008.

[AspenRose]

83. "Party Unity My Ass"

Cleaned up version: People United Means Action

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_United_Means_Action

Nancy Pelosi mentioned them once the primaries were over last year

"Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi had stated that PUMAs and other Clinton supporters "have been less than gracious" for their continuing refusal to support Senator Obama."

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/08/14/pelosi-not-happy-with-some-clinton-backers/

And it's not just DU: They're all over the internets

http://www.puma08.com/
http://pumaparty.com/powerofpuma/

[karynnj]

109. This OP seems more "Nader" than PUMA - he really did not like Hillary in the primaries

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6288861
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=132&topic_id=6271428

He seems to dislike most Democrats - including Obama, Kerry, and Hillary Clinton. He has defended Nader. I don't get what the fun he gets out of posting every pessimistic article he can find.

[joeycola]

103. I wish the Dems would start acting like they have won!

[DailyGrind51]

110. When the President starts leading rather than being so accomodating!

[bluestateguy]

2. Hand wringer

nt

[scheming daemons]

3. LOL! Epic fail

[opihimoimoi]

4. Appears to be a PUB HIT PIECE...all neg...nothing Poz...a denigrating attack to make the Pres

look weak and floundering....

This at a Time when all hands to help the chosen Leader would really help

Instead we got a Leader trying his level best at 15% into his term ..finding burrs under his saddle and nasty tacks/nails in the horse path..all the while dodging flying cow chips...

Why so DIVISIVE? Thats how the GOP works...Divide and RULE....

"I'm a UNITER?"...remember that?

[LooseWilly]

78. Did you really seriously call Obama "chosen Leader"?

You do have some concept of the connotations, right?

Maybe not...

[opihimoimoi]

91. Yeah, you right...shoulda used elected..but thought this was better

Hw was chosen from all of the others...dats whot i wuz thinking..

:hi:

[demwing]

5. Obama Almighty

Obama: Dave Lindoff, you've been a Philadelphia-based journalist and columnist for 23 years now. Tell me, why do you think my administration is failing?
Dave Lindoff: Hey, man, I don't want any problems...
Obama: (messes his hair) Is it my hair, Dave ? Are my teeth not white enough? Or, like the great Niagra falls, is the bedrock of my life, eroding beneath me?
(sticking his face into the camera)
Obama: Eroding, EEEEroding, EEEEErodding.
Producer: Cut the feed. Cut to black.
Control Booth Operator: I'm on it.
Obama: I'm Barack Obama live from the Whitehouse. Back to you, fuckers!

[shireen]

6. my impression of the article from the excerpt ....

that's just silly!
The guy has been in office since January. That's a little over 7 months! And if he doesn't do this and do that and turn hay into gold in the next 2 months, he's going to fail. :eyes:

[Mojorabbit]

98. I think he is right about the market

I expect it to tank before the end of the year if commercial paper keeps defaulting and more prime loan customers default. Not that the market reflects the pain on the ground for regular people but...
Other than that time will tell.

[lamp_shade]

7. Ogawd.

[JaneQPublic]

8. One hour after the Inaugural Ceremony...

...people like him were referring to it as "The Failed Obama Presidency."

[ksoze]

9. I did not realize that we were now under one year term limts

But I sure wish we were back in 2000.

[dionysus]

10. take your sorry act over to free republic please.

and have a nice day :hi:

PS, your bitterness is nectar to my soul

[AspenRose]

84. "You cannot add this user to your buddy list because this user is already in your list"

:rofl:

[JTFrog]

11. .

[FrenchieCat]

12. Working overtime, hey?

Thank you so much....but if I were you, I'd just cut to the chase, and get on with the real message that you are delivering to us day in, day out:

ONE IS JUST LIKE THE OTHER

by BBI!

[MUAD_DIB]

13. I'm really really tired of all the "Obama is failing" bullshit.

Shut off FAUX, go take a walk and get some air.

[salguine]

105. Read the article. There's nothing in it that isn't completely true.

[liberal N proud]

14. Failing?

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

[Undercurrent]

15. Day after weary day

-- same sorry shit.

[Armstead]

16. You guys should actually read the damn article -- It makes good points

This is not a right-wing hit piece. And, unfortunately, the basic point that Obama has to take the reins soon or risk political disaster is also fairly accurate.

The author DOES make some positive suggestions. yes they are very dramatic and the "pragmatists" will undoubtedly howl "Oh nooo...he can;t do those tings. That's too radical."

In fact, I agree that the degree of action proposed is probably a bit too much. But the basic direction he suggests is not all that far off the mark of what is needed.

Some variation of this assertiveness would work, if Obama would corral the tiumid faction of Democrats, inject some nerve tonic, and accept that fact that 1/3 of the country will always be unappeasable and will consider any form of liberalism as "dangerous socialism."

[ProSense]

20. First damn point: "President Obama has a couple of months to turn his failing administration around"

Dave Lindorff is a major-league asshole.

[Armstead]

25. I would amend that to stay START turning it around...It's not do or die yet

Time does fly....And very soon we're going to be enmeshed in the mid terms.

And it DOES matter what happens with the rest of this year to set the stage for that. If Obama and the Democratic Congress continues to waffle and be weak and look like "neither fish nor fowl" it's going to very hard to generate the enthusiasm necessary to counteract the passion (and corporate money) of the Republicans

[ProSense]

38. "And it DOES matter what happens with the rest of this year " This article is garbage.

Most people realized the shape of the economy and the country when Obama took office. Most people were willing to wait at least two years, some longer, to begin seeing results. The reaction to the health care debate is not an indictment of Obama's Presidency.

This author is an utter and complete moron for leading with claim that Obama's Presidency is failing.

[DevonRex]

21. I don't read any fucking article that starts out with that line. It's what the RWers say.

[Armstead]

23. If you don't want to read it fine -- But if not, don't criticize what you don't read

[DevonRex]

28. I did critize what I read. The title says it all. Good lord. nt

[Hippo_Tron]

90. The author should have used a better title if he wants us to read it

That's one of the things they teach you in a journalism class. So either the author hasn't taken one or he only wants people to read the article that already agree with him. Either way, I'm not going to read the article and I'm going to criticize the author for having a crappy title.

[ChimpersMcSmirkers]

68. I stopped reading after the author used a prediction of the stock market as a piece of evidence

as to why Obama is failing.

[billh58]

87. No, it is

NOT a "right-wing hit piece," it is a Far-Left hit piece, and Lindorff has been writing them since before the election. Like most pols on the Far-Left, he makes his living by being "anti." Neither the political affiliation of a sitting POTUS, or his/her competency would make any difference, because without an enemy in the WH, wannabe "journalists" like Lindorff would be out of a job, and have absolutely nothing to say.

The Far-Left, like the Far-Right, is NOT a part of the solution -- they are very much the problem.

[curlyred]

17. you know the poster by the headline, don't you?

At least you're consistent.

[Zynx]

18. The notion that the only economic indicator that has turned around is the stock market is laughable.

No reasonable analysis of the data yields that conclusion.

[Ikonoklast]

19. Do I think some posters here are failtrolls with an anti-Democratic agenda?

You better believe it.

[DevonRex]

22. Hmm. Don't our political opponents say that Obama has failed? nt

[NYC_SKP]

24. This kind of dramatic flambait titled article makes some people Positively WET!!!

:rofl:

[Spazito]

26. Same shit, different day from this poster n/t

[joeycola]

27. I rather like his recommendation about the messed up health insurance proposals

that Congress is considering.

.............Second, he should declare the disfunctional and industry-polluted health reform plans in Congress dead and simply announce that by executive order, he is lowering the age for Medicare to 55, and is switching all Medicaid patients in the country over to Medicare (with the intention of lowering that age by five years ever year until all are covered), and shutting down the Medicaid program. He should then submit a bill to Congress establishing a government-owned insurance company, open to all, with no restrictions on its ability to set pricing and reimbursement rates or to negotiate discounts from hospitals, doctors and pharmacy companies. Or alternatively, the bill could enable anyone to simply buy into Medicare. He should tell Democrats and Republicans alike that any member of Congress who votes against that bill will not see any bill with her or his name on it get his signature in his remaining years in office. The government company would be phased out once Medicare covered everyone.
............

Congress could be expected to howl at the use of an executive order to expand Medicare, but the president could declare a national health emergency as justification, saying the recession had thrown too many people off of health insurance, and that as well, states were in dire fiscal shape and laying off workers because of the increased Medicaid burden.

Removing older workers from employers' health insurance plans would be a huge shot in the arm for struggling companies, as they are the biggest users of health care. Lifting the $400 billion cost of Medicare from state governments would free up money to prevent the layoff of state and local employees, which is threatening to stifle economic recovery.

Republicans can be expected to denounce the president for going after the Bush/Cheney administration on torture, but most Americans at this point are becoming aware of the damage that the policy has caused to the country's international reputation, and to the soldiers in the field...................

[Political Tiger]

29. Unless Obama appoints Dennis Kucinich as co-President we're doomed!

Doomed I tell ya!

[DevonRex]

30. Anybody else see a pattern with this poster? Or is it just me?

:shrug:

[joeycola]

31. The OP's pattern is get issues out that usually get voted down on DU as

far as U can see. Good for the OP.

[Baltoman991]

33. Bullshit!!!

The only pattern the thread starter has is to find as many OPINION pieces that slam Obama and bring them here and try to pass them off as fact.

There are no fucking issues. Just pure opinion of one asshole writer who fails at trying to be factual.

[ProSense]

39. Ah, suspected lunch guest. n/t

[Name removed]

47. Deleted message

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

[alcibiades_mystery]

42. The pattern is to bemoan having lost the primary

The OP hates Obama for making him look like a fool. He'll post anything and everything that confirms he was right in the primary in order to compensate for that. It's clear and ongoing. I'd wager the OP doesn't give a good goddamn about politics or people. It's pride he cares about, and nothing else.

[Jennicut]

32. I guess the author did not look at Reagan's presidency

He had a lower approval rating then Obama and was reelected. This "fail" bs is hilarious....we only give them 7 or 8 months now? At that rate half the Presidents we have would have been thrown out. It takes 4 years people...4 years to evaluate a President's term. If you wanna go early and say two then go ahead. But many Presidents turned thigns around in the second two years of their terms. The author also failed to mention how weak the Rethug party is...running around 20% approval rating. The hysteria has to stop.

[bain_sidhe]

34. AARRGGHHH! Did any of you actually read the article????

For those of you possessing that weird genetic abnormality that prevents you from clicking on the link, the following paragraph is among the author's prescriptions:

Second, he should declare the disfunctional and industry-polluted health reform plans in Congress dead and simply announce that by executive order, he is lowering the age for Medicare to 55, and is switching all Medicaid patients in the country over to Medicare (with the intention of lowering that age by five years ever year until all are covered), and shutting down the Medicaid program. He should then submit a bill to Congress establishing a government-owned insurance company, open to all, with no restrictions on its ability to set pricing and reimbursement rates or to negotiate discounts from hospitals, doctors and pharmacy companies. Or alternatively, the bill could enable anyone to simply buy into Medicare. He should tell Democrats and Republicans alike that any member of Congress who votes against that bill will not see any bill with her or his name on it get his signature in his remaining years in office. The government company would be phased out once Medicare covered everyone.

Come on people! Look at the website in the link! It's commondreams! Hardly a bastion of conservatism!

Sheesh. :eyes:

[polichick]

85. That's quite an alternative - the prez would be putting principles on the line...

Sure would be an interesting turn of events!

[emulatorloo]

35. "commondreams?" Nuff said, they don't write positive things about Democrats

[salguine]

106. I don't recall that their purpose is specifically to write positive things about Democrats.

[Hutzpa]

36. Kick and Unrec

another knee jerkass journalist.

[Better BeLIEve Bull]

41. He will actually have about 8 years...

[Number23]

80. Best User Name of 2009!!

:rofl:

[MH1]

43. I recognize the author's name, therefore will not bother with the article

Zero credibility.

[billh58]

45. This "author"

is yet another member of the Far-Left, "anti-everything," camp. They have all but killed other formerly strong Democratic websites with their doomsday rants, and radical "opinions-for-profit." It's telling that these "political experts" almost never criticize the Republicans for opposing President Obama's proposals at every turn, or show the same outrage at the "birthers," or the phony disruptions at Town Hall meetings. Why is that, one wonders?

Other posters on this thread are exactly correct: these anti-Obama, anti-Democratic, Far-Left, diatribes are a carry-over from the Primaries, and are designed to further splinter the Democratic Party. It appears that they will only be satisfied when some Third-Party presidential nominee who parrots their fringe views loses big-time, and allows the Republican neoconservatives to regain control of our government for the foreseeable future. Job security for the "anti" crowd?

The Republicans may have their fair-share of Far-Right crazies, but we Democrats have been infiltrated by a fifth-column of Far-Left wing-nuts, and DLC neocons. It's little wonder that we Democrats are accused of eating our young: we are our own worst enemies when we allow both the Far-Left, AND the Far-Right to speak for (and steal votes from) us.

[Kaleko]

59. Seconded.

And a belated welcome to DU!

:hi:

[billh58]

61. Thanks!

And glad to be here...;-)

[Number23]

81. Fannnnn-tastic!

:thumbsup: :applause: :thumbsup:

[and-justice-for-all]

44. ....

:eyes:

[butterfly77]

46. Wrong...

[leftofthedial]

48. I think he's already lost millions of progressives.

It shows in his poll numbers.

[Jennicut]

49. Depends on which poll....the one from CNN I posted last night said it was independents

that pulled the #'s down and Dems were still strong. All polls can be manipulated to given the answer someone wants which is why I don't trust many of them. Here is the poll: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8620079&mesg_id=8620079

[leftofthedial]

50. most real progressives are becoming independents these days.

the days when independent meant "I'll almost always vote repuke" are fading fast. The "democrats" have "centered" themselves right into the middle of that demographic.

[Jennicut]

53. That is the first time I ever heard indies thought of as mostly progessives

I will do some research on it...but the independents in that poll listed the deficit as one of their main concerns, I doubt those indies are very liberal. Sounds more like they are centrist types.

[Spazito]

60. You are right, it was repubs turned independents....

which was the cause of the great increase in the precentage of independents recently, certainly prior to the recent election. Actually, there is a poll on this where:

In 2000, the public declared they were the following:

Democrats 33%

Republicans 28%

Independents 30%

In 2009, the declared they were the following:

Democrats 35%

Republicans 23%

Independents 36%

It seems the republicans lost 5% and Independents gained 6% while the Democrats gained 2%

It certainly seems to say the moved to Independents came mostly from republicans.

http://people-press.org/party-identification-trend/

[leftofthedial]

70. not what I said.

I said most real progressives no longer identify as "democrat" because that party has become so right-of-center and pro-corporate.

That's not at all the same thing as saying most independents are progressive.

[billh58]

75. Then why are you

not posting on "Progressives Underground?"

[leftofthedial]

94. It is my fervent hope that the Democratic Party will rise from the dead.

[billh58]

69. Could you please

define the term "real Progressive" (or even just "Progressive") for those of us who are Liberal Democrats?

[leftofthedial]

71. left of, say, Nixon.

[billh58]

74. That could describe

almost any sane person. I'll reword my question: how is a "Progressive" different from a Liberal Democrat of the New Deal school of politics?

[leftofthedial]

95. Not different,

but vastly different from the DLC, blue-dog, neo-democrats who infest the national party.

[treestar]

51. A more ludicrious title I have never seen

A title that makes you not want to read.

[Cha]

52. So say fuckheads.

[BlueIdaho]

54. Dude - there is no spoon... nt.

[hollowdweller]

56. During the primaries

People here kept going on about how Obama's campaign was floundering and he needed to do this or that.

He was dropping in the polls then he'd do something and he'd be right up on top of it again.

I think Obama is doing decent as a president. I'm not sure congress is doing everything they can to help him though, but I think he'll be fine.

One thing you can say about the GOP is they are fairly lock step. So they sort of work to make their presidents LOOK like decisive leaders even when they aren't. The democrats not so much unfortunately.

[Better Believe It]

57. Does anyone object to these two proposals and if so why?

First, he needs to announce a bold peace initiative in Afghanistan. He should reject the call for more troops, and instead call for a regional peace conference--one that would include all the neighborhing countries around Afghanistan, and most significantly, the Taliban. At such a conference, he should arrange for a new government of national unity that includes the Taliban, and then get the hell out of the country. Obama can declare victory if he wants, but the main thing is to get out. Ditto for Iraq, where the US is still viewed as an occupier and is going to be forced out eventually. There is no reason to stay another day.

Second, he should declare the disfunctional and industry-polluted health reform plans in Congress dead and simply announce that by executive order, he is lowering the age for Medicare to 55, and is switching all Medicaid patients in the country over to Medicare (with the intention of lowering that age by five years ever year until all are covered), and shutting down the Medicaid program. He should then submit a bill to Congress establishing a government-owned insurance company, open to all, with no restrictions on its ability to set pricing and reimbursement rates or to negotiate discounts from hospitals, doctors and pharmacy companies. Or alternatively, the bill could enable anyone to simply buy into Medicare. He should tell Democrats and Republicans alike that any member of Congress who votes against that bill will not see any bill with her or his name on it get his signature in his remaining years in office. The government company would be phased out once Medicare covered everyone.

[andym]

76. Second suggestion is not possible

The second suggestion is as far as I understand it not possible. Medicare eligibility is not under executive control but mandated by law. Changing the law requires an act of Congress. Otherwise, he could just make everyone eligible for Medicare, which would be better than the article's idea.

The first suggestion of an Afghanistan conference is interesting. The major reason not to do it, is that the Taliban seem to have trouble keeping their agreements, at least in Pakistan. Their recent actions (before Pakistan interceded) in the Swat valley were troubling. The Afghani Taliban are under different leadership, but share quite a bit of common cause with their Pakistani brethren.

[Better Believe It]

82. If that's the case President Obama should propose legislation to expand Medicare.

And instead of employers giving billions to the health insurance crooks to cover older employees, that money could go into the Medicare fund.

[TheKentuckian]

104. I object to both on grounds

that the Executive Order idea makes a mockery of our entire system and adds to the insanely dangerous precedent of the Imperial Presidency. I agree with the spirit of the concept but have grave reservations about the methodology. Lack of perseverance, determination, grit, and long term approach sets us up for a far greater fall than any hamfisted gain. The same system that slows and frustrates the best of ideas allows poison from being quickly shoved down our collective throats.

The Afghan peace conference idea is just sounds good/feels good nonsense with some very questionable nation building tactics of installing yet another government on top of people. This is nothing but a magic wand solution to a big ass and real world problem. We are there now so we must determine what the problems are, what our range of effective solutions are, make it happen hell and high water, and get the fuck out Dodge. We must have concrete objectives and objective water marks to determine achievement. If we cannot do that then it is time to rotate home. We cannot attempt to use our military to achieve ethereal and political objectives. If there are targets to be hit or areas to secure we can accomplish that but we cannot give democracy at the end of gun barrels or change the trajectory of thousands of years of social development with a carefully targeted load of munitions.

We are there supposedly for our own security interests and those must be identified with a prescription and description of how force will be effective in meeting those goals. If it is determined that there is no reasonable hope of achieving the objectives or that achieving the objectives will not affect then we have to come home and chalk it however it must be chalked. By that same token if there are achievable objectives that will reduce or destroy a credible threat then we cannot shy away from the duty to protect our country.

[Generic Brad]

58. Do you think the president is failing?

Don't hide behind some else's opinions. Just come out and say what you think.

If you think he is failing, how would you define success for him? Throw us a bone here.

[inna]

62. i can't believe the barrage of invective and attacks directed at the OP

in this thread.

it's just sad.

attack ideas, not the posters; this is the Democratic Underground, not the DLC Bully Playground.

[Name removed]

64. Deleted message

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

[Amos Moses]

67. racist

[inna]

72. thanks for illustrating my point.

[Baltoman991]

65. I for one

am attacking the ideas of the poster who continues to bring this bullshit to this board on a daily basis.

Day after day, searching the nets high and low to find any negative article he can about Obama.

So forgive me if I don't follow your advice.

[JeffR]

73. What's actually rather sad is the OP's relentless stream of

"oh-so-disinterested" pessimism about all things Obama, and if you've failed to pick up on that, try the search function. It will tell you all you need to know to understand why the "invective and attacks" - or as we in the rational world like to describe it, vehement disagreement - are more than warranted.

I for one have some vigorous differences with some of this administration's policies, beginning squarely with Afghanistan, and I don't begrudge anyone the right to his or her opinions, but the OP has become something of a cartoon character, and not a lovable one by any stretch.

[Mari333]

86. LOT of people in denial.

lot of people who are DINOs and prefer moderate republicanism. much like many politicians, just because one calls themself a democrat doesnt mean they dont espouse republican behaviour. thats DLC dems for you.

[salguine]

107. Get used to it. Increasingly, anyone whose lips aren't pressed to

the President's ass 24/7 is usually painted as a troll, a freeper, or worse.

[akbacchus_BC]

63. What would you have done different?

[Amos Moses]

66. K&R

[johnaries]

77. WTH has happened to Common Dreams?

Why do they keep posting these anti-Obama hit pieces that are full of rhetoric and almost no facts. And the few facts they contain are completed twisted.

I have given up on them.

[Hippo_Tron]

89. Common Dreams and CounterPunch have never liked Democrats

[Better Believe It]

92. Is that why they publish articles by Senators Feingold, Sanders and other progressive leaders?

What kind of nonsense are you peddling? Just because you don't agree with all of the articles that appear on Common Dreams and Counterpunch doesn't mean you should smear them.

I don't agree with all of their articles and writers either but I'm sure not going to swiftboat or teabag them.

Can you name a website or publication that only publishes writers and articles that you agree with?

[johnaries]

93. You should reply to me.

I'll admit, I don't usually read Common Creams... oops, my Freudian slip is showing!...I mean Common Dreams, except when it's referenced here in DU. So I'm certainly not an expert on the "average" article they print.

But lately it seems that the only times that CD is refernced is when they do an article that is very low on facts but high on rhetoric. And they seem to delight in bashing the Obama Administration. Not with facts, but with spin and rhetoric.

Personally, one of the things that I liked about most Progressive sites was that we had plenty of facts to back up our claims. Has it actually come to the point where Progresives must rely on the same spin tactics that RW Radicals use in order to further a particular agenda?

I'm sorry, but that runs contrary to everything I believe as a Progressive.

If we adopt RW techniques, then we are no better than them.

I will reject Progressive brainwashing just as quickly as I reject Conservative brainwashing.

Because by definition, it is anti-Progressive.

So, all of you Obama-bashers - please look at some perspective, and understand that there is such a thing as "momentum" in politics and policy. After the last 8 years it is going to take a long time to undo that damage. And Obama is also dealing with damage that has been accumulating for much, much longer.

It would be nice if there were a magic wand that Obama could wave and fix everything. But that magic wand doesn't exist.

Finally, let me remind each of you that Obama never promised he would fix things on his own. Obama always said "we". that means you. So, are you going to sit on your lazy ass and expect O to do everything for you (oh, hey I voted - what more do you want from me?), or are you going to accept his challenge to get off your ass and actually DO something. Obama never said "He" was the one we were waiting for. He said "WE" are the ones we have been waiting for!

He quoted that old Native American axiom for a reason. Stop complaining until you get off your freaking lazy ass and DO something! The time is NOW! And whining that someone else didn't do your job for you is simply....

Pathetic!

WE are the ones we have been waiting for. And if you beleive that the Public Option is failing, - it's YOUR Fault!

Don't you dare accuse Obama of abandoning the Public Option. If he does, it's because we - YOU - didn't work hard enough to push it through. Don't blame Obama for your own faults. He can only work with what we can give him.

To summarize: for all of you Obama bashers, his hands are tied because you decided to zip-tie them and castrate him. Granted, after GWB I would be a little skepical, too. But for those who compare Obama to GWB - please look at the facts: Obama is the anti-GWB in policy decisions despite your anti-Obama spin. You are no better than your Republican counter-parts.

[Better Believe It]

96. "Public Option is failing, - it's YOUR Fault!" That's called passing the buck.

The Congress and President aren't responsible for bad policies and failures .... unless the Republicans are running the White House and Congress.

Of course, perhaps the Republicans are still running Congress and the White House .... there is that.

[Baltoman991]

99. Or how about this

Could it be YOU trying to pass off bullshit here as fact? How many articles have you found us stating the President is ready to kill the public option only to be shown to be pure bullshit?

It's you and the rest of the haters who can't get past your hatred for the man and will dance wildly in the streets should he fail. PATHETIC.

[Hippo_Tron]

88. I don't read articles with that kind of bias in the headline

"Failing" my ass...

[salguine]

108. How brave of you. Intellectual curiosity is for commies and socialists. If you work hard enough,

you can be this guy:

[dionysus]

97. why is this piece of shit kicked back up?

[Amos Moses]

100. kick

[dionysus]

102. no surprise you'd kick this piece of crap up.

[rvablue]

101. The folks at Common Dreams make me sad. Do and say anything for a few mouse clicks

driven by fauxrage.