Are we going to see another bait and switch by Democrats this election?

[JDPriestly]

So, I'm a veteran grass-roots Democratic campaigner who is really fed up with Congress -- mostly with Harry Reid's Senate.

It occurred to me, that the following chart comparing the Republicans' and Democrats' tax proposals would be great on a hand-out to voters. At the top, you could simply ask the question, which tax plan do you want?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9098853
Yes, that chart looks really good -- for me and my neighbors.

I really like it. It's almost enough to get me out to work for Democrats this Fall.

Problem is that I fear another bait and switch. I got burned by the Democrats' luring me to work for them based on false promises on a number of issues in 2008. I don't want to go through that disappointment again.

For example, in 2008, I told a lot of seniors around my age about Obama's plan for funding Social Security by raising payroll taxes on those earning over $250,000 per year for example. They liked it.

As we all know, after Obama got elected, instead of sticking to his promises in 2008 on covering future Social Security shortfalls, Obama appointed the Cat Food Commission. In my view, that is just a way for Obama to avoid taking responsibility for breaking his promises to seniors. How cowardly!

And that is not the only issue on which we were handed the old bait and switch routine in 2008.

I think the only important promise that was kept was passage of the Lilly Ledbetter bill. After that, the voters were forgotten. Making sure Wall Street got to keep its bonuses was the top priority, not the other 99.9% of the population.

Obama's health care insurance bill doesn't cut costs -- as all who received notices of higher insurance premiums since it was passed are well aware. Just what the effects on Medicare will be are still unknowable. Then there is Iraq. Obama claims we are "out," but as far as I am concerned, as long as we are feeding, clothing and housing 50,000 troops there, we are still "in."

I was sitting with a group of women this morning. 2/5 of them are renters. 1/5 is OK in a very old, inadequate house with a low mortgage. The 2/5 living in decent housing with a mortgage are facing foreclosure. Democrats in Congress have done nothing, nada, nichts, rien to help my neighbors keep their houses. In 2008, I took it upon myself to assure voters that Democrats would not give in to the banks as Bush did. I wish I could brag to my neighbors about how Obama saved their homes, but ........

And Democrats have done even less to help my neighbors keep their jobs.

So, thinking back on the 2008 campaign, I feel that Obama and the Democrats in Congress made me look like a liar.

How can I go out and talk to my neighbors about voting when all they remember is that I lied to them last time?

I repeat: Many of my neighbors are facing foreclosure. Some have lost their jobs. Many more fear losing their homes and jobs. And Democrats in Congress have voted to allow the banks to walk off with all the money -- and the houses -- and Democrats have done nothing about stopping the exportation of my neighbors' jobs.

So, with regard to the budget proposal that was printed in the Washington Post, I want to know BEFORE I PUT MY REPUTATION AND THE TRUST OF MY NEIGHBORS ON THE LINE, before I go out and start campaigning to get out the vote for Democrats this Fall -- HOW MANY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS PROMISE TO VOTE YES FOR THE DEMOCRATIC TAX PLAN THAT IS SET FORTH IN THE WASHINGTON POST?

Before I talk to my neighbors, I want some assurances that the Democrats in Congress will work for my neighbors and not for their fat cat campaign donors.

I refuse to be part of another bait and switch election campaign.

I refuse to be a pawn in a political chess game in which my only function is to be sacrificed to save very wealthy kings.

This time, before I campaign, I want something I can rely on, like the signatures of enough Democrats in Congress to actually pass the proposed tax plan -- on the dotted line.

And don't tell me the Republicans are worse. That's not the issue. I don't want my political party to tell me lies, and I don't want to lie to my friends or neighbors. At my level, politics is about community, about friends, not about power.

[Kolesar]

1. I am happy with the new EPA auto efficiency standards,

and that EPA is going to regulate CO2 if Congress does not. I am happy with the 2/3 reduction in troops from Iraq--all in a year.

I didn't read the rest of your post. Short attention span

[JDPriestly]

2. The EPA regulation of CO2 is great, but it's not a talking issue.

If you have a short attention span, then you should understand better than anyone why I am disappointed in the Obama administration's record. Most people have short attention spans. And we in the Democratic Party have to compete for just a couple of minutes of voters' attention. But Democrats in Congress have not given us the exciting images and issues with which we can win that competition.

Do you actually go out and campaign and talk to voters?

Because I did, and unless you do, you may not understand where I am coming from.

The Get Out the Vote effort prior to elections is important. And I am usually very good at it. But this year, I can't do it, and I am very sad about that, but I don't have anything to campaign with.

I can't brag about EPA regulations to voters. I understand what you are talking about, but it isn't a good campaign issue, because it doesn't affect voters in a way they can feel. It is irrelevant to most people's lives.

The 2/3 reduction of troops is better than no reduction -- but again, it isn't something you can talk about with excitement to voters.

I want something I can tell voters that will get them to the polls. I want, specifically, written pledges from individual Democrats who are in Congress and running for Congress agreeing to actually vote for the tax plan that was presented as the Democratic plan in the Washington Post. That would be a big help to the grass roots out there campaigning.

If we had that, we could take the WP chart and show it to voters. It would have a visual impact that is strong and communicates what Democrats are supposed to be about.

I do not want to go out and just campaign for vague promises.

The EPA regs are a good deed.

But the BP fiasco is what voters are focused on. And I really can't go out and talk to my neighbors about what a great job Obama and the Democrats did in handling that oil spill -- because they really didn't do a good job and still aren't.

[LWolf]

6. That's what Democratic candidates are counting on. A short attention span. nt

[3waygeek]

3. Only if they win...

If the Rethugs regain control of one or both houses, the Dems won't be in a position to provide any bait.

[JDPriestly]

4. 3waygeek

Pretend you are talking to an undecided voter today. That voter is middle class and possibly facing foreclosure, may be out of work or may fear being out of work.

What would you say to that voter to persuade the voter to vote Democratic in November?

What have Democrats done that would "hook" the attention of the average relatively disinterested, uninformed potential voter out there? How do you grab the imagination of your neighbor so that person will go to the polls and vote for a Democrat in November?

That's my beef. The Democrats in Congress and the Obama administration have not given us accomplishments that will sway Americans to vote for them. What is more, they promised things in 2008 (and we activists got out the vote based on those promises) and then broke their promises.

Ed Schultz and others are asking us to get out the vote this November. But how can we? What can we say to voters?

I'm usually a very enthusiastic campaigner. I don't want to see Republicans elected, but most of my neighbors just want to keep their jobs and houses and have low taxes and Social Security when they retire. What can I say to them to encourage them to vote Democratic in November?

I am genuinely at a loss. The tax plan chart looks like a good hand-out, but if it is just more BS that Conservadems won't vote for or support, I'm not going to go out and talk about it with my neighbors. The Democratic Party leaders have to help us activists out on this.

[BzaDem]

5. "And don't tell me the Republicans are worse."

Sometimes the truth is hard to hear. No one ever said it would be easy. Putting one's finger's in one's ears and singing "la la la don't tell me inconvenient information" does not change the truth.

[LWolf]

7. That republicans are worse is a given that's already understood.

It's not a talking point, an excuse, or an authentic response to the OP's post, or something on which to build a good conversation.

[USArmyParatrooper]

8. How about the fact that Obama's actions on Iraq have been totally consisent with his campaign?

Is that an authentic response? How about if I point out the OP's claim that Obama said we're "out" of Iraq is a blatant lie?

[LWolf]

9. Sort of consistent with his campaign.

While he did present himself as a hawk, and as "pro" war on terror, he ran on the "was against the war from the beginning" shit too, because he said something unsupported in a 2004 speech before he got to Congress.

Even though he voted to fund the war consistently until the spring of '08 when the primary wars were hot and heavy.

We obviously aren't "out of Iraq." I think it can be legitimately argued that Obama's rhetoric about "turning the page" is just that...rhetoric. We still have 50,000 troops there. It's not over. They've just been re-labeled to fit his time line.

I also think that it's not a blatant lie to interpret a president's words, when those words are vague enough to be open to multiple interpretations.

[USArmyParatrooper]

11. Sorry, as much as you want him to be "sort of" consistent, he was EXACTLY consistent

- The belief that defunding troops already in theater is the wrong way to end a war does NOT = "supporting" the war

- President Obama never said or implied we were "out" of Iraq. Not even close.

- President Obama has consistently said "we need to be as careful getting out as we were careless going in", which means doing a phased withdraw. We are exactly at the point he said we would be at this point.

- We ARE turning the page as things have dramatically changed. I was there all of last year and personally witnessed the changes taking place in preparation for a withdraw. We are no longer performing combat missions, we've converted FOBs into JSSs - which is a precursor to turning them completely over to the Iraqi military.

[JDPriestly]

16. USArmyParatrooper -- are you out there talking to voters?

What are you saying to them? How do they respond to your statements on the war?

It's not that I disagree with you. It's that the things you are saying don't move voters.

What have Democrats done that can be explained to voters without ifs, buts, and we're "out" more than we were but not entirely, well we are sort of "out," that is to say we are not as "in" as we were 18 months ago. Could you say that with a straight face to a voter you have never seen before?

[USArmyParatrooper]

17. That all depends.

If I'm dealing with people who are only receptive to negative input when it comes to President Obama then there is nothing I can say. That would include almost all Republicans and some self-proclaimed Democrats on political blogs.

If I explain the Iraq transformation in the deliberately clumsy way you just did then it doesn't matter who I'm talking to.

But if I'm talking to someone who's open minded I simply explain that we have a responsibility to Iraqi forces and the Iraqi people not leave them high and dry with an immediate and irresponsible mass exodus. That even when one US army brigade replaces another there is a transition period, called a "RIP/TOA" which stands for Relief in Place/Transfer of Authority.

I then go on to explain the details of the transfer of authority, which not only includes the turn over of US FOBs to the Iraqis but even scaling down our own operations and transferring that responsibility Iraqi forces (see the latest status of forces agreement).

Barack Obama is right on schedule - in fact, he's gone further than he's already promised.

http://www.barackobama.com/pdf/issues/Fact_Sheet_Defense_FINAL.pdf

Strategy for Ending the War and Achieving Success in Iraq: In 2002, as Washington lined up for war,
Barack Obama had the judgment and courage to oppose it. Our heroic American troops have found the right
tactics to contain violence, but we still have the wrong strategy. Reducing our troop presence in Iraq will apply
real pressure on the Iraqi government to make necessary political accommodations, while enabling us to address
other challenges, like Afghanistan. Immediately upon taking office, Obama will give his military commanders
a new mission in Iraq: ending the war. The redeployment of our troops will be responsible and phased, directed
by commanders on the ground and done in consultation with the Iraqi government. A residual force will remain
in Iraq and in the region to conduct targeted counter-terrorism missions and to protect American diplomatic and
civilian personnel. If Iraqis take significant steps toward creating nonsectarian security forces, then American
forces will help train those forces. Obama will not build permanent bases in Iraq. During our redeployment,
Obama will launch aggressive initiatives to press for reconciliation within Iraq, to achieve a new regional
compact on stability in the Middle East, and to address Iraq's humanitarian crisis.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/promise/126/begin-removing-combat-brigades-from-iraq/

Begin removing combat brigades from Iraq

And last, but not least.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/08/31/remarks-president-address-nation-end-combat-operations-iraq

Going forward, a transitional force of U.S. troops will remain in Iraq with a different mission: advising and assisting Iraq’s Security Forces, supporting Iraqi troops in targeted counterterrorism missions, and protecting our civilians. Consistent with our agreement with the Iraqi government, all U.S. troops will leave by the end of next year.

Sorry I didn't follow your, "we're "out" more than we were but not entirely, well we are sort of "out," that is to say we are not as "in" as we were 18 months ago" narrative.

[JDPriestly]

20. Many of my friends and neighbors are being foreclosed --losing their homes.

That includes a number of people who have been successful in running their own small businesses, employing people, creating jobs and economically valuable activity. How do I explain to them that Obama owes this responsibility to the Iraqi people to take care of the Iraqi people but doesn't owe any responsibility to take care of my friends, their homes and businesses?

We have surely spent a long enough time in Iraq. By now, the Iraqi people should be able to govern and police themselves.

I agree that we should not leave Iraq in disarray, but I also think that the Iraqis should have taken a lot more responsibility for seeing to it that their own society is tolerant. They have to nurture their own democracy.

[USArmyParatrooper]

22. I submit that you're probably the wrong person to be talking to voters

"How do I explain to them that Obama owes this responsibility to the Iraqi people to take care of the Iraqi people but doesn't owe any responsibility to take care of my friends, their homes and businesses?"

Why would you explain something so ridiculous and untrue? That's a false dichotomy. How does one responsibility negate the other? If you can't figure out what to say to voters perhaps you shouldn't be talking to them. Personally, I don't have the time to go knocking on doors but I have no problem engaging people about Democrats and Barack Obama.

We have surely spent a long enough time in Iraq. By now, the Iraqi people should be able to govern and police themselves.

How much time have you spent in Iraq working with Iraqi forces to form this opinion? We didn't even begin the transition of authority until President Obama was in office.

but I also think that the Iraqis should have taken a lot more responsibility for seeing to it that their own society is tolerant. They have to nurture their own democracy.

This I fully agree with. It's time for them to take charge. It's simply a disagreement about whether we perform a mass exodus a perform a proper RIP/TOA with Iraqi forces.

[JDPriestly]

25. My response, USArmyParatroopper

"How do I explain to them that Obama owes this responsibility to the Iraqi people to take care of the Iraqi people but doesn't owe any responsibility to take care of my friends, their homes and businesses?"

"Why would you explain something so ridiculous and untrue? That's a false dichotomy. How does one responsibility negate the other? If you can't figure out what to say to voters perhaps you shouldn't be talking to them. Personally, I don't have the time to go knocking on doors but I have no problem engaging people about Democrats and Barack Obama."

The reason I compare what we are spending to "help" the Iraqis to what we are doing here for troubled homeowners is that the people I would normally be talking to are troubled homeowners. Our government is spending NO money to help my friends and neighbors keep their homes, but a lot to help the banks, and a lot to help, or some would say to meddle in the affairs of, Iraqis.

Our government claims to have too little money to invest in helping Americans, too little for education, too little for homeowners, too little to pay Social Security to seniors, yet it is spending billions in Iraq. Hard to get people to go out and vote Democratic on that record.

Television commentators have asked why activist Democrats are not excited. I am one of those activist Democrats. In fact, I volunteered to work for a candidate and then got cold feet as I tried to think of what in the world I would actually say to voters.

I feel really bad about feeling as I do because I know that a Republican victory would be a disaster. But, as I explained in my post, I feel embarrassed to go out. I don't want to lie to voters. That actually sets people up to resent Democrats later on.

But what are the sound bites that we can use in the few seconds we get when we knock on doors or talk to voters in public places?

Just -- we're better than Republicans. Or -- they messed things up and now we have to clean up -- sounds really juvenile. It's not persuasive.

I'm wishing that the higher-ups in the party would stop and think about the problem that those of us who do make time to talk to ordinary voters are having this year. They did absolutely nothing that we can brag about to our neighbors. Nothing.

The couple of things they managed to put together, like health care reform, won't be of widespread benefit for years -- much too long for the short attention spans that ordinary people have. After all, the latest Brad Pitt headline and the latest football scores are far more important to average voters.

Nerdy answers will not do. I'm really at a loss. DUers have kindly suggested a lot of things, but they are obviously not very experienced at actually knocking on doors because they don't seem to understand that you have to have some issue that puts your candidate(s) in a positive light. I honestly can't think of any this year.

[LWolf]

34. Dream on. nt

[JDPriestly]

15. You may be right, but does that do anything for the father I met while

knocking on doors in 2008 who told me that his daughter had just come back from Iraq and that we had to get out. He was in tears. That father wanted ALL our soldiers out. He had seen the damage that the war had done to his daughter. How can I tell him: Well, Obama pulled all but 50,000 troops out of Iraq. How can I go back and knock on his door this year?

If you don't actually knock on doors and talk to voters, then you won't understand what I am talking about. And if you haven't worked on a get out the vote campaign and feel that you are happy with Obama and can campaign on the record of the Democrats thus far, then I urge you to get out there. Start talking to voters -- one on one.

[JDPriestly]

12. I know the Republicans are worse. I know they have nixed everything.

That makes me want to vote for Democrats, but it isn't an argument I can use in talking to voters. I'm looking for what I can say to voters. The past 18 months of the Obama administration haven't given me much to say that is good. I'm hoping someone else can think of something really persuasive.

I wish that our Democratic representatives and senators in Congress would think more about what they are doing that grassroots active Democrats can use in talking to voters. All the gibberish about complicated policy works for someone like me who can read the statutes and will take the time to do it on important issues, but what can I say to a voter in the few seconds that voter will spend with me? That's where the Democrats in Congress have let us down.

[BzaDem]

19. HCR.

HCR was the biggest progressive social welfare achievement since the 1960s. Personally, this is obvious enough to me (having spent a lot of time learning about the bill's specific provisions and comparing them to the pre-bill status quo) that any progressive who understands what the bill actually does and still believes it to be bad legislation is beyond help or persuasion.

If you are in agreement about the fact that the legislation should have passed, think about it this way (in terms of explaining it to other voters in 2 seconds). You know those signs that say "help us raise a million dollars to pay for a kidney transplant to save this persons' life"? In 2014, those will be a thing of the past. No longer will people need to rely on charity to raise 6 and 7 figure sums of money to get what would be considered a basic human right in most other countries. No longer will people have a black mark on their records for the rest of their lives preventing them from getting health care because of a previous condition or health history.

[JDPriestly]

23. Again, you may be right, but even I don't really understand what that bill

will do to my health care costs.

If I could go out and say that we now have Medicare for everyone, the people I talk to would understand what i am talking about. 2014 is a long way away.

It's not that you are wrong. It's just that this is not something I can explain to someone in the few seconds they give me when I go door-to-door. So the Republican, right-wing ads will win out over me.

Did you see the Jon Stewart/Kaine interview last night? I just watched it. Apparently I'm channeling Jon Stewart because he has the same view that I have.

I'm a strong Democrat. But the Obama administration and the Democrats in Congress have not made this campaign an easy one for activists to participate in. I can't console my many friends and neighbors who are in foreclosure. And the conservative Obama economic team has done nothing for them.

I can't campaign for Democrats on some vague statement about benefits in 2014. Not in this country in which instant gratification is expected. You are right. The health care plan will improve some things somewhat, but it will also make some things worse. So that is not enough of a winner.

I don't really see how the health care bill will lower health care costs, shift them may be. Those of us on Medicare will probably have to pay more. I need something better than that.

[BzaDem]

27. Food stamps don't lower costs. But they are still considered a good thing by progressives.

The Healthcare bill does some things to control costs (such as bundling, moving in the direction of fee for value as opposed to fee for service, etc). But at this stage, the main goal was expanding access.

It expands access to those with pre-existing conditions (so it now costs the same for them as it does for someone without such conditions), and it provides subsidies for people making up to 400% of the poverty level (capping premiums as a percentage of income), and free Medicaid for those making up to 133% of the poverty level. This is a gigantic change in healthcare access.

Yes, we have to wait for 2014. Anyone wanting instant gratification will not get it for the most part, because the core of the bill starts in 2014.

"Those of us on Medicare will probably have to pay more."

The bill did not raise costs or reduce any benefits for anyone on normal Medicare. It did reduce the amount of money it pays insurance companies for people on Medicare advantage, but that was because insurance companies were being overpaid by around 15% to serve Medicare advantage customers when compared with what it costs for the government to provide normal Medicare to everyone else.

[JDPriestly]

30. I'm on Medicare Advantage.

In L.A., so many doctors refuse Medicare that I really need Medicare Advantage. Problem is we don't know how much the insurance companies will raise Medicare Advantage costs to seniors with this new bill.

[johnaries]

10. "bait and switch"? Have you been paying any attention at all?

I am sorry that all your problems aren't "magically erased". But in case you haven't noticed, most of the obstruction has come from the Party of No. Yes, there are some Dems who are willing to question the wisdom of the Party because their constituents have questions - and Dems tend to listen to their constituents. Unlike Repugs, who like to force their ideals on others.

The fact is, no matter what your ambitions are, they might not be realistic.

Yes, the Republicans ARE worse, and YES, it DOES affect you, your friends, and your community.

If you are so blind that you cannot see that, then I feel sorry for you. And your community, and your friends.

[JDPriestly]

14. You are not speaking to the issue I have raised.

Let's assume that everything you say is true, what do you say to an undecided voter, maybe someone who voted for McCain because he was a hero but who isn't a die-hard Republican? Let's say that you knock on the door of that voter's house or meet that voter at a Democratic table at a farmer's market in your town, in just a few seconds, what is the big issue, the major action that the Democrats in Congress have accomplished -- or just fought for -- that you could mention that would move that voter to get to the polls and vote for Democrats this Fall?

Please tell me.

[depakid]

13. Is there something credible left to bait with?

:shrug:

[lonestarnot]

18. Hey JD Priestly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/business/economy/31taxpayer.html

The profits, collected from eight of the biggest banks that have fully repaid their obligations to the government, come to about $4 billion, or the equivalent of about 15 percent annually, according to calculations compiled for The New York Times.


As Banks Repay Bailout Money, U.S. Sees a Profit

Nearly a year after the federal rescue of the nation’s biggest banks, taxpayers have begun seeing profits from the hundreds of billions of dollars in aid that many critics thought might never be seen again.

and

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/06/22/politics/main6606694.shtml

Geithner told the Congressional Oversight Panel at a hearing that banks have repaid about 75 percent of the bailout money they received, and the government's investments in aided banks have brought a return to taxpayers of $21 billion, in income from dividends, sales of warrants and stock, and fees from canceled guarantees.


:shrug:

[JDPriestly]

24. And the bad part --

The government still faces potentially huge long-term losses from its bailouts of the insurance giant American International Group, the mortgage finance companies Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and the automakers General Motors and Chrysler. The Treasury Department could also take a hit from its guarantees on billions of dollars of toxic mortgages.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/business/economy/31taxpayer.html

What I'm trying to avoid is lying to my friends, family and neighbors. And what you are saying is only part of the truth.

[lonestarnot]

28. No need to lie. Tell the truth. Tell them who intentionally created the mess

because they knew a democratic president was going to take away the keys and they wanted the house burned down before he got there to open the door so he wouldn't be able to unpack, just time to attempt to clean up the mess and really not even time for that.

[Hannah Bell]

21. "I don't want my political party to tell me lies, and I don't want to lie"

[Radical Activist]

26. I'm picky about who I help. I sit on my hands for conservative Democrats.

Obama hasn't actually opposed anything on social security that's different than what he campaigned on. Your post only gets more inaccurate from there. I know this is a popular narrative, but Obama has made major progress on all of the top priorities he campaigned on.

[JDPriestly]

29. Obama appointed the Cat Food Commission.

It meets secretly. I'm on Social Security, and I'm scared. I certainly can't reassure others on that.

I thought more about this last night. The best argument is Obama's tax plan and the fact that the rich took their tax cuts and invested almost all their tax savings overseas.

I would like to see a campaign to get pledges by members of Congress to vote yes on the tax plan. That I could campaign on.

As for blame about the past. Obama is raising that too late. Remember how he said we should look forward. Besides Clinton has to be blamed for his share with revoking Glass-Steagall and changing commodity exchange regulations.

The only thing we have that is clear-cut, easy to talk about is the tax plan. But, we have to make sure that we get the Conservadems behind it before I am willing to risk my reputation on it.

[bvar22]

31. I will validate your experience.

I live in a very rural, very conservative, very poor area of The South.


During Campaign 2008, I AVOIDED the wedge issues.
They don't really matter when people are broke, sick, and out of options.
I was able to give several local long term Republicans "permission" to vote "Democratic" based on several Economic Issues, but the best selling point was:

The Democrats will open Medicare or "something just like it" to everyone.
Almost everyone here has a parent, grandparent, or disabled family member or relative on Medicare.
When asked "Wouldn't YOU like Medicare?", every single one answered "YES"!
"Health Insurance will become cheaper even if you don't want Medicare."

THAT, by itself, was enough to get a few long term Republicans to quietly vote FOR the Democrats.

Unfortunately, I have had to backtrack.
Several people have forced me to eat my words.
People around here take promises seriously.
My credibility has suffered.
I won't step out on that ledge again.

[TheKentuckian]

32. The problems are well understood which is why the focus hasn't been on correcting concerns

sharpening the rhetoric, and discrediting the failed Republican ideology but rather blame shifting to liberals.

If it takes a solution outside what is accepted corporate right spectrum then it can't even be discussed.

[newtothegame]

33. "I feel that Obama and the Democrats in Congress made me look like a liar. "

We made OURSELVES look like liars. There is noone to blame here but us; WE decided to get on the "making history" bandwagon. Candidate Obama's record (or lack of one) spoke for itself; WE'RE THE ONES who created all this "progressive hope" out of thin air.