A simple question for those still supporting President Obama: Why should I support him?

[blondeatlast]

This isn't a challenge--and I'm not asking those who've been pissed off at him for some time now (I've heard y'all already and have become one of you). Specifically, I don't want to hear criticism of the president--although I absolutely invite discussion of the issues the "cheerleaders*" offer.

FWIW, he pushed me to the edge over education DEform and right over it with the Federal wage freeze which was purely symbolic, IMHO.

For intelligent argument's sake, let's try to avoid using the following:
President Palin/McCain
No different than GWB
DLC/Blue Dog
Wall Street lackey, etc.
Corporatist

I'm looking for concretes here and not tired, overused talking points from either side. I'm a college graduate, former educator, and a pretty smart person. Let's raise the usual DU level, shall we?

*Note: I am truly sorry to use that word (have I mentioned how much I loathed that whole "woodchuck" thing? If not, I just did), but we really have become two warring factions here, it appears.

Thanks--and may I add, I'm glad to see DU survived the night!

[mdmc]

1. three little choices

stop caring
support the dlc
embrace your inner neo-con
========================
we have no where to go (this coming from a 2 time Nader voter)..

[mdmc]

2. ps

sorry that my reply really didn't "raise the bar" of our discussion..

[blondeatlast]

3. I was about to say... nt

[eilen]

4. Reasons to continue to support Obama

1. You want to keep the Republicans in check, somewhat.
2. He might have a jobs bill in the Spring. Maybe.
3. You are invested in the status quo of an infinite growth centered economy.
4. You own a lot of stock and depend on investment income.
5. You work for a hedge fund/investment house/ large bank or insurance company.
6. You are in denial or have no interest in the impact of global warming and peak oil and you prefer your government keep their heads in the sand and continue to provide industry specific incentives and subsidies to continue the status quo.
7. You look forward to more trade agreements because you would like to outsource your manufacturing and/or call centers to Korea etc.
8. You are an arms manufacturer. Perm-a-war is good for the bottom line.
9. He may work with Republicans to delete the requirement for mandated payments to health insurers.

I am really not supposed to be posting here anymore. It's not good for my mental health. Sorry!

[NNN0LHI]

5. Not being a warmonger is good enough for me

I will do everything I can to prevent sending any more rapture ready Republican nuts to Washington.

The lives of my grandchildren depend on that.

Don

[Stinky The Clown]

23. Would you call the current situation in Afghanistan warmongering?

I would.

[NNN0LHI]

43. No it is fighting for peace

Like fucking for virginity ... Cough, cough.

:P

Think it was about five years ago I said here that as long as people keep enlisting to go over there no matter who is president, they will keep sending them.

Wish it wasn't that way, but I still think it is unfortunately.

Don

[Donnachaidh]

27. uhh -- forgot about Afghanistan/Iraq already?

Obama IS a warmonger. He owns that now, too.

[abelenkpe]

42. Yeah I don't want my kids shipped off to war either

But so far this administration has not proven itself to be the answer to America's perpetual wars. I mean we are still doing drone attacks in Pakistan, still in Iraq and Afghanistan with no end in site. I voted thinking this would end....but I'm still waiting.

Add to that that our taxpayer dollars are going to pay for defense contractors in Afghanistan who are using that money to avail themselves of child prostitutes. And that the State Department says they are unable to legally do anything to stop it. (Yeah? Really? How about voiding their contract and not hiring them again?)

Ugh.

[BzaDem]

6. So far, that logic has given our country Citizens United. Do you want Roe v. Wade to be

overturned next when Justice Kennedy retires? How about Miranda? Perhaps you would be happy with not only a solid 5 conservative majority on the court (instead of a 5-4 liberal majority when Kennedy retires), but Republican appointees taking over all the lower courts as well? All with lifetime terms?

[blondeatlast]

7. I don't wnat possibilities--I want concretes. What's he done that truly has truly improved our lot?

I jumped up and down when he appointed Justice Sotomayor ( I work in the legal field and knew of her before most of you did), and even more so with the appointment of Hilda solis as SoLabor.

But since then--what?

Concretes, not maybes.

[BzaDem]

16. You are comparing Obama to what you WANT. That is a bogus comparison. You can't get what you want.

You should be comparing Obama to the alternative. I do not know exactly what justice the alternative would appoint, but you can be sure that it will cause this country concrete, particularized injury for a generation.

[PVnRT]

26. Your post is a sad reflection on American democracy

Politicians shouldn't try to say what they're for to win votes; rather, they should get people to vote against the other candidate, because they claim to be better.

[kctim]

8. Because you are not unreasonable?

[blondeatlast]

9. Wow--apprently I'm the only confused, non-cheerleader or purist on the board!

But the fact is, I don't think I am, and I'm asking for a decent discussion.

So far, reading comprehension FAIL.

[Stinky The Clown]

22. "I've been here since 2003--we used to actually DISCUSS things."

That's a year longer than me. I, too, recall this place being a discussion board. I recall actually having my mind changed by a few posters as a result of those discussions. Now we have roving gangs of hit and run posters with agendas and armed with talking points.

I think the biggest single reason for the lack of discussion is the rec/unrec system. If it were only possible to do either after making a post, the posts would be more substantive. As it is now, you can hit and tun (good or bad) and never say a word.

I'm with you on this.

I can't answer your main point because I am among the critics you asked not to reply.

[metapunditedgy]

49. If we really care about DISCUSSION, the rec/unreccers should be publicly listed.

No "hit and run" attacks. Put your username right up their with your click.

That's if we're interested in discussion, mind you.

[seabeyond]

10. i think with about every issue i have gotten mad because seems he caves and not spine (like i like)

i am a very forceful, always get my way, kinda gal. not diplomatic by any means. and things that matter little to me, i let go. that is lots of things. i pick battles. that being said

his style does not fit my personality at all. he is just like my husband. though he is never a clear winner in all this, he ALWAYS advances the progressive causes and has accomplished more for progressive causes than other presidents, for a while. though we dont hear it that way.

this tax thing for example. i am financially fine. would be easy for me to call bluff and allow taxes to expire and no UI. but then i am not being hurt. and allowing others to be hurt isnt very progressive. i could still do it. he wont. he did the job.

if you look at much of what he has done, that is how he works.... and though it goes against the way i walk life, i watch hubby end up very successful and accomplished with this style, as i watch obama. though obama does not get credit for the progressive policies he accomplishes

that always leaves me feeling not happy, not content, not a winner but my brain says, he is doing progressive and i need to support.

best i can explain

thanks for your op. i have stayed out of the obama threads mostly, for a good year, because i cannot express my "sybil" feelings for obama to most posters.... they wont listen. and does no good to argue it.

[blondeatlast]

11. In the same boat--I know we're better off with Obama but I'm really concerned as well.

As I say, teh education issue just about did me in--that's not a "courage" issue--he really believes in something I abhor (privatizing schools with public money).

I feel as if I have to "pick a side" at DU--and like you, SB, I think for myself--and uncomfortable position here lately.

thanks for actually READING my post and a thoughtful response.

[seabeyond]

15. and then you have the few issues i feels one way and i totally disagree

like the education issue. but then a lot of the dems agree with obama on this, on du. i am always ranting about the destruction of our public education and leave it the fuck alone. having kids in the system, and watching yearly as they change it and chip away to make it "better" but really increasing the problems cause they are not identifying the real issues. society.

yes there are those. and with those, i say, not gonna agree on all things, hope kids make it thru before the public schools are totally ruined.

and

you are welcome. i appreciated the op anyway.

[DonCoquixote]

12. three words

Supreme court picks

Whatever you can say about the rest of his admin, I am glad to see Sotomayor and kagan where they are, and I know the GOP is eager to undo that gain, especially if Ginsberg gets too sick to work.

[bullwinkle428]

14. Regarding the SC, I have a very genuine fear that if one of the

Pukes decided to retire, Obama would go ahead and nomimate another Puke-a-licious judge to replace him in the interest of "maintaining the balance"!

[blondeatlast]

18. Okay, sorry, but that's ridiculous. I'll give him credit for that much.

Sotomayor was a great pick and there are plenty of worthy legal minds in the Fed system and elsewhere (I work in the legal field).

[emulatorloo]

30. Don't think that is a genuine fear, sorry,

[HughBeaumont]

13. Sorry, I really have nothing else other than "A republican would be infinitely worse".

And the band of Republicans they got in mind for 2012 make George W look like Eisenhower. I cannot have that swill in charge again. This country would be fucked for decades - we're talking "for real Depression" fucked. What we're going through now is a mere slow coming-back from catastrophe.

Our major problem is the wealthy, not their puppets. What do we do about the corporatism?

[blondeatlast]

17. About the corporatism--I've thought a lot about that. The one thing the corps can't actually do that

we can is vote. In order for the corps to get their way, WE have to put their people in power. Therefore, we have to stop them at every opportunity and the only way to do that is massive, difficult, organized grassroots efforts--but how to acheive it?

I haven't given up yet, but the Left needs something bigger than the Democratic party--but what?

Thanks for a thoughtful response.

[Autumn]

48. I think we have too many republican light politicians

in the Democratic party. Maybe we need to just suck it up and not vote for them just because a real republican is running against them. I voted for Bennet just because he wasn't as big an idiot as Buck, he was such a ass over the tax deal when I called him the other day, I don't care if the fucking devil runs against him next time, I'm not voting for him again.

[MichaelS2012]

19. None nt

[Name removed]

20. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[panzerfaust]

21. Because he did not compromise on the Bush (now Obama) Tax Cuts for the Rich?

Actually, I suppose I should be happy, for the extension will personally save me thousands of dollars in taxes.

The thing is, though I certainly do not want to pay more taxes, I do think that progressive taxation is just - and that, the tax rates of the Clinton era were pretty fair. Though it would have cost me a lot out of my pocket, I was hoping that the current Bush/Obama tax cuts for the rich would have been allowed to expire.

I say that Obama did not compromise on the tax cuts, because 'compromise' means that each party gives up something. As best I can tell, the only thing the Republicans gave up was that the tax cuts were not made permanent - but only being extended for 2 more years when the next president, likely a Republican, will make them permanent.

This slight delay in permanence was made more palatable to the Republicans by Obama's wholly embracing the Republican 'reform' of inheritance taxes.

The president tells us that this craven retreat “... isn’t the politics of the moment. This has to do with, ‘What can we get done right now?’” Not having drunk the Kool-Aide I fail to discern the distinction. Indeed, to my aging brain, the one would seem to be the definition of the other.

[Lord Magus]

45. Two years from now Obama will still be president.

Presidential terms are for 4 years, not 3 3/4.

And if he hadn't accepted this deal, Republicans would get even more in January. They'd restore the tax cuts for the rich without any extension of unemployment benefits, leaving Obama with the choices of either accepting that or vetoing it and leaving everybody's taxes higher. He doesn't consider raising the top rate to a more fair 39.6% to be as high a priority as keeping the bottom rate from 10% to 15%. You can disagree with those priorities (I'd be fine myself with having all the tax cuts expire), but that's the position he's operating on.

Really, it's Congress's fault for not having the sense to deal with this over a year ago, before Republicans had a chance to make it an election issue (which in turn led to "Blue Dog" DINOs cowering away from the idea of holding the votes before the lame duck session).

[blondeatlast]

24. Kick. nt

[27inCali]

25. because he is a compromiser.....

it's our job to send more Progressives and less Pigs to Washington for him to compromise with.

[blondeatlast]

29. That's a good answer. I don't think he sees traditional liberal values as having

the power to sustain themselves.

I LOVE that answer and you are correct.

[Erose999]

39. But the RW values are somehow more sustainable? We can't go on forever looting the public treasury

and spending ourselves in to debt just to give more wealth to the elites who don't deserve it.

The false dogma that "tax cuts create jobs" is what got us into this hole and by capitulating Obama has just re-enforced it. 30 years on, Reaganomics has not delivered the growth it promised. There are no signs to indicate it ever will.

Something's got to give if we're ever going to get this country back to solvency. Right now Obama is the one bending, and he's bending in the wrong direction.

[27inCali]

41. I'm hoping Congress hijacks this bill

which is what is sounds like and it turns into a big stimulus bills. That's not as far fetched as it sounds.

am I willing to trade two years of tax cuts for a lot of help for working families? yeah, if we can extort a little more out of the Rs.

[K8-EEE]

28. Unrec, for God's sake

You seem like an informed person. Put it all through your own filter and don't support him if you think that an alternative, or no alternative, is better. So tired of all the whining and "talk me down" stuff!

[blondeatlast]

31. Have you nothing to offer? Really? nt

[K8-EEE]

37. No because nothing I'd offer would make a difference

The person has their mind made up which is fine...when I have my mind made up I don't go around begging for people to change it. DRAMA QUEENING!

[blondeatlast]

38. I'm that person--the OP. And if you know my history here at all

you'll know that I was a very cocal "cheerleader."

But you just fo on and think what you want; I've actually gotten a couple of very wise responses. Unfortunately, yours isn't one of them.

[K8-EEE]

44. Cocal cheerleader?

Well OK then somebody said what you needed them to say to be a cocal cheerleader again? Awesome! Sis boom bah, good thing you brought it up then.

[Bluebear]

34. "So tired of all the whining" - as arrogant as the White House. nt

[BlueJac]

32. I can not name any...........

just remind you of the promises he has broken so far, that you already know about. His new trade deal is another of many scratch my head moments. I have been fooled. Good luck on your quest for some help!

[MattSh]

33. Because if you don't...

the terrorists win?

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[emulatorloo]

35. I'm pissed about the top 2% and am glad Dem Sens and Reps are giving him hell. HOWEVER

I am glad about the middle class and below tax cuts. Per Ezra Klein and Lawrence O'Donnell last night, if those do not continue, the lowest bracket would see their taxes go up by 50%. And apparently the poor are getting some income tax credits as well.

Honestly I hate the top 2% tax breaks. But also honestly I have no idea what Obama could have done about it. He can't get 60 votes in the Senate. The Republicans won't vote for anything that does not contain those cuts.

[donheld]

40. He sure as hell does not support you or I

[mdmc]

46. 1

[uppityperson]

47. What do you mean "support him"? Are you donating time or money? Trying to figure out

what you should do for the next election? Or do you mean should you talk positively about the things he's done you like or negatively about the things he's done you don't? I seriously wonder what you mean, and not just have tired overused talking points as I am a college grad, professional, pretty smart person also.