This Is Not What I Voted For...

[Steely_Dan]

I'm so angry, it is hard to find the words.

This is not what I voted for.

I didn't vote for bailing out Wall Street while Main Street continues to suffer.
I didn't vote for a Health Care Bill that rewards corporate America before it takes care of "the people."
I didn't vote for a spineless Congress that is apparently as much in the pockets of corporate America as the Republicans.
I didn't vote for a President that values some mythical "bipartisanship" over the needs and the people.

We should have come into office kicking some ass. The Republicans have no problem bullying their way. Maybe we should learn a thing or two from them. I thought we won the election - BIG! I think they need to be reminded of that.

I had such great hopes for this president. I saw him as a change agent. He is not. It will take a long time before I regain my "hope" for "change."

-P

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

1. Sorry, but this is what you voted for

[iconocrastic]

30. If you speak in anger on a board populated largely by clinically dsepressed people

don't be surprised when you get a hostile reaction.

[Cosmocat]

56. You weren't listening ...

if you didn't think this was what you were voting for, seriously ...

Being disappointed about what you WANTED it to be is different from the reality of what BO spoke about ...

Look, he hooked A LOT of people with his rhoshack (sp) broad sweeping and enchanting speeches ...

But, if you actually LISTENED to what he actually took stands on, he is about where he said he would be ...

[Name removed]

2. Deleted message

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

[jefferson_dem]

3. Awwww...

Don't be sad. Here's a lolly pop.

[asdjrocky]

66. I'm sorry but that's just rude and childish.

How do you expect to have any kind of discussion with someone when you respond is such a manner? What does that solve?

I know you don't agree, but the post wasn't childish or mean spirited at all. To me it was actually kind of sad and something I learned when talking to voters during the primaries and the general election was you had to be willing to at least listen, or you never had a chance of finding common ground and in doing so find find some solutions. Maybe even an ally.

I don't know anyone here or in real life that are happy because they are disappointed, these are real issues for some of us. I know you would never offer a sucker like that to someone in real life. I'm always willing, even through my anger, to try to have a dialog and it's so hard to do with replies like that.

I'm not trying to judge you, I just know you're a better person than that.

[closeupready]

70. There are a LOT of young people on DU, so responses like that are quite common.

It is what it is - childish, yes, being one.

[Solomon]

77. Yeah. He shouldn't have left out the pony. A lollipop is not

enough.

[sandnsea]

4. Then go vote for Nader again n/t

[Steely_Dan]

19. I Didn't Vote For Nader...

...and never would.

[donco6]

34. That's another standard accusation if you dare take your lips off Obama's ass. n/t

[QC]

37. And then comes, "YOU NEVER REALLY LIKED HIM TO START WITH!!!!!11!" N/T

[donco6]

40. Followed by "You Can't Kum into teh Sekrit Treehous!" n/t

[QC]

50. So nyahhhhh!

[dionysus]

61. which you mock because.. well because it's true...

:rofl:

[katandmoon]

5. K&R

[LakeSamish706]

6. I agree with you, and unless things change big time I believe that Michael Moore

is right on. There will be one hell of a blood bath come November and who knows what happens in 2012.

[totodeinhere]

41. I would love to see Michael Moore take on Obama in the 2012 Dem primary.

I am serious. I think he would make a great prez who wouldn't sell out to anybody.

[LakeSamish706]

44. I think your Avatar would make a great prez as well. n/t

[totodeinhere]

46. Yup, actually both of them would make a great ticket together. n/t

[LakeSamish706]

48. Agreed! n/t

[dionysus]

64. LOLOLOLOL.. i'll give you one thing, you guys sure know to drive the party into the ground!

jesus, you'd find some way to lose every single state...

if you guys REALLY want to help democrats, go manage a republican campaign. please.
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[MadBadger]

68. Country into the ground

Michael Moore vs Any Republican would be a slaughter of epic proportions.

[totodeinhere]

73. Even against Palin? I don't think so. Moore beats Palin in a walk.

You know, when Reagan first started making noises about running for president, they laughed at him too, but you know what happened. And I in no way want to compare Moore with Reagan. He is 1,000 times more intelligent than Reagan was even before his Alzheimer's set in.

[totodeinhere]

72. Hey, they don't need me to drive the country into the ground. It's headed that way already without..

any help from me. Do you honestly think that a President Michael Moore could do any worse? I don't. And you know this country is in such a sad state of affairs that it just might take some out of the box thinking to get it going again.

[gcomeau]

7. Oh look...

...it's exhibit A.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7894666&mesg_id=7894871

[Cleita]

8. Maybe this had to happen to open our eyes to the complete

corporate takeover of both political parties and as a result our federal government. I guess we are going to have to go back to the state and local governments to start reining in the corporate beasts with regulations at those levels.

[iconocrastic]

25. State and local governments are bankrupt.

[Cleita]

28. And that has what to do with changing laws? n/t

[ProSense]

9. More grandstanding

"I didn't vote for bailing out Wall Street while Main Street continues to suffer."

The bailout bill was passed and signed into law under Bush. Most of the money was given to the banks before Obama took office. Obama is responsible for getting most of it back.


"I didn't vote for a spineless Congress that is apparently as much in the pockets of corporate America as the Republicans."

Are all of them your reps?


"I didn't vote for a President that values some mythical "bipartisanship" over the needs and the people."

So how does the President valuing bipartisanship change anything? Why is it a really great thing to partner with Grover Norquist, but not for good for President Obama to encourage Republicans to support needed legislation?

[Steely_Dan]

14. I understand what you are saying...

...but consider:

Bush did in fact start the bailout process. However, the current president has continued this policy. Am I mistaken here?

As far as bipartisanship goes: I praise the president for his idealism in thinking that it could work. However, many of use (in the current political atmosphere) knew that this WASN'T going to work. In addition, he has tried it and has done little to accept the fact that the Repubs are not going to play. Finally...Bipartisanship must be accompanied by the kind of "leadership skills" that seem to be lacking.

-P

[Cha]

16. More disingenous willfully ignorant grandstanding.

[Number23]

39. "So how does the President valuing bipartisanship change anything?"

Not only that, but people who constantly screech about how horrible "bipartisanship" is but holler that the President "isn't looking out for the people" have no clue what the hell they are talking about.

Considering that damn near half this country considers itself conservative, how are the President's efforts to consider these people and their wants/needs as articulated by their Representatives in Congress (no matter how wrong-headed or idiotic) anything BUT "looking out for the people?" Even if he hears what they say and completely discards it, he still has to at least put up the pretense of listening and acknowledging the existence of HALF THE COUNTRY. And considering that this is what Obama ALWAYS pledged to do throughout his entire campaign, the kind of ideological foolishness that makes people think that this something that he should be CRITICIZED for just makes absolutely no sense.

We screamed at Bush for not listening to anyone that wasn't conservative and are now screaming at Obama for doing the opposite. I've been doing alot of screaming myself lately, and it ain't been at the President.

[CTLawGuy]

84. see Number 23

everyone in America is really liberal. It's just that the word "liberal" has been attacked so much by the (non-existent, I guess) conservatives that only a few people CALL themselves liberal.

You might ask why all these liberals didn't elect a liberal congress, well that's all the corporations fault. And I'll just leave it at that..... Should be sufficient explanation.

[HughMoran]

54. Excellent points

Nobody who is intellectually honest can argue with what you've posted.

[Name removed]

74. Deleted message

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

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

86. Bipartisanship was part and parcel of the "Change" Obama offered

People really need to pay attention. He wanted to change the toxic atmosphere. He wanted to find solutions we could all agree upon.

It simply wasn't possible, and that's not his fault.

I think that starting with HCR, you're going to see Obama start to use his Democratic majority and ignore the howls of the conservatives.

[golfguru]

10. You should always look into a politicians actual voting record

before voting. Try it next time.

[Steely_Dan]

11. I Can't Believe...

...there are actually people here that imply that they are satisfied with the current state of affairs in our country. Especially after we were promised changed.

And for those that say that I'm being a baby because it isn't "happening fast enough" for me...Please
I didn't expect miracles overnight. However, I did expect that "some" efforts would be made towards changing this country back to some sort of sanity. I didn't care if it would take all 8 years. But when is it going to start.

And let me tell you, I am no "far lefty." I understand that the challenges faced by the president are numerous and daunting. But please...just show me some balls. Show me that you can at least control the message and not let the right wing-nuts determine the argument. It is the first lesson and it has apparently been completely overlooked.

Want me to go on???

[saracat]

13. They will just put their fingers in their ears and go" La! la! la! I can't hear you"

[sandnsea]

17. You didn't like him two years ago

Who are you trying to kid. You didn't want him or Hillary.

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x5695053#5695169

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[Steely_Dan]

29. You are correct!

This is what I wrote:

"We blew it by putting forward the only two weak candidates. How we could have taken what should have been a shoe-in election and made it into a horse-race is beyond my understanding."

At the time, I honestly didn't think that this "racist" country would elect an Africa-American. I wasn't alone in that opinion. And....Hillary was very divisive. I acknowledge that I was WRONG in my opinion at the time. I supported President Obama and believed that he would bring real change.

-P

On Edit:

And, just because I felt that other candidates would have been better choices at the time, DOES NOT mean that I didn't support President Obama 100%.

-P

[saracat]

12. Be prepared to be spit on and told you don't exist or never supported Obama to begin with and it is

likely you were never a Democrat to begin with, or you never voted for Obama.They will say you support MCcain /Palin. It is all because it is very important to some to insist that people like you do NOT exist and nearly all recent polling is wrong. If it isn't wrong it has to be spun to look positive.Oh and I forgot, you want Obama and this nation to FAIL."Why do you hate America":sarcasm:

[WI_DEM]

15. What you don't seem to understand is when Obama campaigned on change he meant primarily

trying to work out bipartisan approaches and to bring down the partisan rhetoric in Washington. He has tried to do this. It's the other side that hasn't. Obama should now just do what needs to be done and to hell with the republicans.

[Steely_Dan]

18. EXACTLY! n/t

[vaberella]

20. Don't vote for him next time. I'm cool with a Republican President.

DU has prepped me for a Repub President next time around.

[grahamhgreen]

47. But he's better than Palin!

:sarcasm:

[alcibiades_mystery]

21. Pffffffffftpppppfftfftftftt

What the fuck ever.

[vaberella]

23. A person posted your posts when Obama ran as a candidate. You didn't like him then.

So I'm not taking any of what you say at face value. You're using this as a way for you to push some more angst on this board. Thanks but no thanks.

[LakeSamish706]

24. Your referring to the wrong poster, but hey don't let that bother you. lol n/t

[vaberella]

26. No, you're wrong. I'm referring to link provided in post # 27.

which clearly goes to the OP's post on Obama. So...uh yeah.

[LakeSamish706]

27. Your right, my apologies! n/t

[alcibiades_mystery]

31. Don't let it bother you!

:rofl:

[Steely_Dan]

32. You are correct!

This is what I wrote:

"We blew it by putting forward the only two weak candidates. How we could have taken what should have been a shoe-in election and made it into a horse-race is beyond my understanding."

At the time, I honestly didn't think that this "racist" country would elect an Africa-American. I wasn't alone in that opinion. And....Hillary was very divisive. I acknowledge that I was WRONG in my opinion at the time. I supported President Obama and believed that he would bring real change.

-P

On Edit:

And, just because I felt that other candidates would have been better choices at the time, DOES NOT mean that I didn't support President Obama 100%.

-P

[babylonsister]

51. Yes, it's commonly referred to as flame bait, used commonly around

these parts.

[vaberella]

53. ahhh..understood. n/t

[impik]

33. Next time vote for John Edwards. I hear that he's very progressive

[TreasonousBastard]

35. You forgot the crumbling infrastructure, destruction of public education...

the continuation of two wars while enlarging th war machine for more, the lack of immigration reform, the looming deficit, the lack of a real economic plan... Oh, and so much more...

But, the most important thing you forgot is that you have one lousy vote and it does not give you the right to insist on having every little thing you want done your way. You have two Senators and a Representative like most of the rest of us, and they do not control Congress.

No one controls Congress-- it is a cage full of hungry tigers that can be tamed with a sharp whip, but never completely controlled. I don't care whaty the Founders thought-- for such a group to function properly by itself would defy the laws of nature. It didn't work that well when there were only 26 Senators.

I am upset at Obama's strategic mistake in not taking a firmer hand with Congress in HCR-- how could he not know Congress would never come up with a bill without a strong hand leading it? Had he never heard of LBJ? That mistake seems to have lead him down a path of retreat on a lot of things. Whatever stores of capital he has left can't be wasted on other battles until health is resolved. If he gets something, he can act as if invincible, if he gets nothing, he is doomed as a failure worse than Carter.

[Dappleganger]

36. You never did like him so your post is meaningless. nt

See post #27.

[azmouse]

38. Why don't you "disappointed" people just all post on one thread

about your "disappointment" instead of each needing your own?
You're all spewing the same crap.

[donco6]

43. You just love Nader.

Oh . . . oops . . . same crap, wrong post.

[azmouse]

45. Huh? What?

I despise Nader.

[dionysus]

65. oh, constant, redundant poutrage is in fashion you know!

;)

[Milo_Bloom]

42. Exactly and it is why I won't vote for him in the future.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[denimgirly]

52. Obama is not a Fighter -- that is clear .. He is a very good politician and a DLC'er....

It is almost certain he will not get record turn outs or make as much funds in his re-election campaign but give him credit he knew how to pitch the populist message. There are many (at least half on DU) that will not vote for him again. I know i wont. But i certainly wont vote republican.

One day the stars will align and a real progressive president will come along and enact REAL CHANGE. Until then hope for more Weiners and Graysons.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

58. "One day the stars will align and a real progressive president will come along "

and Republicans will cease to exist.

Obama is a the most progressive President in history. He's not a "clap louder for single-payer healthcare" progressive, but someone who deals with reality and achieves "real" progress.

"There are many (at least half on DU) that will not vote for him again."

Wow, a bubble-gum wrapper statistic.

[brentspeak]

75. "Obama is a the most progressive President in history".

:spray: :spray: :spray: :spray: :spray: :spray:

Even Obama and Rahm will be snarfing and rolling on the floor over that one.

[The Genealogist]

79. "most progressive President in history" Really? Quantify that n/t

[ncteechur]

69. last time I checked he was--just maybe not the brand you want

he fought for and won the nomination and the election when everyone said he was out (he'd lost to Hillary or he can't beat McCain now that Palin is on board)

he has kept the fight for HCR going when the GOP thought they had killed it in August-- the Clinton administration let it go by this point--they would not have kept it going and insisted on its passage-if so maybe we would have had it in 1993 or 94

[Dinger]

57. A Sad K & R (nt)

[Steely_Dan]

59. Upon Further Thought...

...and I have thought about the issue of what is separating Dems from each other. I think a part of it is generational. For some of us over the age of 50, we recall (what we consider) the true essential planks of our party. Apparently, it is sort of the "old" Dem party. The party of my youth cared about those less fortunate. We believed in equal rights and tolerance for those not like ourselves. We believed in a "living wage" and a safety net for when we were too old to work. We believed that our country should stand for human rights on all levels and through the world. We put people before business with unions that protected the middle class. I could go on and on.

Quite frankly, I see little of that party remaining. Since Reagan, our country has slowly swung to the right. Now everything is redefined. What was once considered a moderate Democrat is now considered a far left Dem. How sad.

For the most part, younger Dems do not seem to have the same understanding what it means to be a Democrat as us older Dems. I'm not saying that they are wrong...just different.

-P

[NYC_SKP]

60. I think you're right (on this), not your OP. There was a cultural shift during 80s and 90s.

From my point of view-- more of a "me" generation and greater materialism.

SUV's became cool, everything began to come in hundreds of flavors (I miss Levi 501s).

Globalism was good, Clinton didn't help, sad to say, but it was happening anyway.

Super rich Dems in office.

Total walk away from the working class from both sides of the aisle.

I think you're right about generations, but I have more faith that the current young generation will come full circle and cast off the bullshit.

Netroots Action and Campaign finance reform would help.

But I can't rec your original post, sorry, I am getting what I voted for and I'm happy given the circumstances.

:patriot:

[Steely_Dan]

62. No Worries...

I appreciate your reasonable response.

-P

[asdjrocky]

67. That's a great point.

Perhaps we're getting old. I'll soon be 50 and the values I held dear as a Dem don't seem to matter as much any more. Reagan changed a lot, even the way, perhaps, Dems are Dems.

I thought your Op was very thoughtful, thanks.

[tilsammans]

78. "Liberal" became a dirty word . . .

. . . when the Reagan Revolution came. And it's still a dirty word.

As for the so-called Reagan Democrats, :puke:

[asdjrocky]

81. Exactly.

I remember in that interview with Ted Kennedy where they asked him if he was a liberal, it was either during or just before the 1980 run. I could sense the questioner waiting to pounce on his answer, and I could here the eagerness of the question in the interviewers voice.

That's when I saw, for sure, where the media was going. America is a media driven country, so where the media goes, so goes most people.

[tilsammans]

76. Agree. But even among us older Dems . . .

. . . I see an acceptance of the status quo like never before. :rant:

When I expressed my anger about the current situation to a friend, she just shrugged it off with a remark to the effect of, "Well, you know, it's typical that there's a ruling class aristocracy and then there's the rest of us."

Just like that.

How bad do things have to get before acceptance and complacency are replaced by action?

I'm ready NOW.

[donco6]

83. I'm 50. Could be. n/t

[onenote]

85. The "old Dem" party of your youth is largely a figment of your imagination

The Democrats have had large majorities (sometimes larger than what we have today) and controlled the presidency before. During the Truman Administration; during three years of JFK's presidency; during LBJ's presidency; during Jimmy Carter's presidency; during the first two years of Clinton's presidency.

And those Congress' did some very good things. Some of them also did some not so good things. Just like this Congress has done some good things and failed to do other good things. But if the Democratic controlled legislatures and White Houses of your "youth" were so much different than what we have today, why didn't they pass comprehensive health care?

There were Democrats of all stripes when we were younger -- war mongers, pacifists, progressives, conservatives, racists, and egalitarians and on and on.

I'm over 50 too, and I remember being pretty dissatisfied with my government in the past, even when the Democrats controlled that government. But that didn't make me give up.

[NorthCarolina]

87. The "Country" hasn't swung to the right

just our government has. The MSM guided perception that America is a center-right nation is a myth, and public polling on specific issues repeatedly demonstrates this, even among those that self identify as conservative.

America Is a Center-Left Country No Matter How Much the Corporate Media Say Otherwise http://www.alternet.org/election08/106276/

[Robeson]

63. Folks, we're an Empire. These guys serve the Empire....

...there are trillions of dollars involved, and our little dance of democracy isn't going to change that. If Obama went against this system - to paraphrase Gore Vidal - he'd find himself six feet under in Arlington.

[donco6]

82. But he'd die with his balls on.

That's something.

[HughMoran]

71. Gravel snaps

[Phx_Dem]

80. Too bad for you.