The President is in a very, very tough situation.

[kentuck]

And so is the nation.

Yes, he asked for the job. So did Lincoln and FDR and neither really knew what they were getting into when they took the job. And neither did Barack Obama.

But he has been chosen by history, whether he knows it or not.

Few Presidents have been burdened with such a heavy load. Past decisions of past Presidents and past Congresses have created several dilemmas for our country, the least of which was two wars laid in his lap.

He inherited an economy that was in the process of total collapse. Wall Street and the Big Banks were finally caught up in their trap of greed and corruption.

Homeowners were losing their homes by the millions. The jobless rate was stuck around 10% with no relief in sight.

What could he do? The opposition offered nothing but criticism and roadblocks to everything he attempted. He wanted to be a President that could bring the nation together but the Republicans would not permit it.

The first African-American President sits in a job that is too big for any one man. One thing is for certain. He cannot do anything without the people behind him. Either we must be part of the solution or we are part of the problem. We must recognize the gravity of this dilemma.

[secondwind]

1. Kick and recommend, wholeheartedly!

[HughMoran]

2. Some of us have been saying this since the beginning

No President can turn the country around without the people behind him.


With the Republicans an automatic NO!! And many in the middle somewhat ambivalent, he could have used some help/support from his left. Sadly, it may be too late for that.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

69. People think the president has the power to do it alone when in fact it is Congress who should be

We should think President and Congress

[damonm]

112. DAMN, why can't I rec this?!?

[Chulanowa]

126. Many people thought they were electing Gandalf in 2008 n/t

[hlthe2b]

3. Yes...

I wonder, sometimes, if he regrets having the job. K&R

[MannyGoldstein]

4. I know! Let's slash Social Security!

It's possible that Obama is doing the best that can be done: that bailing out banker bonuses was necessary, as was a stimulus package that was bound to fail (according to our most-reliable economists like Krugman and Stiglitz). Or, Obama could be, as Ariana Huffington says, just not "in to" the middle class.

Which is the case?

Obama's extraordinary and single-handed attack on Social Security adds the context needed to make the call.

[kentuck]

7. FDR was an aristocrat..

The job changed him. Just as it must change Barack Obama. We do not have time to dilly-dally. Taxcuts are not going to save us. Government is the only solution to such huge problems. We, the People, are the government. We must discard ourselves of the supply-side notions as quickly as possible and start looking for real solutions.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. FDR sought out the very best and brightest

His first cabinet ranged from far left defenders of Labor and socialized farming, to the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hartman_Woodin">far right. But, always, he sought out those who were pragmatic and who had successful track records.

Obama sought out Rahm, Summers, and the rest of the Clinton posse - the same right-wing zealots who put our economic demise into overdrive.

[kentuck]

14. But Rahm and Summers are now gone.

There is a new reality. It is a different situation now than when he took office. Nobody thought we would be this deep into a recession. We have had 14 months of unemployment over 9.5% - the longest since the Great Depression. We cannot deal with the past. We have to deal with the future.

[MannyGoldstein]

18. Krugman called it from day one, but is shunned by the White House

Krugman's been calling this crisis for 15 years or so, when I first started reading his books.

Putting Summers and Geithner in charge of the economy was like giving the car keys back to someone with multiple DUI fatalities. And Arne Duncan? A man pushing a union-busting agenda that has zero evidence of results to back it up?

When Krugman, Stiglitz or another reality-based economist gets a high position in the White House, I'll have hope. When people who win elections like Dean are called back into service, I'll have hope. When the President calls off his attack on Social Security attack, I'll have hope.

[kentuck]

20. Nobody said he was perfect.

Mistakes were obviously made. But we are where we are.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. The point is that Obama has methodically favored the wealthy

over working Americans. He's unrelentingly taken the politically expedient road, triangulation that fails the middle class and emboldens the crazy right - whether it's running with $trillions to the aid of bankers at a moments notice, bargaining away the Public Option in backroom deals (while publicly claiming he was still wanted it!), appointing a commission whose co-chairmen have publicly announced they want to cut more than $42,000 from each recipient, or any of the many shocking policies carried over from the Bush Administration.

[vaberella]

30. That is hardly the truth and you know it.

I'm fed up with this. A poster stated that if Obama signed the foreclosure bill that would show he cared more about the wealthy than every day Americans and obviously every day Americans won. Obama pushed for middle class tax cuts and a rise on the wealthy taxes. Obama has his people going over off shore accounts and fining those people and raising taxes for companies that do. And yet, you still sit there and type with a straight face that garbage that he has "methodically favoured the wealthy". Just plain disgusting.

[MannyGoldstein]

35. Obama's rhetoric has improved recently

And he's taken some small steps in the right direction. Let's hope it's a long-term trend.

[Jackpine Radical]

160. I've been seeing that too--the small steps in the right direction--

and I can only hope that they will continue. The problem, of course, is that he may never again have as large a "Democratic" majority in Congress as he has had in the first 2 years, so even if HE changes, he may be more blocked than before.

I really don't see why he couldn't have applied more pressure to his own Blue Dogs than he did since Jan 2009. If a Blanche Lincoln wants support in her primary, make her earn it.

[bvar22]

179. I am cautiously optomistic about these little steps in the right direction.

I applaud them, but it IS the Silly Season (elections). I am burdened with a Good Memory and still remember Campaign 2008.

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

[Divernan]

161. And only because we progressives have been vocally critical of him

And it is still a question of words versus deeds. O is great at talking the talk - but not at walking the walk. Was it Lyndon Johnson who used to say that "money talks and bullshit walks"? We've certainly seen that corporate (Insurance/Oil/Gas/Wall Street/Banking/Military-Industrial complex) money called the shots during Obama's first two years.

OP & others rant endlessly that O needs "our backing". Well, it seems the only time he needs it is on election days, and his initial rhetoric was to have his tools call us fucking retards. Now that's been modified to calling us "gullible, at best" by his cheerleaders on DU.

[pattmarty]

171. If that is in fact the case (I myself doubt it), let's hope it's not too little too late.

[niceypoo]

44. He has favored the status quo

The status quo is no longer workable.

[pattmarty]

169. Very astute observation.

:sarcasm:

[bvar22]

180. That is CLASSIC Bush rhetoric.

"Mistakes were made."

Using the Passive Voice to avoid ALL accountability and possibility of correction:
"Mistakes were made."
NOT
"We made a mistake"
or (God Forbid) "I made a mistake."
The latter two statements accept responsibility, and begs the identification of the mistake:
"What WAS The Mistake", and "how can we correct it"?...or "How can we NOT make the same mistake again?"....
OR (he best yet) "And we have FIRED the incompetent bastard that MADE The Mistake".

NO.
Using the Passive Voice is the COWARDS way out,
AND following it with "We must look forward"
ensures that the SAME mistakes WILL be made again.

[kentuck]

182. That is classic BS.

Nobody is quoting George W Bush. That is lower than whale shit.

[bvar22]

184. I didn't say you were quoting Bush the Lesser.

I DID say you were using classic Bush rhetoric by using the Passive Voice to duck taking responsibility, avoid assigning blame, and block fixing the problem.

Mistakes were made" IS, and has always been, a COP OUT.

Bush the Lesser did that, and for the very reasons I cited above.

Go Ahead.
Google it... Bush "Mistakes were made"
49,000 hits

[Duke Newcombe]

188. Nobody asked for perfection.

Just some fucking due diligence would have been nice. Unless, those were exactly the people he wanted with the agendas he agrees with.

[clarence swinney]

94. Correct

Since Krugman got a weekly article on NYT he has, since 2002, almost weekly sounded the alarm.

Those articles made up his book THE GREST UNRAVELING.

Joseph Stiglitz also sounded the alarm regularly

[joe black]

21. Did he replace Rambo with a republican.

Just asking.

[defendandprotect]

119. After almost two years of corporate decision making you want to tell us Rahm is gone????

You need a new reality -- obama and Duncan are busily pushing privatization of schools --

Why are we adopting a GOP agenda?

FDR faced a Depression ... no Social Security ... no unemployment insurance . . .

no Medicare --

Obama has now put Repugs in charge of Social Security!

We have something like 17% unemployment -- and Obama called this a "Depression" about

three months ago! It was quickly scrubbed -- others in Congress are calling it

"The Great Recession" obviously because they can't say "Depression."

We a still rising unemployment rate -- with 22 million unemployed -- 25 million if you

could really long term unemployed and underemployed.

You can check with Bernie Sanders on those numbers --

[DailyGrind51]

153. Rahm and Axelrod were also part of the conserva-dem "Chicago Machine".

A combination of the Chicago School of Economics and the "back-of-the-yards" thug-ocracy.

[Just One Woman]

103. smoke

The tax cuts are just a smoke screen. They matter not when you back up and look at the big picture.

[nevergiveup]

13. Obama is not going to mess with Social Security

and you and everyone else with a brain knows it. Commissions are a dime a dozen and all administrations have them by the carloads. They don't mean crap and this was doesn't either.

[MannyGoldstein]

15. Then why appoint a commission designed to recommend cuts?

And why tell us that he'll defend us (from his own commission!) against privatization, but fall silent on whether he'll cut benefits.

It's OK to acknowledge that Obama's the President now, and that we need to support Democrats today because the Republicans would be even worse. But we need to replace the current crop of Democrats with folks who'll fight for working Americans,.

[Divernan]

162. Budget cuts HAVE to be made. Think he's going after the bloated military budget?

I don't think he or the Congress will retroactively cut CURRENT recipients of SS. But it is very likely that he/they will extend the retirement age, just as they did about 10 years ago. And that is bogus, because notwithstanding the extended life expectancy, the majority of people over 62 are no more capable of working more years than they ever were. Our life expectancy statistics have changed because far fewer people are dying in infancy and childhood.

Many jobs require a level of physical stamina which over 62's do not have. Then there are pesky facts that most workers do not have health care coverage for eyeglasses, full prescription coverage, hearing aids or dental care - and many have no health care insurance at all. You have to be able to SEE and HEAR to perform jobs. You have to take medication for diabetes, high blood pressure, cholesterol, etc. And poor dental health can negatively affect the rest of your body as well.

[pattmarty]

173. If I were you I would hold off making that statement UNTIL December...........

..........when they "issue" their report to the Prez and a LAME DUCK Congress. I hope you are right, but we'll see in Dec.

[vaberella]

29. I'm still waiting on you to congratulate Obama on Elizabeth Warren. n/t

[MannyGoldstein]

33. I heartily congratulate him for that pick

Although I'll reserve final judgement until we see if she's allowed to operate.

[RufusTFirefly]

130. Oh Puhleeze. Warren's appointment should've been a slam dunk

Instead it was turned into an extended symbolic drama. Have we reached a point where we should applaud the obvious?

Let's hear it for gravity! Yeah!!

[Uben]

5. Did Lincoln or FDR have to deal with....

... a totally ignorant republican congress hellbent on destroying America?

The Newt Gingriches and John Boeners and McConnells will be remembered as the worst politicians of all time in the U.S. To me, they are all American traitors and should stand trial for treason. They don't give a shit as long as they get their lobby money. But, what politician does?

I just hope justice will be served on these worthless pieces of shit.

[clarence swinney]

101. CLINTON HAD SAME OPPONENTS

Newt Congress spent $110,00,000 in six years on Hearings and Investigations. 13 Hearings a known nothing Whitewater.
A simple land deal. Borrow $200,000 buy 210 acres, cut roads sell lots.
McDougal had made much money doing if for years.

GAO gave $110,000,00 number.

Coffees--Lincoln Bedroom--Chinagate.

All to destroy a presidency.

What did they buy?

ONE ONE can you read ONE
One person who worked for Clinton was convicted of a Felony which was committed while working for him.

Mike Espy Chief of Staff pled Guilty.He did no have funds to fight OIC Smaltzsmear.
Smaltzsmear said there was no Quid Pro Quo.
It was college pals flying him to ball games, etc. Had been doing it since college days.
But illegal in executive. not Congress.

His boss faced 37 such charges and jury found him not guilty on each.

Clinton whine? He expected it. It was part of being Governor for twelve years.

Why did they do it? Clinton said "because I won". They had White House for 12 years and expected forever. Shocked them. A Hick.

Clinton knew more on Governance than any six of them.

12 years first hand. Adult Lifetime studying Governance.

Henry Hyde said:"had President Clinton not messed with Monica he would go down in history books as one of all time greats". AMEN!
Repubs promote mediocre as great. D silent
Reagan was not great. He has no great numbers.

My comparative Clinton vs Reagan is total wipe out for Clinton.
R looks like amateur.
olduglymeanhonest mad mad mad

[AndrewP]

104. 100 % agree with that

[Hannah Bell]

143. oh, for heaven's sake. no, lincoln just had to deal with the revolt of the entire south & was

assassinated for his pains. little stuff like that, nothing compared to what obama faces.

fdr just had to deal with the fascists at home & overseas.

[Chan790]

157. You forgot the attempted RW coup against FDR foiled by Smedley Butler.

But yeah, since they asked the question it deserves an answer:

Actually the resistance faced by Obama is a cakewalk compared to that faced by FDR and Lincoln. The absolute inability to overcome this modern resistance considered in combination with the massive support he rode to office on for center-left policies to the left of where he's felt compelled to govern does little to build faith in the image of Obama as a great statesman.

You'd think people would make sure the truth wasn't going to leave them with egg on their face before they asked rhetorical questions? :shrug:

[jimlup]

6. Mostly agreed...

I'm thinking that the true story of the Obama presidency will be told after the midterms. We need to give him as much support as we can in congress so that the story will be the positive one we all can imagine.

[Stellar]

132. Agreed, What did Bill Maher say about voting for

a disappointing friend or not voting to help your deadly enemy?

[crazylikafox]

8. well said

[Clio the Leo]

9. gotta get in on this one! nt

[treestar]

10. K&R

:kick:

[gateley]

12. He's handling it incredibly well. My respect for him grows daily. nt

[clarence swinney]

102. Daily Speeches my problem

It seems almost daily he is flying around making speeches to his CHOIR.
Few hundreds.

This is "feel good" stuff.
Professor loves it.

It is non productive.

Where are Press Conferences?

Millions watch them.

He needs new advisers

Bang For The Buck.

[Honeycombe8]

16. K&R.

[jefferson_dem]

17. Post of the Day!

Maybe the week.

Thanks and a big :thumbsup:

[tularetom]

19. He had to have seen this coming

Whoever inherited the cheney/bush clusterfuck was going to have his hands full. And I think most Americans with half a brain realized that things were not going to turn around overnight. Anybody as smart as the President knew it for certain.

What surprises me is that it appears that he underestimated the douchebagginess of the opposition party. He was in the Senate; he knew what asshats he was dealing with. Why he even attempted to give them a chance to screw up his agenda is still a mystery to me.

I don't think he can be blamed for the things that didn't get done. He's been stuck with some very poor leadership in the Senate and a sizeable contingent of DINOs in the House. He has not been served well by his cabinet and staff, particularly in economic matters. And he had a WH chief of staff who was undercutting his program at every opportunity.

Looks like he has realized the futility of trying to deal with the other side. He has gotten rid of his worthless chief of staff. He has taken a fairly aggresive tone in recent public speeches. He may even have finally realized that the liberal media are not his friends.

Even if you think this President has made a lot of missteps (and I sorta do), the consequences of not doing everything we can to support him are unthinkable.

[vi5]

23. Didn't know what he was getting into?

Of course he did. Yes, by the time he took office the bad had already happened and needed to be fixed. But he could have listened to and put members in his cabinet, people who had accurately predicted what would happened, and who warned against it. But he didn't. He mostly shut them out in favor of those whose policies and economic beliefs and political beliefs got us into that situation and shut out those who were right. And now it's pretty clear that the people who were right the first time, were right the second time when they warned that what he was doing at the behest of folks like Geithner and Summers was not going to be nearly enough to fix the problem and would be barely just enough to stop the bleeding.

So yes, the opposition of republicans is a big problem and not one to be discounted. But to imply that he did even nearly as much as he could have or listened to every voice that he could have is just flat out disingenuous.

Bottom line, the country needed major surgical intervention, and every renowned doctor recommended that. But instead he listened to the quacks who said to just put a band aid on it, take two aspirin and call them in the morning.

So no he doesn't deserve a bit of blame for the problem as it happened in the first place. And he doesn't bear all the blame for what was done not fixing the problem and possibly making it worse. But he's also not some poor, put upon innocent who did absolutely everything he could but just wasn't listened to.

[vaberella]

28. In actuallity I think Obama actually said a few times that they were surprised by the mess.

Obama knew there was drama and there was a lot of problems but he himself said that he didn't know the problem was this big. He didn't know that there was corruption in every single significant department of the government where they'd basically have to fire entire people or just dismantle entire organizations. I'm sure he suspected but didn't realize how much the Pentagon hated him and adored the ground Cheney walked on.

I think you have to realize that even though he was a Congressman that there are a lot of things that Congress is not privy too but the President is...or the Speaker of the House is. Obama was a congressman who probably only suspected a few things but was rather shocked by the magnitude and gravity of it which I can understand. A lot of people think that all of the people in Congress know everything. Shoot even the Speaker of the House was lied too and that was proven by several other Congressman that she was lied to by the people and power and you are posting as though Obama was aware of everything.

AS for prediction you're acting as though, because that's the impression I've given, Krugman was in some way in the know of what the whole spectrum of the government. Added to that Krugman himself said he wanted to play in politics or well Obama's admin. And that's ONLY the economics part. There is a slew more of other parts that are in play here and you ignore them to harp on one. Not to mention even Krugman had to give leeway and say in a round about way that Geithner did okay, not as much as he would have liked but did okay. And every other economist looking at the turn around has said the same--and you ignore that in your post.

As for the rest of your post...ridiculous. Because Obama had a great team of people he wanted to have a role and they were repeatedly tossed out. You act as though you don't know that Republicans have stopped over 80 of Obama's nominees from taking their positions. That's no joke and not to be ignored and you just shat on that. That includes people like Dawn Johnsen who would have done a damn well of good but the Republicans wont' allow.

You put more blame on Obama than even the real problem that we face which is Republican party that is catering to a quack jobbed base. You talk about being disingenuous. You're not so truthful yourself.

[vi5]

32. I don't put MORE blame on Obama...

..than on the republicans, but I'm also not going to fall for the revisionist line of BS that "nobody could have predicted" or "nobody knew", and definitely not that he doesn't share some of the criticism for gambling on the notion that going small and hoping for the best was a winning strategy.

Not only were there plenty of economists talking about how bad the problem was and how bad it was going to get, and what was really needed to fix the problem completely, any student of basic history knows what has happened in the past and what was needed to get out of it. And I admitted that what he chose to pursue stopped the bleeding. But it was still nowhere near enough to fix the problem or to stop the actions and behaviors that got us into the problem in the first place.

And anyone with even 1 eye and 1 ear could have told you how the republicans were going to react to anything he did and how they were going to react to a Dem controlled house and senate and what types of tricks they were going to pull, and how they would respond to "bipartisanship". But he put a priority on that anyway, and as a result ceded far too much control to them and to the misguided notion that he could do anything to appease them. So we now find the situation still bad and getting worse, and we find ourselves as a country with a "center" that is pulled even further to the right because he chose to start at the center and put faith that the GOP would meet him there and instead they pulled him and us further to the right. Rather than fighting for the moon and ending up somewhere in the middle.

Look the fact is that he chose to put into place where he had the power, and advocated for where he didn't have the power but still had the influence, policies which were rooted in some belief that trickle down economics works and is in the best interest of the country. It's not, it doesn't and this has been proven again and again over the span of the past 50 years.

So no, I don't think he bears any of the blame for the original problem at all and I've never said that. And I think he gets credit for realizing that SOMETHING had to be done and for at least stopping the bleeding. But until he gets economists in there and advisers in the there and starts advocating for what needs to be done to fix the system (Warren being where she is, is a good start......vetoing this shitty foreclosure bill is another good move) then we're going to be right back to where we were very shortly.

[kentuck]

34. Actually, nobody knew.

Just as nobody "knows" what it is going to be two years from now. We can make predictions and guesses but we do not "know".

But, we should not forget that the President spent a huge amount on a "stimulus", which has probably kept our heads above water for the last year and a half, but has now run its course. We read today that states are laying off 58,000 teachers.

It has become taboo to spend money to stimulate the economy. The Repubs argue that we need more taxcuts and less regulation, just like we have now and just like we have had for the last 30 years, and look what it got us? This is the argument we have to make. Taxcuts have not worked and will not work. The opponents say it is the uncertainty caused by the socialist in the White House. That is the BS we need to fight.

[vi5]

53. Yes, but who do you listen to?

People who consistently got things wrong in the past, or people whose models most accurately predicted what was going to happen?

Who do you listen to? The person or philosophy that says "Hmmmmm...this situation is dramatically similar to this other period in history where action 1 failed to fix it, but action 2 did fix it.....I recommend we try action 1!!!" or the person or philosophy that says "Hmmmm...this situation is dramatically similar to this other period in history where action 1 failed to fix it but action 2 did fix it.....I recommend we try the approach that fixed the situation last time!"

The fact that republicans are obstructionist and that they argue that we need more tax cuts does not let our side off the hook for not doing enough when all evidence pointed to the fact that we needed more and all evidence and history pointed to the fact that what were were doing was not nearly going to be enough. You said it yourself: The stimulus kept our heads above water for a year and a half but it's run it's course. That's because our side chose to accept a temporary band-aid rather than to fix the problem or even attempt to fix the problem.

If the leadership of each branch fought tirelessly against the obstructionist tactics, and made the case in public and on tv and wherever else, again and again and again, and used every tool within their power to fight the obstruction and fight the lies then I'd be with you on this. But they didn't. They started from a position of caving and then expected us to cheer when they only got a fraction of what they supposedly wanted and what we all knew was needed.

So is "our side" to blame entirely? Not at all. But are they off the hook for any blame for the situation not getting better or possibly getting worse? No. Not at all.

[kentuck]

61. He listened to the "experts"...

The President can be criticized for who he listened to. And many, including myself, criticized him for it. But, we are where we are. It does no good to say "I told you so!" What do we do from today forward? If we think the economy is going to improve dramatically in the next few months, chances are we will want to stay with what we have. If we think we are in a long battle, then we will have to make a lot of changes. I think the latter. Nobody is off the hook.

But if we look at the facts, there is no rosy scenario on the horizon. Teachers are being laid off. States are making deep cuts to keep from going broke. The unemployment rate is stuck at a very high rate, for the longest time since the 1930's. We are facing very tough times. We either all hang together or we will all hang separately, as Ben Franklin said...

[vi5]

64. He listened to his experts....

..none of whom had a great track record. They advised him to play it safe. If he listened to any dissenting experts (and by all accounts he didn't) then he chose not to take their advice or chose not to make the case for their recommendatations. You're right, he did and we are where we are, as you pointed out. But we need to learn from mistakes. And whether or not the republicans mistakes would be worse (they would) it doesn't mean our side didn't make any.

I'm heartened by the fact that he seems to be changing course. Summers leaving (by choice or by force, I don't care) and Rahm leaving (ditto) are great starts, although now the choices he makes are his and his alone, including who he replaces them with. Giving Warren the power he gave her is another good start. And if he vetoes this atrocious foreclosure bill the Senate passed that will be another good sign. We can hang together rather than separately and I'm all for that. But I won't hang together if it's the result of someone or some group on our side insisting on making the same mistakes over and over and over again.

[kentuck]

67. It is unfortunate perhaps that he did make more decisions with his gut?.

a la George W Bush?

Regardless, we could have been in a much worse situation than today. It is true that the banks and Wall Street are doing good. I do not say that mistakes were not made.

I am encouraged that the President did not sign the foreclosure notarization bill that was put on his desk. And the next day, B of A says they are going to halt foreclosures in all 50 states? I don't know if there is a connection?

I don't know if the President is getting advice from different sources than before. He chose to play it safe rather than take the advice of liberal economists, it is true.

You say, "But I won't hang together if it's the result of someone or some group on our side insisting on making the same mistakes over and over and over again." I think a lot of folks would agree with you on that point but at this time, we don't have a lot of choices but to stand behind our President and hope he makes the decisions that are best for our country and the people at large.

[clarence swinney]

98. 8500 Billion

How many of you know this???

In 2008, Bush committed Treasury, Fed, FDIC to 8500B in potential Bailouts.
Repubs hit Obama on govt take overs.

I cannot comprehend how they can get by with such junk. D confuse me .

Most think O took over AIG and Fannie/Freddie.

Bush bought 80% of AIG stock in 2008
Bush took over Fannie/Freddie on 9-13-08
Bush put up first auto bailout money to Chrysler in 2008.

I am xxxxx to tenth power.

I would be screaming all over TV. Not Democrats. Why? What is wrong? Where is War room?

Axelrod Rhamn Congressmen????? DNC? I am confused. Nuke Material.
olduglymeanhonest madmadmad X 10

[clarence swinney]

99. 500 Banks

got money

25 in North Carolina

[clarence swinney]

96. We did not know

Clinton CEA reply to major chewing out the gave them.
He said "You are the experts and you let me promise a Middle Class Tax Cut and cut the Deficit in half". He could not do both.

Their flip. "We did not know Bush Deficits were so bad. He hid them."

Pure Baloney. I knew certainly they knew.
Bush did not hide it. It was in his budget five year forecast.

[Skittles]

109. they should have let the country know just how bad it was

[vaberella]

147. Ugh they did. You can pick up any article or newspaper on it.

You know very well that Obama can't get people appointed. That's been clearly stated over and over again. You know very well that we have Republican obstruction that's been clearly presented. You know very well that the departments are corrupt---I believe we found all that out in regards to the oil spill and the pentagon news was well known since Gates said he'd fire people if he found out who was doing it. Economically is a no brainer. I don't see what you're asking when this sort of information was out there. And Obama has said in interview after interview and news that this is definitely a more than we would think. I don't understand what more you want.

[Skittles]

187. a LOT more

it is quite clear enough wasn't communicated since the rightwing nutjobs have been allowed to run wild with the OBAMA CAUSED THIS bullshit

[vaberella]

24. Absolutely fantastic post Kentuck. Poignant and substantial. Thanks. n/t

[Mefistofeles]

25. You say the jobless rate was "stuck around 10%" when Obama took over. It was 7.6 actually

http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2009/feb/wk2/art02.htm

[firedupdem]

26. K&R

I support my president.

[impik]

27. Best OP in months

If people can't see who's on their side and who isn't, if they're going to take the ball and go home because it turned out that this man is, in fact, a man and not a Messiah, and they're willing to let this democracy fall in the hands of fascists, racists and evil - then they deserves whatever disaster coming at its way next month.

[Enthusiast]

165. While many of us express our

dissatisfaction, very few of us are planing to "take the ball and go home." And I've never heard a single Obama critic "willing to let this democracy fall in the hands of fascists, racists and evil." Actually we are fighting this with all our energy.

I've donated to many candidates and already voted a straight Democratic ticket.

[Beacool]

31. Hey, he wanted the job.

All this complaining about how tough he has it means squat to the millions who have lost their jobs and to those who have also lost their homes.

For all the berating from the WH to "buck up" and "stop whining", THEY are the ones who constantly whine about what a tough economy they inherited. Too bad, the economy was lousy before they took over. Therefore, if they didn't think they could handle the job they should have stepped aside and let others takeover.

I don't feel an iota of empathy for them, including Obama. The ones I feel for are the ones who despair each day about how to pay their bills, feed their families and keep a roof over their head.

:shrug:

[ClarkUSA]

36. "I don't feel an iota of empathy for them, including Obama."

Wow, that's such a surprise. :eyes:

<< For all the berating from the WH to "buck up" and "stop whining" >>

Really? I disagree. I'm a liberal and I don't feel that way at all.

What's ironic is that you have a long history of deriding liberals in general -- especially those who dare criticize DLC Royals Bubba & Hillary -- and in a far more "berating" fashion than anything allegedly coming out of "the WH".

[Beacool]

37. I berate liberals?

Anyone in particular? If you say Obama I'll start laughing, he's no liberal.

:D

[ClarkUSA]

40. Yes. You said this, for example: "The real issue here is that too many liberals are hypocrites..."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8465034&mesg_id=8465093

And then here's more derision against "uber liberals" from you, Beacool:

"The uber liberals will flame away, the rest accept the reality."
http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4533996#4535210

These comments are two of many I have seen from you over the years.

[Beacool]

42. Nothing wrong in what I said.

Sexism is just as rampant among liberals as it is among other groups. Many of the attacks on RW female politicians go beyond a disagreement in policy.

[ClarkUSA]

43. Funny how you didn't seem outraged when one of Gov. Brown's aides called Whitman a "whore" eh, Bea?

Link to your unconcerned response here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x469888#470000

I can only imagine how you'd react if an opponent's aide was taped calling Hillary Clinton a "whore" during a race. :eyes:

[Beacool]

45. I think that the comment was extremely inappropriate and disgraceful.

But it's par for the course as to how women candidates are treated by BOTH sides. BTW, equally disgraceful were all those who agreed with that aide's comment on the LW blogs (including on this board) and said that she indeed was a "whore". Great going........

;(

[ClarkUSA]

47. Uh huh. Sure. Funny how you didn't say so until I pointed out your lack of outrage.

:rofl:

[Beacool]

50. The OP was freaking out, stating that Brown was done in by that remark.

My response was made in that context.

[ClarkUSA]

54. lol! It was obvious from your reply you weren't at all outraged about Whitman being called a "whore"

So much for decrying "sexism" as a rule. I guess some people only make exceptions for members of one family, which is unfortunate.

[Beacool]

58. Oh, please..............

I have to go. I don't have anymore time to argue with you about feminism.

:eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

59. Selective bouts of outraged "feminism" restricted to the DLC Royal Family is not feminism at all.

A feminist would have been as outraged at Whitman's being called a "whore" as much as if Brown's aide had been talking about Chelsea or Hillary Clinton.

[Divernan]

159. Clark seems to be stalking you - & that's against the DU rules.

Plus, Clark selectively quotes you out of context.

[Beacool]

189. I know, thank you for noticing.

He's not the only one, but I take it in stride. I don't personally know these people, nor will I ever know them. So who cares what they say? I believe in freedom of expression, I have never alerted on anyone or put them on ignore. I also don't believe in censorship and have seen too many people who have left or been tombstoned.

Pity.......

:(


Take care!!

:pals:

[jenmito]

38. Obama doesn't whine about the economy he inherited. He KNEW what he was

inheriting, and he still wanted the job-and GOT it. He just points out the fact that no Repubs. are trying to help the economy recover, just so they can regain control in '10 in Congress. Despite the roadblocks the Repubs. and Conservadems have put up, Obama STILL managed to bring the economy back from the brink.

I think the one whining is the one who wishes HILLARY was the one who inherited this economy. :eyes:

[Beacool]

39. There must be some cognitive dissonance here.

Or do I have to take time to find Biden's quote about people stopping the whining, Obama's comments in the Rolling Stones interview, etc.?

Apparently the WH is upset that the base is not pumped up enough and has decided that the best course of action is to scold us into voting.

:eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

46. No, there's alot of spin "here". An overwhelming majority of "the base" approve of President Obama.

Saying "buck up" and "stop whining" to a small but vocal segment of malcontents who never liked President Obama in the first place (like professional media whore PUMA Jane Hamsher and her fans) aka. The Perpetually Outraged was long overdue, says this liberal member of "the base".

[treestar]

49. Hillary would have gotten the same whining

And would not have just sat there an taken it quietly, either.

[Beacool]

52. It depends on what she would have done.

I just hope that she would not have thought that the best way to rev up enthusiasm was by berating the base. If she did that, I would object too.

[ClarkUSA]

78. Hillary would've have gone ahead with Gen. McChrystal's 10 year +, 80K Afghanistan troop surge.

Thankfully, President Obama ignored her "advice". Once a DLC warmonger, always a DLC warmonger.

It doesn't take much to imagine what the Democratic base would've thought of that.

<< I just hope that she would not have thought that the best way to rev up enthusiasm was by berating the base. If she did that, I would object too. >>

Oh, you mean like this, Beacool?

Pssst! Want to hear what Hillary Clinton thinks of grassroots workers in the Democratic Party?

"Huffington Post: Clinton Slams Democratic Activists At Private Fundraiser"
www.huffingtonpost.com/.../clinton-slams-democratic_b_97484.html

[jenmito]

51. Biden told those who don't recognize all that Obama has accomplished so far to

stop whining. OBAMA isn't whining about what he inherited. He never HAS whined. Neither has Biden. Obama ALWAYS says he knew what he was getting into, he takes full responsibility for it, and is fixing it. YOU'RE whining because the person YOU wanted to win did not win. Deal with it and try acknowledging all the good Obama has done despite all the obstacles put in his way.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

141. +10!

:thumbsup:

[firedupdem]

84. there you go with that "base" crap. the big mouths encouraging

people to sit the mid terms out are NOT the base.

[ClarkUSA]

118. +1000

<< firedupdem (1000+ posts) Sat Oct-09-10 05:02 PM
Response to Reply #39

84. there you go with that "base" crap. the big mouths encouraging people to sit the mid terms out are NOT the base. >>

:applause:






:fistbump:

[treestar]

48. Doesn't make it an easy job

Or that the flack they get is fair.

The WH has my empathy, because I know what it is like when people criticize you even though you do your best or demand what is really impossible and refuse to understand why.

[Beacool]

55. I never thought that it was an easy job.

I just don't remember other WHs constantly complaining about what a tough job they had in their hands. They are the ones who need to buck up.

[ClarkUSA]

60. Quote when the WH has been "constantly complaining about what a tough job they had in their hands."

[jenmito]

66. Since she can't give us quotes, I'LL give you the quote he almost always

says after talking about the economy he inherited: "Now, I bring up all these things not to re-litigate the past-I just don't want to RELIVE the past." Wow-what a WHINER-wanting people to come out to vote for Dems. who will allow him to continue fixing the economy that the Repubs. got us into. :eyes:

[ClarkUSA]

81. Thanks for providing FACTS that refute Beacool's spin.

President Obama doesn't "want to relive the past" while some people can't seem to get over the past. ;)

[jenmito]

83. My pleasure...

you're exactly right with your conclusion. It's SOOO obvious. :)

[jenmito]

62. Could you provide just one quote where Obama complained about the tough job he has?

TIA.

[CJCRANE]

74. Shrub used to say that being president was "hard work". n/t

[Spazito]

68. "...they should have stepped aside and let others takeover."

Hmmm, gosh, I wonder whom you were thinking about with this comment?

Would you have felt an iota of sympathy if the "others" had taken over and found themselves in the same place as President Obama found himself upon election? You DO know that 'whomever' (no name need be mentioned as we know who that would be were you to have had your wish)was elected would have been in exactly the same place and, therefore, "the ones who despair each day about how to pay their bills, feed their families and keep a roof over their head" would still be in despair, don't you?

[Stellar]

133. Oh, please!

The ones I feel for are the ones who despair each day about how to pay their bills, feed their families and keep a roof over their head.

Then you should hope that Obama gets more support to help these people out, since you claim to 'feel' so much for them.

I know we can't look for any support from most bitter Clintonista's.

[Enrique]

41. I think he takes advantage of this sympathy

he knows people are going to bend over backwards to overlook things they wouldn't overlook for other people. And he knows a lot of people are out there defending him. Think of his "they talk about me like a dog" and think of that woman at the town hall talking about defending him.

I think the best part of your OP is "and so is the nation". There are lots of people out there that need defending out there, sometimes from him. Think Shirley Sherrod.

[ClarkUSA]

56. You would.

:eyes:

[bvar22]

57. Neville Chamberlain and Winston Churchill both had history thrust upon them.

Which one will President Obama emulate?

[ClarkUSA]

63. Neither. 44 will continue being the most successful president since FDR despite GOP stonewalling...

... and 24/7 backbiting from The Perpetually Outraged.

[bvar22]

72. Ole Neville had his ardent supporters too, right up to the end.

And partisan Republicans will continue to say that "Reagan was the best president ever" despite the harm he caused.
In their eyes, he was The Greatest.

I tend to discount people who treat politics like religion or sports, and use the same kind of fervor in their testimonials.

[ClarkUSA]

77. Yes, and Bubba "had his ardent supporters too, right up to the end" of his impeachment and beyond.

<< And partisan Republicans will continue to say that "Reagan was the best president ever" despite the harm he caused.
In their eyes, he was The Greatest.>>

"And partisan" Hillary supporters "will continue to say that" Hillary "would have been 'the best president ever" despite the harm' she "caused" to the unity of the Democratic party. "In their eyes," she is "The Greatest."

<< I tend to discount people who treat politics like religion or sports, and use the same kind of fervor in their testimonials.>>

Well, "I tend to discount people who treat politics" like a personal grudge match because they never liked President Obama or his supporters in the first place "and use the same kind of fervor in their testimonials."

[bvar22]

80. Oh. I see what you problem is:

"because they never liked President Obama or his supporters in the first place"

Your problem is, I LIKED Obama, and I still do.
After he received the nomination, I actively campaigned FOR him in a very RED area of The South.

I STILL like Obama and his family,
and give him credit where credit is due:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9283905&mesg_id=9286078

I have strong issues with his broken promises, and his Centrist, seeking Republican approval ("seeking Bi-Partisanship Consensus") style of leadership.
For example:
*Giving away re-importation of drugs in secret meeting to appease Big Pharm

*Giving away the Public Option in secret meetings to appease the Health "Care" Industry

*Giving away EFCA to appease the Chamber of Commerce

*Giving away Equal Rights and Equal Protections for ALL to appease the ChristoTaliban

*Giving away Czechoslovakia to appease Germany
.
.
.
Oops
My Bad.
That last one was Neville Chamberlain.

"Let me be blunt. Strong and successful presidents (meaning those who get what they want - whether that happens to be good for the country or not) do not accept "the best deal on the table". They take out their carpentry tools and the build the goddam piece of furniture themselves. Strong and successful presidents do not get dictated to by the political environment. They reshape the environment into one that is conducive to their political aspirations."

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/07/17

I still like Obama.
He is a wonderful speaker, a hell of a Nice Guy, and has done a lot to restore our International Image....
it just that we needed MORE than a nice guy.
We NEEDED a junk yard dog not afraid of a fight.
"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[ClarkUSA]

82. I'm not the one with the "problem" as I'm not one of the whiners Biden was referring to.

And forgive me if I'm rather dubious of your protestations of how much you "like Obama" since you have repeatedly compared him to Nazi appeaser Neville Chamberlain in your last three replies. As a general rule, you never fail to complain about him, even on the extremely rare occasions when you can muster up a few faint words of qualified praise.

You have also failed to back up any of your claims with a shred of evidence, bvar22. Thus, I won't bother to respond to empty rhetoric. Once again, I am reminded of how right Biden was.

[grahamhgreen]

65. THE SOLUTIONS ARE SIMPLE

Get the F*ck out of Iraqistan (he can do it with a phone call). If he just did this, it would stop our hemorrhaging.


Withdraw from the so called free trade agreements that are nothing more than job outsourcing agreements. Increase tarrifs on forign made goods. This is the ONLY way we will get our jobs back.

Advocate for single-payer, or get us the public option in order to fix health care costs.

Break up the monopolies, including the financial/media institutions that are destroying our democracy, using the Sherman anti-trust act. Repeal the financial services modernization act, GATT, NAFTA, etc. Prosecute white collar crime.

Prosecute war profiteering, and possible war crimes, including who lied us into the war & what happened on 9-11.


It's not hard - he just doesn't see that he should do it, yet.

[Rosa Luxemburg]

70. Wehn we win November we can do much more

[grahamhgreen]

134. Agreed!

[austin78704]

174. Well, when we won last november...

..we didn't do a whole lot. So what's going to be different this time?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

176. we won't be able to ANYTHING if the Republicans get in?

[Politics_Guy25]

71. Wow-excellent post

Very encouraging to read. Thanks again.

[BeyondGeography]

73. Great post; I think he will routinely have to do things he would have once considered distasteful

For the remainder of his term. Basically, we need to have the ideological fight that Democrats have avoided since Reagan. His mission will be to defend the rights of government in the face of private money. Issues such as Citizens United and Chinese money flowing through the U.S. C of C have to be brought to the forefront, relentlessly so. Americans have to decide once and for all if they want a strong, independent federal government. Give them a stark choice in 2012, because, if he loses, things will be very stark indeed.

[kentuck]

76. I tend to agree.

We have to say that it is time to throw their supply-side crap into the trash bin of history. It hasn't worked and we cannot afford any more trial runs. When Reagan tried it first, we were less than $1 trillion dollars in debt as a nation. Look at us now. It is not because we created all these social programs for the people that we are in debt. It is because their philosophy spent us into oblivion without paying for it and transferring the wealth to the very top as they did it. Just put it on the credit card.

At the same time, they were brainwashing the American people in believing that we had to have a world-wide economy. Why? So they could make more and more profits for themselves and their stockholders. Who suffered? The workers and the middle class of this country.

They said we needed treaties such as NAFTA and GATT so we could compete with those folks that were willing to work for .50 cents an hour. Many of our jobs, including manufacturing, left the country. Then jobs, like low-paying customer service jobs, left the country also. And the computer makers, and the TVs, and the clothes, and the shoes, and the cars, and the appliances. And there was nothing left.

But they had a scheme.

Instead of pay raises, they would give everyone credit cards.

Before the housing bubble, everybody was spending on credit cards. Except those, of course, who had maxed out on their cards, and had refinanced their homes to pay off their credit card bills and to have a little extra spending money. That had been the normal cycle for many average consumers for many years. But then, the housing bubble burst and that was the end of easy money - no more credit cards and no more re-financing the home. That is where we are today.

Unless we can put money into the pockets of average consumers, we will continue in this downward slide. We live in a consumer society. People have to consume or the economy stalls and declines. It is not true that people are not spending because they are "uncertain" about the future. They are not spending because they do not have access to money (or credit cards) the way they did in the past. This is the price we pay for easy credit.

Unless we change course and do something about the outsourcing, we are headed toward third-world status. There simply are not enough jobs for people to do. There are plenty of jobs but they aren't in America anymore.

[Doctor_J]

87. Starting Jan 21 he'll be spending all of his time defending himself on

impeachment charges.

[readmoreoften]

75. Poor baby! My heart bleeds for him.

If he actually led the country instead of trying to appease right-wing interests and corporate interests, it might help. If he stopped fucking over teachers and other unions (I don't really give a crap about the paid off union higher-ups, I'm talking about union MEMBERS); if he stood up for things he can EASILY stand up for, like LGBT voters, well then I'd feel a little pity for him.

You know who I feel sorry for? The American people. That's who I feel sorry for. Not Barack Obama.

[jaysunb]

92. You don't feel sorry for the American people.

If you did you'd be out busting your ass to see that no more harm comes to them by way of a Republican Congress. :evilfrown:

[ClarkUSA]

120. +10000

<< You don't feel sorry for the American people.
Posted by jaysunb

If you did you'd be out busting your ass to see that no more harm comes to them by way of a Republican Congress. >>

Nailed it. :applause:

[readmoreoften]

135. I truly fail to see a difference. In fact, Obama just had to veto what the Congress vomited into his

lap.

If you really cared about the American people--or any other people--you'd stop worrying about poor Obama's feelings and start fighting for them and with them.

[jaysunb]

183. I'm not worried about Obama or his feelings

I'm worried about you and people like you that seem to live in the emotional world as opposed the real one.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

79. Americans are in a very very tough situation, their elected officials should do al they can do

to serve them

i hate this reversal of who is the actual victim. none of the very rich members of congress, senate, executive office, judges are the victims. we are.

[Doctor_J]

85. It seems in my view that he resigned himself to a single term,

and decided that he would grease the rails to make his life easier with that in mind. I really thought we'd elected a fighter for Dems, working people, the downtrodden, minorities, etc. His lack of fight against the Repukes has been horrifically discouraging.

[kentuck]

89. Do you blame him alone?

Or any of his Cabinet?

Or the Leaders in the House or Senate? Or the Party in general?

Personally, I'm willing to give him at least two more years to see where we are at and where we are going? I will support him because he has enough people stabbing him in the back already.

[Doctor_J]

91. Everyone here will be suporting him

But he will be impeached, and, with at least 5 teabaggers in the Senate, probably convicted. and once again, like pretty much everything else for the last 20 years, we will do nothing about it.

I would have liked to see him change the entire outlook of how the country is run. Instead, he gave health care to the insurance company murderers, money to the banksters, the economy to proven anti-consumer insiders. He never pardoned Don Siegelman. He didn't prosecute Cheney for war crimes and treason. He didn't prosecute Rove for treason in the Valerie Plame affair. He for some reason (naivete?) thought that giving in to right wingers would make them play ball, and continued to invite them to play even when they expressly stated that their goal was to destroy him. In so doing, he pretty much pissed all over the people who voted for him to undo Bush's malevolent reign.

Of course he's not entirely to blame. But his willingness to appease the murderers, traitors, and terrorists on the other side of the aisle has been a major disappointment and probably a fatal mistake for the country.

[Number23]

95. With two wars, rampant unemployment and a litany of other ills

I'm glad Obama has not wasted one DAMN second on your list of demands. Can you explain to me how going after Rove for the Valerie Plame episode puts somebody through college? Gets them a job? If anyone has displayed naivete, it's you.

I am all for respecting the rule of law, but anyone upset that Obama "never pardoned Don Siegelman" when people are losing their homes right and left has their priorities in the wrong damn place.

But he will be impeached, and, with at least 5 teabaggers in the Senate, probably convicted. and once again, like pretty much everything else for the last 20 years, we will do nothing about it.

Good grief. I don't even know how to respond to this. There really is no appropriate response.

[Doctor_J]

100. You really are clueless, aren't you?

The president has let the right-wing repukes completely control the agenda since the day he took office. If he really believed that "compromising" and "meeting them half way" was going to cause them to play along and suddenly become concerned for the people of the US, then he really didn't deserve my money, time, and vote two years ago.

Would pardoning Siegelman and putting Rove in prison gotten someone a job? No. What it would have done is to begin to take the country back from the criminals, sociopaths, and traitors in the republicanparty when that was done, a jobs program, health care, infrastructure could have begun.

If you really don't understand how letting these criminals continue to get away with their crimes hinders progress in this country, you need to wake the fuck up

[Number23]

131. You don't get it.

And it is as clear as rain.

The idea that you think that pardoning Don Siegelman would somehow begin to put this country back on the path to economic and/or moral recovery is easily one of the stupidest things I've ever seen here. And that is TRULY saying alot.

Would I love to see Bush/Cheney et all in a jail cell somewhere? Heck yes. But do I think that this is even in the top one HUNDRED important things this President should be focusing on right now. HELL NO.

If you really don't understand how focusing his attention on the issues that matter the most to the vast majority of the AMERICAN PUBLIC advances his agenda and strengthens this country, you need to GROW the fuck up.

[Doctor_J]

164. Let me try to write it more slowly for you

The most important thing for the president to do is to take the country back from Rove, Beck, the Bush family, and hate radio. Everything else will follow from that. This is not number 100, or 50, or 20. It's number 1 - ahead of all of the deck chair rearrangements that you think are important.

Firing corrupt US Attorneys, prosecuting and imprisoning Rove, nullifying Rove's unlawful prosecution of Don Siegelman, investigating Diebold, and investigating Cheney's Energy Task Force would be a start on cleaning up the stench left by the Bush Crime Family. One of the biggest reasons I worked for Obama in 2008 was that I thought he was going to do something about all of the corruption during the Bush years. If you can't see that ignoring all of Rove's crimes hurts our chances to recover as a nation, you are part of the problem - a big part of it.

[Enthusiast]

172. Plus one!

Justice is job one!

[Number23]

186. How the hell can the President, let alone anyone, take "the country back"

from hate radio??! Do you have anything REAL to talk about??

Karl Rove is not in office. Beck and talk radio are not elected officials and the idiots who listen to them cannot be told by anyone to NOT listen to that swill. Do you have any idea what would happen if the freaking President or anyone in his administration tried to shut down hate radio?? How the hell old are you??

Obama has done alot about the corruption left by the Bush years. He has made the Justice Dept impartial again including reinstating unjustly fired US attorneys. He has significantly beefed up deregulation which has become lax as hell over the last 30 years. Because he's not personally spearheading a commission to imprison Bush does not mean that real, meaningful change has not happened and the fact that you have chosen to DELIBERATELY not see that is not his problem.

The "stench" left by the "Bush Crime Family" infiltrated so many areas it's impossible to count. But the most heinous, the most egregious areas were the war in Iraq, an insane amount of deregulation which has destabilized entire industries and large swaths of this country, and a ridiculous tax structure that has led to the rich getting richer while the poor are getting worse off.

Pardoning Don Siegelman AIN'T ON THE LIST OF CRITICAL ISSUES for this President. Prosecuting Bush and Cheney AIN'T ON THIS LIST. You go out and ask the American public what issues they think are the most important and 99% of the folks will say "HELP ME SAVE MY HOME" or "HELP ME PUT MY KID THROUGH COLLEGE" or "PLEASE GOD HELP ME FIND A JOB." Finding a jail cell for those criminals will have to wait until the country is not teetering on the brink. The fact that you seem INCAPABLE of understanding that really says alot about your ability to gauge what is going on and what is important in this country.

[Enthusiast]

170. Pardoning Don Siegelman would

have been a start.

[flyarm]

86. have you read many history books lately????????

this is nonsense!

I am just guessing..you didn't get shuffled into hallways and under desks in school as a child or get sent to tin shelters Huh???????

or live through the Kennedy administration and the Bay of Pigs days ?

or Cuba Missle Crisis..

Or John Adams didnt have Air Force 1 when he rode his horse from Mass to Philly in the rain and snow for months ..then on to Washington DC

Or go to France for a couple years away from his family by boat.

Or Thomas Jefferson..

Or Lincoln..

Or Harry Truman..


Did you forget Pearl Harbor?

How about Hitler..forget him too?
wow does anyone read history books anymore?? or is that just for OLD Democrats ?

[kentuck]

90. Who do you think was the last President to inherit this type of economy?

Perhaps not even Roosevelt? This was a unique disaster. And make no mistake, it was a disaster. And we are nowhere out of the woods yet.

[Fire1]

88. Many of us are well aware of his burden. I'm in total

opposition to his education reform but still an ardent supporter. If we lose both houses of congress, he might as well call it a day and there won't be much else to talk about.

[clarence swinney]

93. Democrats will not use Attack Tools

C to B to O Who Fumbled The Ball???
numbers rounded

Clinton left Bush an 1800B Budget
Bush Left Obama a 3600 Budget

Clinton left Bush a Surplus
Bush left Obama a 1400 Billion Deficit.

Clinton left Bush a 5700B of Debt
Bush left Obama an 11,800B of Debt

Clinton left Bush a 70% increase in Gdp
Bush left Obama a 40% increase in Gdp.

Clinton left Bush a 19.8% of Gdp in Revenues
Bush left Obama a 14,8% of Gdp in Revenues

Clinton left Bush an 18.5% of Gdp in Expenditure
Bush left Obama a 24,7% of Gdp in Expenditure

Clinton left Bush a 237,000 net new jobs created per month
Bush left Obama a 31,000 lowest since Hoover.

Clinton left Bush Peace on Earth
Bush left Obama Hell on Earth Two disastrous wars

Clinton left Bush a President most highly rated of any peacetime President in Asia, Africa, Europe.
Bush left Obama the most hated President in history
Bush left Obama an Housing Tsunami and Financial Volcano
Bush left Obama, in 2008, an 8500B Bail Out Commitment
Bush left Obama his Takeover of Fannie/Freddie, AIG, and first bailout of Chrysler

clarence swinney—political historian—lifeaholics of america
author-Lifeaholic--Life story of workaholic failure to lifeaholic success
University President-"Every college student should have this book"
comments welcome at [e-mail]

[pokercat999]

150. I think the FIRST bailout of Chrysler was in 1976?

$1.5 Billion to Lee Iacocoa. The year maybe wrong.

[LittleBlue]

97. How about this: Offer tax incentives for companies that hire the unemployed

Or perhaps quotas.

Would decrease our unemployed and increase economic activity. Currently there is rampant discrimination against the unemployed, and it's legal.

Why hasn't the president pursued this? Why focus on deficits and corporate profits? He isn't serious about it, it's all politics. Took me 5 seconds to think this up, don't tell me the president and his brilliant economic team can't figure it out.

[Just One Woman]

106. There already is

Tax incentives for hiring those that have been on unemployment. To get the credit, they must have been out of work for six months or more, but it is still a tax credit.

[LittleBlue]

107. Then we need quotas and discrimination laws

Because it's not an incentive enough to hire people.

There was an article on Huffington Post about how jobs still openly tell the unemployed not to bother applying.

This country has to come together now, this type of discrimination is hurting our economy badly.

[Just One Woman]

108. Yes it is despicable

The biggest one I have read about is Sony-Ericsson. I use my purchase power to not buy from them. And I wont buy from any others I see doing that. As a group, our power lies in our purchase power and our vote. There was some talk of not being able to run credit checks on job applicants but I am not sure where it ended up. I would love to see a non-discrimination for the un-employed. Sony said it couldn't afford to train people that had been out of work that long because the industry was changing that fast. There was also some banking/mortgage companies that said the same thing. Awwwww. Let's get the violins out. I don't care how much trouble they have to go to. They created the mess in the first place. Hire the people that need the jobs!

[Just One Woman]

105. VOTE!

All the more reason that we have to get the vote out. For the first time in my life I am asking people to vote party and I don't care if it is bozo running. I have always trumpeted voting your candidate and conscience, but not this time. Our democracy is in the hands of the voters, some of which are brainwashed. So it is up to us to make the calls, walk the neighborhoods, and talk to the retirement homes and colleges about what these republicans have become and what they are really saying they are going to do. Boast our accomplishments, but point out the alternative. Never have I seen a mid-term so important. And either way it goes is not going to be easy. So strap in. This ride is going to get bumpy!

[TBF]

110. The people are behind him - we were behind him with health

care and many are feeling sold out.

Those of us who care enough to post about politics are going to vote for democrats, but you've got a lot of independents to worry about. Wars still going on, no jobs, people losing their homes, the list is very long. Some esoteric change to their insurance in 2014 (if they can still afford the premiums) is not going to convince them ...

[defendandprotect]

111. Do NOT try to compare Obama to Lincoln nor FDR .... if Obama is in a tough

situation, he has put himself there - especially in nor following thru for the

public re MEDICARE FOR ALL -- and back room dealings with the health care industry

and big pharma!


Few Presidents have been burdened with such a heavy load.

What nonsense!

Two wars? Perhaps someone should play the video for you of Nancy Pelosi the morning after

the '06 elections where she affirms clearly . . . "Democrats were elected to end the war!"

And then the Democrats proceeded to refund these wars for four years now!

Obama inherited an economy that was in the process of total collapse. Wall Street and the Big Banks were finally caught up in their trap of greed and corruption.

And Obama's first steps were to put these corrupt and criminal corporations on government WELFARE!

The banks should have been NATIONALIZED ... as Rahm, himself confirms! See Rahm's comments below.

Homeowners were losing their homes by the millions. The jobless rate was stuck around 10% with no relief in sight.

Unemployment rate is STILL right now RISING! Obama has done very little about creating jobs --

which should begin with overturning the trade agreements!

And, Obama could have brought governors together -- as Governors had already tried to do during

the W Bush administration -- to deal with the foreclosures and stop them!

Did you ever hear the GOP or W Bush asking "What could I do?" ...

Of course not! Whether Democrats are the minority or the majority they let the GOP rule!!

I'm certainly not part of Obama's problems ... nor is anyone else who voted for a turn around

from the Bush years.

Obama's problems lie in his pro-corporate agenda -- taking money from corporations, permitting

himself to be sponsored by the health care industry -- as well as Baucus -- and then making

deals with them to sell out the American public!


If we're lucky, disgusted Democrats will do what I plan to do --

#1 - HOLD MY NOSE --

#2 -- KEEP FIRMLY IN MIND THE NEED TO MOVE TO THE LEFT --

#3 -- VOTE AGAINST REPUBLICANS BY VOTING FOR DEMOCRATS --

#4 -- NEVER VOTING FOR A CORPORATE/DLC DEMOCRAT IF I CAN AVOID IT --

#5 -- IF WE ARE SUCCESSFUL IN MOVING MORE REPUGS OUT OF CONGRESS THEN IT WILL BE AN

AUTOMATIC SHIFT TO THE LEFT --

#6 -- THEN WE WILL NEED TO DOUBLE BACK AND BEGIN TO TARGET ALL PRO-CORPORATE DEMOCRATS

AND REPLACE THEM WITH LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRATS.


If Republicans re-take Congress, we can only blame the Democrats who have thrown away

the best opportunity the nation ever had for MEDICARE FOR ALL!! And for acting like the

minority when they are the majority!



Here's Rahm "crowing" about why business should be grateful to Obama for opening up

schools to privatization -- and for keeping the health care industry privatized!!!



Here is the quote: ”In a Thursday interview, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel argued that rather than recoiling against Obama, business leaders should be grateful for his support on at least a half-dozen counts: his advocacy of greater international trade and education reform open markets despite union skepticism; his rejection of calls from some quarters to nationalize banks during the financial meltdown; the rescue of the automobile industry; the fact that the overhaul of health care preserved the private delivery system; the fact that billions in the stimulus package benefited business with lucrative new contracts, and that financial regulation reform will take away the uncertainty that existed with a broken, pre-crash regulatory apparatus.

http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=B2F85DDF-18...

This was posted by another poster here at DU on 8/12/10 --

If that doesn't make you sick you can't read!

[humbled_opinion]

138. You have said it better then many....

I find myself in 100 percent agreement with you.

[Mira]

113. Very clearly and eloquently stated. These are the facts Recommended

[emsimon33]

114. Obama could have stood with us, but instead

he chose the very people who got us into the mess and those who would rather cozy up to corporate greed and call the base retards rather than asking us to stand with him as he stood by us (which he didn't--he sold us and our welfare out to anyone who had a dime to give him--he didn't even sell out for eight pieces of silver!).

No, Obama chose his bed and now he has to lie in it. He did not bring the change that we voted for. He had the power of the people behind him and instead he made deals in smoke-filled rooms that sold out the very people who put him in the White House to begin with. He is a man without principles or vision, a puppet with no moral character but a silver tongue.

I worked hard and gave more than I could afford to get him elected and I am sorry that I didn't put my time, money, and effort behind Hillary. At least with her we knew that there would be little change and that she is a corporatist. And now we know the truth of Obama.

Chosen by history! You think????? No, chosen by the elite and the greedy to continue their rape of the country! And Obama is complicit and obedient!

[zenprole]

117. Seconded

It is we who are in this fix, not Obama, who will never face consequences for his (in)actions.

[readmoreoften]

136. +1.

[humbled_opinion]

139. +1

[defendandprotect]

185. +1 --

[johnnyplankton]

115. I'm in.

It's sink or swim time, motherfuckers!

[nradisic]

116. Amen.

well said...to the point.

Whether we agree with everything or only part of what Barack Obama has done, we are the people behind him...he still has much work to do.

I may be somewhat disillusioned, but I (and my wife) will vote in November and a straight Democratic Party line...the alternative is utterly unconscionable....

[creon]

158. so will I

I intend to vote Democrat.
I will not be holding my nose either.
I am not disappointed.

[Blue_Roses]

121. k and r

:kick:

[Guilded Lilly]

122. I stand behind him and will do anything to keep

ANY Republican from gaining any power anywhere. Period.

Putting any of these creatures back into power is UNACCEPTABLE. Period.

[madmax]

123. One of the most powerful OP's I've

ever read. This is a keeper which I'll refer to when I feel I can't take it another minute and the country is doomed

Literally brought tears to my eyes. Thank you.

[crim son]

124. I was listening to NPR as I drove home from my temporary, part time job

this evening. The story was about a woman who at one time had a stable job with great responsibility, which she left to get married and move with her new husband. Long story short, this educated, experienced and articulate fifty-year-old woman is now homeless. You people know why. When asked about her hopes for the future she spoke calmly at first but then broke down and began to sob through her words. My point: the President's position, however precarious, will never leave him homeless. He will never have to hit up friends for a place to sleep. He will never look back on his education and experience and realize he is still past his prime and viewed as useless in today's job market and therefore, let's face it, in general. So what, exactly is tough about where he stands now? He can act, or he can sit back. Either way, in terms that actually matter, he will be unaffected.

Eh, flame on or tombstone me. I have lost my tolerance for headlines like this one, though I don't blame the OP. I have lost my tolerance at the same time that we as a nation seem to have lost our compassion.

[anachro1]

125. Who were we to believe

that republicans would ever go along with a black president in office?
They never wanted anything to "Change" - it was all flowing into their pockets already.

As much as I like and admire this man, White Amerika would never have given him a chance.
Stupidity is the new norm.

[barbtries]

127. i support president obama

let's all vote in november, democratic please!

[jillan]

128. I support our President. I may not always agree with him, but he will always have my support.

[kentuck]

129. I can understand and empathize with every post in this thread.

Those that agree and those that disagree.

But the President is only a man. Even if he wanted everything that we wanted, he would have to fight the system that has taken root in this nation for 235 years. They do not submit to the desires of one man. Especially if he cannot get the House and Senate to agree with him. He cannot snap his fingers and get things done, no matter how many liberals may be advising him.

He could rant and rave, like a wild wind blowing, but in the end, accomplish nothing.

Like many here, who have been on DU since 2001, we experienced the anger and pain of the Bush years for eight long years. It ripped at our psyches to have to suffer thru that ordeal. We wanted and expected the change we had worked so hard for.

But, as the old song goes, you can't always get what you want.

The point of my OP was that we are in the midst of a severe crisis in our country. The choice may be one that we are very discouraged about or one that we know will do us all great harm. It is one thing to be hungry and homeless and have a government that at least cares about you than to have one that doesn't even know you exist. You can die in the unknown darkness, for all they care. That may not seem like a big difference but it is. We have to have hope. We cannot surrender. Not yet. We have to fight one more big battle before we can know if all our efforts were for naught. We cannot give up.

It is my opinion that we have not seen the worst of this economy or the joblessness that was laid at our doorstep. The President and the Democratic Party will have to adapt to new situations in the coming months. At least, when that time comes, we would prefer not to have the Republicans in charge. That would be like wishing cruelty on all Americans. I wish I did not think so negative about our future.

[BlancheSplanchnik]

137. yes, yes yes! a million times, YES!

That excellent vid up Sat afternoon put our job, right now, very well.

[DesertFlower]

140. K&R. nt

[bkozumplik]

142. Heres what Obamas got to do:

I'll start with the first weeks of office, even those those have passed. If he follows this formula, he's sure to bring us exactly where we need to go.

First off, ignore Bush and Cheney and the lawlessness of the past. Thats over and done. No time for that.
Ignore climate change.
stay on autopilot with the bush bailout, and stay on autopilot with the Bush withdrawal from iraq plans, but shift those soldiers from iraq to afghanistan. Dont end the war there, we have great reasons for being there.
get rid of your progressive policy advisors, get some rubinites to run the finances. They know how to soak in the corp money.
slap the progressives to get those bitches in line, buncha whiners.
Reach out as often as possible to the middle. You will need middle voters to get re-elected later.

Reach out to the right, repeatedly. They will almost literaly piss on you at first, but eventually, they will relent, because who doesnt like Barack Obama? no one thats who. Once you have the republicans on your side, everything will be great. You can be the post partisan president, finger wagging to both parties like some sort of know it all adult scolding kids. Just act like you are above the fray, and you will be. Its beneath you to get in there and fight old school. Dont be tempted to do it, because you're better than that-- Barack Obama, fighting like that is beneath your dignity.

Get big pharma to the table and cut a deal with them on this health care reform thing. They need to be totally happy with the outcome, so give till it hurts. As long as its labeled health bill at the end, it doesnt matter much whats in it.

When you hit a contentious issue, put the stuff you wanna be praised for in one bill, and then the actual hard and worthwhile stuff that might be contentious in another. Then pass the bill that looks good, and let the bill with the actual meat in it die. Thats how you make deals and get stuff done, I'm telling you (Ledbetter act). You have to remember sir, you arent just the executive, you're the leader of the party which controls both houses of congress. You got all kinds of leadership duties. Lead the party!

Get big banks to write the financial reforms. We dont want glass stegal back, for F's sake, and we need to re-inflate the derivatives market by any means possible. For gods sake, dont end the gambling on wall street, and pay off whoever lost their bets the last round.

Write some laws so that future bailouts are automatic, we cant suffer any sort of press next time it happens, and it WILL happen again. soon.

Worry about the deficit, because the republicans take it very very seriously, so you should too. Always listen to the republicans very carefully. When they whine, you gotta react fast. You should really fear the likes of Glen Beck and Rush Limbaugh. Fear them.

If Obama follows these points I have laid out, he has a 100% chance of gaining even more seats at the midterm election, and he will coast to victory after 4 years. Its a frickin cakewalk, especially for a guy who knows how to give good speech and facetime like Obama does.

No need to thank me buddy! I know you "got this", but I got your back! Democratic majority forever hoorah!

[bvar22]

178. I would be laughing if I wasn't crying.

Nailed It!
:patriot:

[jtuck004]

144. Not as tough as homeless families who can't find a job. n/t

[NanceGreggs]

145. K&R ...

Nice to see an OP calling for support of our own every now and again - an incredibly infrequent occurrence on this website of late.

[Imagevision]

146. I'll go with what JP Morgan said...

"By dividing the people we can get them to expend their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd." JP Morgan...

[BlueJac]

148. Not the post of the day......

Either people do as they say or they don't. Catering to Republicans from the start took the steam right out of a good chance to lead!

[pokercat999]

149. Tough situation? Well maybe but:

Two wars he could have been out of in 90 days, but chose instead to escalate one and continue the other on the down low.

Continued the TARP program of extend and pretend when he could have done the right thing and let the too big to fail....fail.

Did too little too late for jobs leaving the elephant in the room (China/India job loss) unmentioned and unchanged.

Kowtowed to the opposition in the face of their hatred and backstabbing.

It's too big a job for someone who's only real interest is in earning the corporate dollars necessary for re-election.

Obama has been and will likely to continue to be a disaster for the Dems and the "left", by continuing the policies of the right.

The people WERE behind him and he kept his back to us and only played with his NEW (corporate) friends.

[cornermouse]

151. Making a point.

:hippie: :hippie: :hippie: :hippie:

[lonestarnot]

152. K & R

[jerseyjack]

154. He started is admin. with problems. Big deal.

There were things he could have done without Republicans. Remove troops. Stop wiretapping. Not hire Rahm, Tim, and so forth. Prosecute Bush crimes. Executive order to end DODT.

Yeah, I'm a professional libr'l whiner.

[LawnKorn]

155. K&R

[creon]

156. True

It seems that nowadys we have a "every man for himself" attitude nowadays. It was a little different in the times of FDR and Lincoln. I doubt that Obama is going to get much support. From anyone.

[Enthusiast]

163. While I K&R this,

I did it with reservations. The President and his team made several fundamental errors when they took office.

Above all, it seems, the President wanted to 'work with Republicans'. Most of us, by a huge margin, knew this was foolhardy. President Obama even wanted to "Look forward" not even holding the previous administration responsible for misleading the country into an ill advised war(duh)and committing war crimes such as torture. These actions alienated some of the President's most ardent supporters right from the start. I could go on and on but many of us feel that President Obama must have been shooting hoops from 2000 to 2008 to not recognize the record setting criminality of the Bush Administration.

The country was/is in a state of emergency, progressives are the only ones with plan to correct this. Indeed the Republicans/Teabaggers promise more of the same corporate subservience that got us into this mess.

You can't compromise and play footsie with fascist enemies of the nation. If you deny the existence of these enemies just take a look around at the nature and cost of these midterm elections. "We the people" can't outspend the multinational corporations in their attempt to purchase the nation.

"Either we must be part of the solution or we are part of the problem." Spare me. This sounds very like the Bush, "You are either with us or against us." And you say, "We must recognize the gravity of this dilemma." I say, "The President and his team should have recognized the gravity of the situation right from the start."

[kentuck]

166. Although I agree with most of your comments...

It is my belief that this economic recession and all the other problems were so deep that it will take much longer than 2 years to clean it up. We were put in a deep, deep hole. Also, I grimaced when the Administration said that the "stimulus" would keep the unemployment from going above 8%! That was the moment I thought they had no idea how serious the situation truly was.

But, my hope is that they finally see the light. I have disagreed with the Administration on several issues, as have you, but we need to recognize that it is going to take more time and we have to give the Democrats a little more time to put us on the right track on those issues where most Democrats disagree with the Administration. The alternative is totally unacceptable.

[Enthusiast]

175. I've already voted for

every Democrat I can legally vote for in this midterm election. And I've sent many Democratic candidates as much money as I can afford. So I am basically doing all I can.

The Republicans keep harping on the Administration saying the stimulus would keep unemployment at 8%. I wonder if he said it at all. But it has now become reality whether he said it or not.

[pattmarty]

167. Uh, "the people" were behind him, that is why they gave him.............

..........huge majorities in both Houses. What have the Dems given the country? A shitty health "reform", a shitty financial "reform" and we are STILL fighting two wars that the Dems were voted into office in 2006 to end. I'll say it again: "We needed an FDR, and what we got was a black Bill Clinton". You can choose from one of two things, either he is "weak" and won't fight for the things he should OR he is bought and paid for by the PTB. My opinion it's both.

[Doctor_J]

181. Looks to me like he was allowed to take office for 4 years while Big Media

works to cleanse the Bush name. Jeb will probably be elected in 2012 so we can go back to the same ideology we lived under in 2001-2008

[creon]

168. Obama is OK

On a scale of 1 to 10, I give him a seven.
He does not have much to work with. The Democrats in Congress are very weak; with almost no political will or courage to do much of anything. The GOP is a blind kitten.

The economists are no help. Very few of them have any solutions; Krugman and Stiglitz are the two with the most sense. And, they are ignored.

The biggest failing is the lack of urgency. The economy is in dire straits. The WH and Congress should started moving right away. It is called triage.

[COLGATE4]

177. My problem with Obama is that he did not take his plan directly

to the people the way FDR did. He had tremendous political capital at the beginning and he squanded it in a vain attempt to be "President to all the people" and prove that bipartisanship wasn't dead in Washington. He wanted so badly to make any deal bipartisan that the Rethugs made him negotiate against himself, so when he finally got his cherished reforms they were almost unrecognizable. He preferred to play inside politics rather than vigorously (and loudly) fight for his ideas by incorporating the people as his backers. He let the vacuum created by his absence on the issues be taken over by the Teabaggers, never going on the airwaves and telling people what he wanted to do and what that would mean for him. He didn't sell his ideas and wound up compromising them. He could have taken a lesson from FDR.