I gotta say it -- Obama has become a DLC pseudo-Democrat

[Armstead]

I'm beginning to think that Hilary would have been better.

I strongly supported Obama in the primaries, because I did not want to see more of the same DLC Corporate Crap (socially liberal GOP Corporate Conservatism) take over the Democratic Party and the White House again. I thought another Clinton would have just perpetuated the same old pro-corporate nonsense that helped to create the mess we're in today.
I had no illusions that Obama was a wild-eyed progressive populist, but he seemed to be a good moderate liberal who would bring a different approach than the collusion with the oliogarchs that is the hallmark of DLC "centrism."

Boy did I call it wrong. Obama has done the kowtowing to the corporate elites, given the same "stick-in-the-eye" to the so-called left and basically ignored more and more of his promises.

Hillary might have actually been more liberal.

Instead of fresh air and people-oriented policies, we get Obama's FCC tossing out net neutrality, approving the Comcast plan to create a monopolistic communications empire, pushing for more "free trade" robbery of the working class, hiring a corporate henchman to run his administration, and griping in the Wall St. Journal that there is too much regulation of business. (awwwwwe poor babies in the board rooms.)

Yes he is much better than any Republican. Yes I'm glad he and the Democrats are still nominally in charge, for now.

But, Jeeze Louise, we're going right back to the worst side of the 90's, in terms of supporting and enabling the takeover of o0ur nation by the Corporate Oligarchy.

Change you can believe in? Yeah, I guess if you're a wealthy executive or investor.

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[derby378]

2. Personally, I think the results would have been the same with either candidate

There was hope that Obama would be more liberal than Clinton, but those hopes appear to be dashed.

[Exilednight]

23. I agree. I believed Obama to be to the left of Hillary, thus my

support for him during the primary. I feel as if I were hoodwinked.

A lot of the major legislation that he passed (e.g. HCR mandate) is the same platform that Hillary campaigned on.

[area51]

64. +1 n/t

[Tesha]

3. Welcome to the crowd.

There was a reason he was my second-to-last choice.

Tesha

[Armstead]

5. Hope springs eternal....Or perhaps it was any port in a storm

[gateley]

4. I share your dismay, but I'm not sure anyone could have done things much

differently once actually there sitting at the helm. It always looks so easy - or at least easier - when we're not the ones who are doing it. Unless you have a Cheney/Rumsfeld Tower of Evil running the show, progress is slow and painful in DC.

[Armstead]

6. I'm okay with slow progress -- What I'm not okay with is changes in thbe opposite direction

[gateley]

49. I hate some of the stuff that's happening - absolutely devastated and enraged, but

there are a lot of things we have accomplished that are great steps forward.

I hate slow progress. :7 Drives me up a wall, but as long as we're going in the right direction on at least SOME issues, for that I'm grateful.

[rfranklin]

8. As President, now that you have all those spying powers....

why not do like J. Edgar Hoover and build up dossiers on everyone, gathering info about all their peccadilloes and transgressions. Then when you need some leverage you got it.

[gateley]

51. That's what Homeland Security is for.

:grr:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. President Obama has governed mostly as he campaigned

He never pushed himself as being some rigid progressive ideologue and he has always presented himself as more of a moderate/centrist but I think that in a lot of ways better on the issues that Bill had to be. It is, of course, impossible to know how Hillary would've been as POTUS but if I remember correctly, her positions on foreign policy were a lot more "hawkish" than President Obama's and her health care reform proposals were quite similar to what President Obama helped push through. I strongly suspect that we'd be having pretty much the same discussions about President (Hillary) Clinton that we're having now about President Obama to say nothing of Republican Tea Party antipathy towards her.

[JamesA1102]

11. Well said nt

[Exilednight]

25. He hasn't governed like he campaigned

if he put half as much passion as he did into campaigning, he might not have lost nearly 20% of the liberal base.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

62. Governing isn't the same as campaigning

Campaigning is about trying to win a contest (aka election) and defining yourself against your opponent. It's easy to be passionate out there on the campaign trail saying all of the things you want to do and attacking your opponent. Governing, however, is about having to bring lots of different people with lots of different viewpoints (even if they happen to be members of the same party) together in order to keep government running. Some negotiation and compromise (and less passion) is inevitable, even necessary, to keep government running in a democratic society IMHO.

[Hello_Kitty]

63. So basically we shouldn't have believed anything he said during the campaign.

Or at least qualified every campaign promise he made with the caveat "some negotiation and compromise will be necessary for governing".

I can't tell you how excited that makes me to get out on the campaign trail for the President and Dems in 2012. :sarcasm:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

71. Name one candidate (for any office) that's managed to do EVERYTHING they campaigned for

and/or gotten everything through a legislative body in the precise form that they wanted it to be? Of course, yeah, we want candidates- once in office- to make good on most of their campaign promises (or at least some of them) but to suggest that a candidate can accomplish everything that they want, especially without some negotiation and/or compromise, is, frankly, unrealistic IMHO. I think that most people whom vote naturally understand this. The question is not whether a candidate is able to do everything they promised but rather that they did at least some of what they promised that and that it helps people, the country, etc.

I'm sorry to hear that you probably won't be excited enough to get out on the campaign trail for President Obama and the Dems in 2012 despite some of the accomplishments (that he campaigned on) of the past two years but that's, of course, your prerogative.

[Hello_Kitty]

77. Well I'm sure you guys will amass an army of sensible moderates to do the grunt work in '12. eom

[StarsInHerHair]

88. I heard Kennedy was good

still waving those things..............?

[mkultra]

75. poitifact reports that Obama has fullfilled 25% of his promises

which by their measure is astoundingly high.

[Name removed]

78. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

9. So DLC would have been "more liberal" than "DLC pseudo"? Let's count the way

in which that's inaccurate: one, two, three, four and five.

[JamesA1102]

12. Thanks ProSense!!! nt

[Armstead]

16. Sure, Obama has done some good things.....However...

We do not need a president who is going to zig and zag and send mixed messages.

Once he supported sorta regulation...Now he's going back to the old Dlc line that regulation hampers economic progress.

Why did Obama not advocate more strenuously for real net neutrality? why has misadministration rolled over and given the okay to yet another damaging round of Media Mergermania with nary a peep?

As I said in my OP, sure he' better than any Gopper, but I sure wish he'd work harder to restore a balance towards the public interest, instead of echoing GOP/DLC talking points.

[ProSense]

21. "Once he supported sorta regulation...Now he's going back " No,

he's not. From the President's op-ed

<...>

Sometimes, those rules have gotten out of balance, placing unreasonable burdens on business—burdens that have stifled innovation and have had a chilling effect on growth and jobs. At other times, we have failed to meet our basic responsibility to protect the public interest, leading to disastrous consequences. Such was the case in the run-up to the financial crisis from which we are still recovering. There, a lack of proper oversight and transparency nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale Depression.

<...>

President Obama has always been pro-regulation.

[Armstead]

33. The problem is when he feeds the corporatist message machine

Sure, like evrything else, there has to be a balance in regulation.

However for the last 30 years, the anti-regulatory corporatist conservatives have had the megaphone, and used it to relentlessly push the message that regulations and accountably are evil and destroying the economy.

By echoing that, and promising the corporate elites to clean out regulations, Obama is helping that rather than restoring real balance.

[StarsInHerHair]

89. ever hear of the 1996 Telecom Deregulation Act?

Them Regullashuns r BAAD..........

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

83. Simply amazing!! Thank you! n/t

[Cali_Democrat]

10. Obama has definitely moved to the right since his election

But I don't see how Hillary would have been better. She probably would be even more to the right if you ask me. She ran to the right of Obama during the primaries.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted sub-thread

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

[karynnj]

14. The reality might be that the powers that be made sure the only choice was Obama or Clinton

It may be that both were in the Centrist part of the party. It is also possible that the reality of passing legislation is that nothing can be passed that is far from the center (as far as the left is concerned.

I was for Obama in the primaries, but admit it was because he was not Edwards, who I thoroughly disliked because he was so little help in 2004 and then lied about the campaign to make himself more popular, and not Hillary, who I disliked for her hawkishness and her disgraceful stabbing Kerry in the back. This left Obama as the only other choice. I then was impressed with his personality and his eloquence. (I also realize that since I first voted in 1972, the only two candidates that I was more impressed with over time as I learned what they had done and believed in were Kerry and McGovern. Given that track record, once Kerry was not a candidate, I knew I would not be as committed as I was in 2004 or 1972. )

But, I have been very impressed that - with the major exception of climate change - Obama has been able to get more passed than many pundits thought possible. On foreign policy (including Afghanistan), I have been less impressed. Still, I am more impressed than with Carter and Clinton - and obviously all the Republicans.

[Blue-Jay]

15. It's almost like nobody has ever said anything similar on DU.

Original Thoughts for 200, Alex.

[Armstead]

20. maybe because it's true?

[FrenchieCat]

24. When were you last supportive of this President?

Just curious.

[Armstead]

27. I am supportive...But reserve the rightful to criticize him when I disagree

One of the reasons I get critical is because I think he can do better.

I have much respect for him...But I also get very frustrated by him.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

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

[FrenchieCat]

17. What promise has Obama ignored?

As for Hillary.....
She would have been better how, exactly? :shrug:


Thanks.

[vaberella]

19. If it's endless war they wanted...she'd have given them that.

Rumor has it he's cutting SS, haven't you heard Frenchie...? That's what the left has been saying and Congressmen are feeding the frenzy...

[FrenchieCat]

22. But Obama hasn't said that this is something that he will do......

So how can someone put words in his mouth and then start yelling real loud about being mad
about what the President didn't say? How does this have anything to do with reality or
even facts as to what is actual happening?

I understood that the RW does this,
but I didn't realize that even now, there are some who claim to be reasonable individuals
who are pursuing doing this too.

[Exilednight]

26. Well, let's take a look

National public option? Nope.
Ending the war in Iraq? Nope.
Closing Gitmo? Nope.

You can, and probably will, argue that Congress denied him these things, but the fact is that he ran as a candidate who can bridge the divide and accomplish these major goals.

[Arkana]

32. There are no more troops in Iraq.

And you can thank Congress and their craven NIMBY asses for not closing Gitmo.

[Exilednight]

36. No troops in Iraq, you say? So how do you explain the death of six US soldiers during

combat operations since the beginning of the New Year?

And let us not forget the 12 other soldiers who have died in combat operations since withdrawing combat troops.

I won't even get into the fact that we replaced nearly every soldier from the draw down with private military contractors, aka mercenaries.

[StarsInHerHair]

90. VERY EXPENSIVE mercenaries at that! OVERPRICED I might say...........

nt

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

46. A troop by any other name would fight just the same

The 50,000 US troops left (in Iraq) until 2011 will supposedly "advise and assist" and perform "anti-terrorism" missions and training. ... These remaining rebranded US "training" troops will likely be six armor-heavy combat brigades, backed by warplanes from US air bases in the Gulf. Huffington Post

[Drunken Irishman]

48. And that makes him a pseudo-Democrat?

:rofl:

[Exilednight]

57. I made no such claim. I just answered the above posters question. n/t

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

28. Deleted message

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

[Odin2005]

29. Both have always been Corporatist hacks.

[Name removed]

31. Deleted message

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

[hulka38]

34. Obama and the Clintons are all DLC.

At least we gave the candidate a try who was strongly against the Iraq War from the beginning as opposed to the one who caved to GOP pressure in order to act tough. I'm certain that Hillary would not have delivered a public option as the PO is antithetical to the DLC agenda. What I've learned the last three years is that any serious Democratic candidate for President for the foreseeable future will be firmly DLC, no matter how catastrophic the DLC's policies are.

[Armstead]

39. That happens because we allow it to

You're correct. We're probably stuck with DLC mush....But it is disappointing to briefly believe we could do better, and then find we're stuck with the same old s---

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[Beacool]

37. I knew this would be good!!!

:popcorn:



:7

[Armstead]

45. I figured it would bring out the popcorn

[dionysus]

60. you better be nice, or no you-know-what...

:evilgrin:

[Beacool]

66. Ooohhh, promises, promises.........

:eyes:



:evilgrin:

[dionysus]

68. yeah, *you* promise to be good, i give you Banky, and then look what happens.

:D

[Beacool]

72. I HAVE been good!!!

I only took out my popcorn and watched the fur fly.

:(




:P

[Name removed]

38. Deleted message

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

[bertman]

40. My REC but still sitting on ZERO. Barack Obama/Hillary Clinton. DLC twins. nt

[Skittles]

41. YOU ARE CORRECT

[Duke Newcombe]

42. The sleeper has awakened.

Welcome to the club, brother/sister.

[Name removed]

43. Deleted message

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

[Armstead]

44. Yeah, it is too bad they keep disappointing

How's that Public Opoti0on working out?

And those tax breaks for the rich?

And I'm so glad we're still empowering those poor suffering corporations.

[CakeGrrl]

47. Had to know another one of these posts would be along soon enough. Unrec. n/t

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

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

[BklnDem75]

52. Unrec

Same message, different date :thumbsdown:

[Ramulux]

53. Calling Obama a DLC centrist....

is only the most obvious statement in the world. We now have a supposedly democratic president who supports unfettered free trade, massive defense spending, tax cuts for the wealthy, and de-regulation. Thats not even taking into account all the scumbags who he put in his administration and the insulting way he has treated his liberal base over the past 2 years.

So yeah, if anyone doesn't get it by now, Obama duped all of us, he said exactly the right things during the campaign, was on the right side of almost every issue, and within days of winning the presidency changed his position on dozens of issues.

A lot of people like to talk about trying to understand Obama, trying to understand why he makes the decisions he makes and honestly I couldn't give less of a shit. I truly dont fucking care about whats going on in his head, I care about what his beliefs are and sadly he has demonstrated over the past 2 years that the whole "reform" and "hope" and "change" stuff was bullshit and he never intended on even attempting to fundamentally change the system. However I dont think Hillary would have been any better, she would likely have governed identically to Obama, the only plus side I guess is that we would have known what we were getting with Hillary, with Obama all our hopes were built up and we thought we were getting something different and in the end we just got more DLC democrat-lite crap.

[truedelphi]

54. I know. i know.

I commiserate.

And what can you say about a President who has succeeded in making "hope" a dirty word?

[BobbyBoring]

95. I Think we have to understand

That Obama is doing the same thing that anyone would do once they take office. He's doing what he is told. Hillary would be doing what she was told. Mc Cain would do what ever he pleased B/C he goes along with the oligarchy.

Every "Accomplishment" Obama has made has been no more than a gesture. HCR is anything but. If we had financial reform, more than a few bankers would be put away for ever.

Anyone notice all the shifting in his staff? It's sort of like Ws. Many are bailing as they simply want no part of it.

Yes, we've been had, but it's by the same people that have been "Having" us for a long time~

[Armstead]

96. I hate to say it, but I agree with that

It's a depressing thought, but looking more true everyday.

[trayNTP]

55. Top recipients of Wall Street money in 2008 - #1 Obama, #2 Clinton. Neither was better.

He's doing what both would have been doing.

Only difference is, she wouldn't have had a pushover personality.

[JoePhilly]

56. There was almost no difference between Obama and Hillary on policy.

If the "left wing base" was a strong or powerful as it thought it was, Dennis or Edwards would have won the primaries.

That didn't happen.

Obama has governed pretty much just as he said he would. Hillary wouldn't have done much different ... although I don't know if DADT or HCR happen at all if Hillary were President.

[Beacool]

58. Yes, but the left trashed the Clintons and carried Obama over their shoulders.

DailyKos, Huff and this board, were all in the tank for Obama. It makes me laugh to think that they would have thought him to be the more progressive.

I have concluded that both parties are basically the same, they are opposite sides of the same coin. We just had a midterm election, now they'll concentrate on 2012 and they'll do whatever it takes to obtain or remain in power. We the people are only to be courted when our votes are needed. The rest of the time we should know our place and STFU. As of June 2008 I'm a registered Independent. Both parties turn my stomach. The Democrats to a lesser degree, but not by much.

:shrug:

[Armstead]

61. I guess it like what seemed to be fresh bread vs. stale familiar bread

Fresh bread seems like a better choice because its' marketed on the package as new and different. But if it's the same old stuff inside the package, it's the same old bread....Oh well

[dionysus]

59. it's been a while since we had one of these "Sorry Hillary" posts...

:rofl:

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

65. I doubt there would be much difference between the 2..... unfortunately. nt

[NYC Liberal]

67. Yawn.

He's done a great job. And anyone who claims they didn't get what they voted for is either lying or an idiot.

I got what I voted for and I'm happy for it.

[Armstead]

73. I guess that makes me either a liar or an idiot

I had no iullusions, but I did buy his nonsense about bringing a change and empowering people.

I thought he would at least be better than the same old, same old.

[NYC Liberal]

79. Not nonsense. An overwhelming majority of both liberals and

Democrats agree that he has done a good job. And his overall approval is going up.

[Mass]

69. Unfortunately, every single candidate who had a chance of winning would have been the same.

The media machine makes sure that you cannot deviate from what is considered good or they will clobber you. To do anything, you have to subscribe to their diktats, and their diktats are the same as the corporate right.

[Enrique]

70. i call disingenuousness

I've read many of your posts. I can't believe you didn't see Obama's centrism til now, and I can't believe you see Hillary as being significantly different than him.

[Armstead]

74. I saw his centrism as moderation......I was wrong

Moderate liberal/progressive is one thing. That is what I thought Obama would be.

Centrism that goes against liberal principles is a different animal.

My disappointment is that difference.

[mochajava666]

84. +1

Well said

[MasonJar]

76. Hillary is more liberal than Obama or Bill.

Hillary is more liberal than Obama for sure, especially on women's issues, where she is an advocate and a proponent worldwide. I tried to warn you all. I know that Obama had not been in the Senate long (which also worried me/he could have used more experience), but some of his votes there and interview comments were disturbing to a liberal like myself. They did not coincide with the rhetoric of his campaign, which signaled to me that he might not be what he promised. I admit to you that I wanted a woman, but I threw myself behind Obama when he won the primary. I have been very disappointed.

[Exilednight]

80. Hillary is the same as Obama. I admit that I was duped by Obama, but Hillary

is not as liberal as some people like to believe. She came to the Democratic party out of the Goldwater movement. As Secretary of State she has proven to be more hawkish than the majority of the Democratic party. Although, that became quite clear during the primary season when she advocated for a prolonged stay in Iraq.

She's proven that she values free markets over fair markets. Not that Obama has done better since taking office.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

82. Amazing how this thread hasn't been closed...

[emilyg]

98. Why should it be closed?

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

100. Rehashing the primaries, pitting Democrats against each other.

Useless, ridiculous tripe...

Not to mention that it is absolute nonsense to believe that Obama is to the right of Hillary Clinton. In fact, it is laughable!

[JNelson6563]

85. LOLZ

Pointing and laughing. :rofl:

[RBInMaine]

86. I gotta say it - I think your post is a load of crap.

[Armstead]

91. Surprise Surprise Sgt. Carter

RBInMaine thinks one of my posts is a load of crap.

...and the sun will rise tomorrow.

[craigmatic]

87. Hillary would've done the samething if the repigs won. It sucks but it's a textbook move.

[ej510]

92. Obama is a corporate democrat. The democratic party is corporate.

We have a faction of liberals and progressives, but this party has sold its soul to corporate America. We have to take our party back from the fascists.

[SidDithers]

93. ...

Sid

[Hell Hath No Fury]

94. Yup.

And the next two years are going to scare the shit out of me. Bill Clinton recebntly spoke about how the GOP House might be a good think for O, since he managed to get so much done with the GOPers in charge during his second term. :puke:

Easier to screw over the People with little interference from the Left, is what I call it. :mad:

[Armstead]

97. yeah Clinton goty a lot done like NAFTA, welfare deform, Wall St deregulation, etc.

This is beginning to seem like a bad sequel.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

99. It was clear it was a "sequal" --

from the get-go. So much of the old Clinton grew were brought onboard from Day One it was like old home week at the WH. :(

I have no doubt O will get a lot done with the help of the GOPs and DLC. :cry:

[ProudDad]

101. What do you mean "has become"?

There were many of us who knew this all along...

It was apparent from his history and training...

[jeanpalmer]

102. We had a hunch

but he has verified it in spades.

[MissDeeds]

103. Yep

Dear Armstead, you were bound to get trounced posting this in this forum. I share your concerns about Obama, although Hillary was not my choice in the primaries. We need a strong Democratic candidate in the upcoming election. It's not just about winning the election, but about turning this country away from corporate interests and toward the interests of the American people who have always been the focus of the Democratic party...those who have the greatest need and not not the loudest voice. Now is the time for the party to stand up against big business and to reclaim the moral core that has been the benchmark of the party. If we do not, we are no better than those we claim to oppose.

[ProudDad]

104. Democan or Republicrat

They're nearly all corporate tools...

We REALLY need something like this: http://movetoamend.org/

or nothing will change...