The Social Security outcome doesn't mean you should trust or not trust Obama

[CreekDog]

it means that you need to be involved to make his policy choices reflect your wishes.

you can't assume he'll do what you want, it may take pressure to get him to do so.

you can't assume he'll never do what you want, it may be that he will do what you want, but you may have to exert a lot of political pressure to do so.


stay involved

[avaistheone1]

1. Okay

A recommended course of action.

:kick:

[Sherman A1]

2. You make a valid point

however, I have not been encouraged by what I have seen to date.

[impik]

3. It doesn't mean that one should just make up lies about him

And then claim some "we held his feet on fire" victory.

[young but wise]

4. Exactly.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[Autumn]

5. I am waiting for the dust to settle, I have

seen that he doesn't always mean what he says.

[Enthusiast]

7. Already told him, several times.

I'm not feeling too positive about the outcome.

[treestar]

8. I would not frustrate myself by expecting a President of the United States to

"do what I want."

I'd have better luck with my representative, but even he would have other constituents to consider.

[CreekDog]

11. stop arguing simply because your word choice and syntax would've been different

:eyes:

[Enrique]

9. not just Obama, but future presidents

and future Congresses. The only reason Social Security exists right this moment is because a Democratic Senate blocked Bush.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

10. Neither of the House nor Senate were Democratic

when Bush was pushing privatization and the Republicans only managed to get one single Democrat to support his privatization scheme. They take a lot of flak but both Pelosi and Reid did an excellent job keeping everybody in line, even the Blue Dogs, against Bush's privatization proposal.