I have a question for those who say "there's no plan yet, so hold your criticism."

[Stinky The Clown]

When would you have us speak up? After a terrible plan is done? After the repubicans and their Democratic enablers slash and burn the security net beneath millions of seniors? After a cave in occurs? After the Big 3 are changed into the Small 1/2s?

Is it wrong to speak out and keep pressure on the people who hold the futures of millions of us in their grubby fucking paws?

When, in your view, is it okay to speak up?

[pnwmom]

1. Now's the right time to speak up. But it's not the time

to accuse Obama of having done things that he hasn't done yet -- and may never do.

[ohheckyeah]

2. Maybe he should speak up

and commit to not cutting medicare, medicaid and social security in any way, shape or form.

[pnwmom]

14. That would be dumb. And Obama isn't dumb.

There are good ways to save money and bad ways to save. A bad way would be to reduce payments to Social Security recipients. A good way to save money would be to negotiate with the drug companies for cheaper drug prices -- like Canada does. Or simply by allowing the reimportation of drugs from Canada.

[ohheckyeah]

16. No, it wouldn't be dumb at all.

It would energize his base and instill some confidence.

[pnwmom]

18. I think his base is smarter than that. I think his base

realizes that health care costs have been rising much too quickly, and that they have to be brought under control. And a good place to start would be by negotiating for better drug prices, instead of subsidizing the rest of the world with the exorbitant prices we pay. Another would be to regulate the profits going to the insurance companies; and to return to the idea of offering a public option.

[StarburstClock]

59. His base is conservative criminals like Goldman Sachs banking cronies

who are destroying the planet one country at a time. Anyone who thinks that base gives a flying crap about their financial situations is sadly deluded.

[TrollBuster9090]

Really? Have you seen what's happened to Wall Street contributions to the Democratic Party since

since Dodd-Frank and Carl "Shitty Deal" Levin's report?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gLx2Xc1EXLg


Seriously...thanks to the Levin report on derivatives, GOLDMAN-SACHS EXECUTIVES ARE GOING TO JAIL, and GOLDMAN-SACHS is going to be SUED INTO OBLIVION by its own clients in Civil Court.

Give them their props. The Democratic party used to whore themselves out to Wall Street, and Wall Street typically rewarded them with about a 2/3 split in donations to Democrats vs. Republicans. Not any more. Now the GOP is the proud beneficiary of money from BOTH the oil industry AND Wall Street.

I'm all for punishing Democrats when they do something wrong. But, much like trained dogs, they're never going to improve if you don't REWARD them when they do something RIGHT.

[pscot]

106. You have a scoop there, bro

Goldman sachs execs in jail? In our dreams.

[AllyCat]

96. This base is smarter now. I will NOT work, donate, or vote for him if he caves on SS

I agree that negotiating drug prices is a good thing to do. All your other suggestions sound good too. But that's not what we are hearing and if all this comes with a decrease in benefits to the elderly, sick, and very young, Obama is no better than a repuke. I'll wait and see, but I am not holding my breath.

[AlabamaLibrul]

36. A minor correction -- it would energize the -entire fucking country-

THIS is what the country is for.
To steal from a DUer whom I love but the name escapes me:




By their WORKS you will know them.

[TrollBuster9090]

85. Rachel forgot one: the majority also opposes raising the debt ceiling.

Probably because they're not informed enough to know what will happen if they don't.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/148454/debt-ceiling-increase-remains-unpopular-americans.aspx

The reason we're in this mess to begin with is because the public insists on both tax cuts AND spending increases, and the whorish politicians are willing to give them both.

Ask Frank Luntz how to construct polling questions to get exactly the answers you want. You can't read too much into polls.

However, having said that, I think we SHOULD do all the things on Maddow's screen. It's just COMMON SENSE. But common sense aside, the Federal Democrats are IDIOTS for not using the weapon of economic populism, and that's what Maddow's graphic is really about.

[Lasher]

97. Good news, the public is getting better informed about the debt ceiling.

Poll: Support for debt ceiling increase doubles

July 18, 2011



Americans are now roughly split on raising the debt ceiling, a new CBS News poll shows, with support for an increase nearly doubling since last month.

The spike in support for an increase follows dire warnings from the Obama administration and many economists concerning the consequences of lack of action. They have warned of a possible U.S. default on its obligations, a stock market crash, an increase in interest rates and a halt in Social Security payments and other obligations.

Some Republicans, among them presidential candidate Rep. Michele Bachmann, have deemed such warnings "scare tactics." But the warnings -- and the increased media coverage of the issue -- seem to have prompted many Americans to move from opposing an increase to backing one.

Support for increasing the debt ceiling has risen 22 points from last month, from 24 percent to 46 percent. Opposition has fallen 20 points in that period, from 69 percent to 49 percent.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20080492-503544.html

[Plucketeer]

99. That's some eye-popping reality that Rachel's showing...

but what I want to know is HOW do we FORCE DC to acknowlege those statistics??? How many MILLION-FUCKING MARCH citizens does it take to get noticed in the capitol??? Does it require numbers great enough to overwhelm whatever policing forces that would be called to try and quell the onslaught? I ask this because CLEARLY - reasoned speech and peaceful demonstration has gotten us NADA. The REAL powers-that-be aren't at all concerned (or even care) with what we think.

You can talk about holding back and trusting the Right thing will come out of it all. But just how likely is it that we can UNdo whatever we get stuck with? Social Security makes my life tolerable. Medicare is an ease o mind. And I should just HOPE???

[Enthusiast]

47. You are so right.

If the President was clear on where he stands it would even boost the economy. But wishy-washy is the strategy of the day.

[Name removed]

40. Deleted message

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

[TrollBuster9090]

78. In "any way?" He already cut Medicare by 500 billion in a GOOD way

The Democrats cut the wasteful MEDICARE ADVANTAGE program, which just gave 500 billion to line the pockets of private HMOs, and used the savings to fill the prescription drug doughnut hole. Was that a BAD thing, or was it a practical thing which, in the end, benefited the public the way progressive policies are supposed to?

What about the other idea which Progressives have been kicking around for years about means testing Social Security with the intent of giving less to the people who DON'T need it and more to those who DO? How about CUTTING Bill Gates' and Bill Clinton's $1200/month Social Security checks which they don't need, and giving them to the poor bastard who's actually trying to LIVE on his $1200/month check?

"Cuts" per se are not evil. It depends on how they're used and what is accomplished in the big picture.


But as I said in a comment below, it doesn't hurt to make noise about it right now. It will remind the Democratic Senators where their loyalties should be, and remind them who created and who is supposed to be DEFENDING these programs. Far too many of them see a big corporate lobby money UP SIDE to cutting social programs, while not seeing any down side. Well, the downside is that you cut Medicare and SS at your own peril. You won't have to worry about how much lobby money you'll be getting for your re-election campaign if we primary your ass out of the race all together.

It also helps Obama's attempt to appear as a flexible moderate, triangulator who is trying to mediate "both sides" to the independent voters who broke 2/3 for Democrats in the 2008 election and 2/3 against Democrats in the 2010 election.

As flawed as he is, Obama has to win in 2012. Otherwise, we will have to deal with 25 more years of a Republican-appointed Supreme Court. It's better to put up with Obama for 8 years than a 7-2 activist conservative Supreme Court for 25.

[robinlynne]

15. You mean he may never do AGAIN? He certainly did cut taxes for the rich.

He maintained BUsh's economic policy, Bush's policy on torture, as per the news today (the torturers were all released by Eric Holder today.)Bush's war policy. well he is spending 26% MORE on the military than Bush did, actually.

[pnwmom]

19. It was the only way he could get approval of the UI extension that millions of families desperately

needed.

It's so easy for people to second guess him now, but he had a good reason for allowing the Bush tax rates to be extended for two years.

Lucky for you if you've never needed unemployment benefits. Most people have at some point or another, and understand why Obama compromised on the tax rates so the UI wouldn't be cut off.

[Lorien]

26. Bullshit. He could have used his bully pulpit to destroy the GOP with that plan then

just as he could do the same now. Problem is; he's AGREES with the GOP platform.

He's been given several chances to completely destroy them. Several. Ruin them for decades. He has CHOSEN NOT TO.

[pnwmom]

27. The bully pulpit of the past has been replaced by hundreds of cable channels

and the Internet.

He can't go on network TV in prime time and expect wall-to-wall coverage. People don't sit around a radio at night waiting for Presidential announcements.

He has to compete with 24 hour news and Casey Anthony. It's much much harder than it used to be to get a message straight to the voters.

He also was up against the first Rethug Senate minority EVER to use the filibuster process to almost everything significant that came down the pike. The only way to get anything done was to peel off a few Rethug votes through compromise.

He never had the 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. Lieberman was an Independent, voting as an Independent.

[U4ikLefty]

30. more excuses for half-assery

If there are cuts to the big three, I'm sure you will be here defending him again.

[pnwmom]

32. I will defend cutting costs in a sensible way -- such as

allowing the government to negotiate with drug companies for cheaper prices -- something that is currently prohibited.

[Enthusiast]

50. That is utter nonsense. But it was cleverly presented.

During a "debt crisis" the president's words would command the attention of the entire nation. For one thing millions of seniors and future recipients of social security and medicare are waiting to hear what the President is going to do.

What you are saying is wrong, you know it's wrong but you are giving cover to a President that, frankly, does not deserve your consideration.

[rhett o rick]

67. So what did the people get when he extended the Patriot Act? nm

[valerief]

70. It's easy to get wall-to-coverage. All he has to do is leave his fly open.

They cover the fly thing and mention what he's saying.

[Enthusiast]

49. Thank you, Lorien.

With his rhetorical skills he could achieve anything he wants. The problem with Obama is his ideology or lack thereof. He's just a bad president. I suspect he is a bad person also.

[SammyWinstonJack]

54. I suspect he isn't a Democrat and never was. I suspect he is also a bad person.

He certainly is self-absorbed and self-serving.

[robinlynne]

92. exactly. Last year we had a Dem congress senate and presidency, and he HAD to give away money to bi

billionaires, over and over again? go on believing it. but when you are all ready to wake up, maybe we can make a better country.

[TheKentuckian]

28. I was on unemployment and was against the deal with my skin in the game.

You can't buy three quarters of a trillion dollars in rope to hang the whole damn country with.

Guess what? The economy is still fucked and that year is running by, now what?

What organ or limb will we trade for pennies on the dollar for?

Where can this tactic possibly take us?

When a terrorist demands a carrier group you can't be giving them a battleship, a destroyer, and a couple of subs for one hostage and brag about not giving up a carrier or the medical frigate.

Especially when you know there are hundreds of hostages.

[pnwmom]

31. I respect your position, but millions of families could not

make that choice -- UI was all they had between them and living in a car. That's not a choice you make if you have children.

[TheKentuckian]

38. Maybe not but that is why one cannot govern like running a household

We can't pretend that taking what seems to be the best bet may also have consequences just as dire as we as a country are forced to walk the plank over and over until many more people will face living in cars or just in the street and many others taken down a peg or two which will further constrict demand.

Flat out, you cannot logically justify cutting that much broad demand nor the ripple effect cuts for 60 billion to anything, especially when that bandaid is temporary and will dictate even more cuts which will put even more into a pickle including the unemployed because killing that much demand and cutting off any possible new efforts makes it that much more unlikely they can't find a job.

Cutting off your face to save the nose.

[pnwmom]

63. Of course cutting UI can't be justified. That's the point. n/t

[TheKentuckian]

105. No, the point is there is no way that you can function by allowing yourself to walk the plank

over and over.

You can't give them 750 billion dollars to squeeze out 60 when you know you will then be made to walk the plank and cut the ransom from the budget.

It is fiscally insane. Do you know how many more are going to get creamed in this exchange??? How many more will be unemployed?

You can't do it. That is the most hand to mouth thinking ever.

[Doctor_J]

39. They will face the same fate in a few months. Extending the tax cuts

guaranteed that the "recession" would continue, and that no jobs would be coming.

[mmonk]

41. The Republicans have never avoided eventually extending the benefits.

At least that is what history has shown. They can accomplish alot with this president by postering.

[GOTV]

68. In fact Boehner said he would do just that if he had to ...

... luckily for him Obama wasn't willing to force him.

[Enthusiast]

48. I second guessed him then.

In extending those tax cuts for millionaires he went against the wishes of a huge majority of Americans. Voters of every stripe want taxes raise on the ultra wealthy -NOT CUT.

It pisses the voters off when you go directly against their stated wishes. And now Obama will have done it twice. He will lose in 2012 and going against the will of the people is the reason.

Ending UI benefits is a temporary problem for a limited number of citizens, cutting social security and medicare affects everyone and it is forever. I've been on unemployment more than once.

[polmaven]

104. So perhaps we should have

just died and decreased the surplus population! Your concern is underwhelming!

[rhett o rick]

66. He yielded to blackmail. You cant deal with blackmailers. nm

[eomer]

69. He (and Congressional Democrats) could have done right in 2009/2010.

They could have passed a decent stimulus, including UI extensions, using the reconciliation process, which cannot be filibustered. Instead they tried to fool us into thinking there was nothing they could do, tried to disinform people who didn't know what the reconciliation process is. They did this because they're owned by corporations.

[rpannier]

90. People keep saying that and yet you have nothing to substantive to back it up with

The Republicans had voted (prior to the December vote) to extend unemployment benefits every time.
They made the same fusses prior to the votes. Hurled the same insults and threats and still UI benefits passed.
There is no evidence that they wouldn't have extended them again.

[robinlynne]

91. simply not true. By NOT extending the tax cuts he would have had much more money to give the unempl...

unemployed. Then, as now, he gave away 75% of the money to the rich for a tiny bit of money for the poor. by doing NOTHING, our government would have money and this current "crisis" would not even exist. last year we had a dem senate congress and president, you're telling me they could not help the unemployed? They HAD TO GIVE away billions to the rich? I don't think so.

[Lordquinton]

93. Not true

If you remember the details of the time many were stating that he should have never let the two crises come together like that, he easily could have taken care of the UI issue before the tax breaks came up. It's easier to forget the bits of history that undermine your position though.

[TrollBuster9090]

79. He traded extending the Bush tax cuts for repealing DODT and extending unemployment benefits.

Frankly, I was surprised the Democrats managed to wangle TWO concessions from the Republicans (DODT and UI) in exchange for ONE (Bush tax cuts for two more years), but they did. And it gives them the added bonus of driving a wedge between the GOP and the Values Voters in 2012. The Republicans claim to support the values voters and their hatred of gays, but when it came to a lame duck session of Congress, the GOP threw their values voters under the bus, and traded repeal of DODT for tax cuts for their Plutocratic billionaire friends...thus showing where their true loyalties are. I thought that was pretty clever.

So, I give them a pass on the extension of the Bush tax cuts for that reason.

I DON'T give them a pass on including so many tax cuts, and so few infrastructure projects in the original stimulus package. That was just plain stupid.

[ClassWarrior]

17. Yeah, but when people do the former, they get accused of the latter.

:shrug:

NGU.

[pnwmom]

21. I've seen a lot of complaining in advance of any decisions being made.

From people who have opposed him since the primary days.

[shanti]

62. and i've seen a lot of complaining

from people who supported him totally since the primary days. :shrug: he said to hold his feet to the fire and we are!

[ClassWarrior]

71. So you really DON'T believe that it's time for people to speak up?

On the one hand, you say it's time for people to speak up, but on the other you have a problem with what you arbitrarily deem "advance complaining?"

Which is it? It can't be both ways...

NGU.

[Lorien]

25. He told us to hold his "feet to the fire"

so was he WRONG??

[Mimosa]

102. Now cheerleaders say STFU and no feet to fire.

What are we supposed to believe?

If Obama would fight for us millions would fight for him. :(

[Enthusiast]

46. He has the bully pulpit.

He demonstrated his mastery of it during the campaign.

Problem is, he only uses it when it suits him and his corporate allies.

I'm done with Obama.

But then, I've been done with him since he extended the Bush tax cuts enabling this entire ruse of a deficit crisis to start with.

He is one of them.

Them ain't on my side.

[Ganja Ninja]

57. He's said he's willing to do it time and time again or haven't you been listening? n/t

[JDPriestly]

76. Obama has proposed cuts to Medicare and Social Security.

That is why we speak out against his proposals.

[grahamhgreen]

101. He lied when he said SS contibutes to the debt. Fact.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

3. It's time to speak up now. nt

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[AtomicKitten]

5. We have spoken up -- in emails, phone calls, faxes, petitions, etc.

The Congressional Democrats are clear on where the base stands and most have pledged to vote "No!" on anything that impacts Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid by cutting benefits. Our job now is to hold the Congressional Dems' feet to the fire and make sure they do just that if presented with a POS bill.

[pnwmom]

22. Right. It's the job of Congress to hold the position on the left.

That allows Obama to find a compromise position between the two sides.

[AtomicKitten]

33. It is their job to vote "no" on anything that dismantles the social safety net. Do you disagree?

It doesn't matter what Pres Obama is doing. I am convinced nobody here really has a handle on what he's doing although there sure have been no shortage of keyboard hysterics claiming they do. No matter what the Congressional Gang 'O Whatever comes up with, if there is any component of raising revenue the House GOP will not vote for it. By the same token, if there is anything dismantling the social safety net you bet your ass I expect the Democrats in both Houses to vote a resounding "no." And that is how another shot at a clean vote to raise the debt ceiling will arise, out of necessity with time running out.

[pnwmom]

65. I agree, that's their job. And I hope they know it.

With the proviso that I don't have a problem with reasonable cost-cutting that doesn't hurt beneficiaries -- like repealing the law that prevents Medicare from negotiating with drug companies for cheaper prices, as in Canada.

[October]

44. Absolutely! /nt

[Ganja Ninja]

58. The president has veto power if he has the will to use it.

He doesn't have the will or even the inclination.

[druidity33]

34. yeah, right...

like they pledged to not vote for the Health Care bill if it didn't include a Public Option. Remember that one?

:shrug:

[KG]

6. they can fix it later!

:P

[SammyWinstonJack]

55. HA!

:silly:

[rug]

7. November 7, 2012.

While you're waiting, remember to donate!

[n2doc]

8. My answer is- Why haven't we heard of a better plan being promoted by Obama?

He never mentions the progressive budget proposal. He never praises anything but these idiotic 'bipartisan' scams. No matter that we don't have all the specifics, he never, ever, says "we must have balance between cuts and taxes" or even that SS is solvent for the next 40 or so years with no changes. Frankly I never have understood why the dems haven't just pushed for a reversal to Clinton era rates. But I guess they all are rich and don't want to pay those taxes either.

People can try and claim he hasn't proposed anything, but all of his rhetoric has been on the republican side of the ledger.

[Mimosa]

20. Even dumb Repubs say that.

N2Doc even Joe walsh, a stupid teabagger, was asking Tweety on MSNBC 'where is the President's plan'? He's negotiating from weakness just as he did with health care. Darn, my head hurts. I am sad about this.

[suffragette]

24. Yep and on the G20 side of Austerity

On that, he expresses "violent agreement."

http://www.rooseveltinstitute.org/new-roosevelt/g20-s-violent-agreement-austerity-will-smash-global-economy

According to the G20 declaration, these government leaders had committed themselves to fiscal plans that would surgically cut their deficits by at least 50 percent by 2013 as well as stabilize and begin to reduce government debt-to-GDP ratios by 2016, all in the name of stabilizing the macroeconomy. Although there was some debate over the precise timetable of their “exit strategy,” Barack Obama emphasized that on the issue of fiscal austerity “there is violent agreement between the parties.”

[Enthusiast]

52. The Deficit Commission's recommendations

were voted down by the.........................Deficit Commission. But now we are going to adopt them? This smacks of insanity to me.

Jan Schakowski had/has a brilliant alternative plan -a more progressive alternative. Funny how we won't even discuss alternatives to the 'far right' plan that was rejected by the very commission that wrote it.

[msongs]

9. all the principal players are endorsing and supporting the republican agenda, with variationsonly nt

[bahrbearian]

10. If everyone would just go back to eating their peas we wouldn't have to criticize

[iwishiwas]

11. good questions and they to be asked NOW.

[kentuck]

12. You are right Stinky!

It is nonsensical to say "Don't speak up until the deal is done".

[deaniac21]

13. When the republicans are in power.

[Missy Vixen]

23. Thank you, Stinky, for another brilliant post

I'm wondering when it's "appropriate" to speak up, as well. It seems I've spent the last two years wondering.

[Desertrose]

29. K&R. Good point Stinky! nt

[quaker bill]

35. One can always be critical

but it is usually more effective to know the subject matter at some level of detail first. Criticism about things that are not reasonably true given all the facts is quite easily and generally dismissed by those in possession of the facts. In short, if you want to be heard, be correct, but if you just want to scream about things because you like to, have at it.

[Stinky The Clown]

37. Yes, Bill, you're correct.

And time after time, fact-based posts here on DU (as but one example) are slapped down and shouted down by the One Louder types. No debate. No discussion. Just attempts at slap down. And by gosh it worked for a while.

[Eyerish]

42. K&R

[NorthCarolina]

43. The time to speak is now, BEFORE the deed is done. That should be obvious to most,

unless of course they have an ulterior motive.

[Ichingcarpenter]

45. When they pry my social security rights from my cold dead hands?

is that soon enough?......LOL

[TrollBuster9090]

87. That would make a good bumper sticker, by the way. For Medicare too.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

51. Obama could end this by simply announcing that he will veto any bill that cuts benefits.

The executive is not weak. He has power. He threatened to veto the cut, cap, balance, bullshit and it disappeared.

[TrollBuster9090]

88. Define "disappeared. It passed in the House 234-190

As usual, it's the ability of both sides in the Senate to stop ANYTHING from passing that's caused it to 'disappear.' Just like the Ryan budget.

Having said that, I guess I would second guess Obama and say that he should have said "I will veto any health care plan that doesn't include a public option." Then we wouldn't have had Ben Nelson and Max Baucus driving the health care agenda.

[bemildred]

53. It is NEVER correct that the US public ought to shut up about what it wants. nt

[Hell Hath No Fury]

56. Speak up NOW!

Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, DNC head
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

White House
Comments: 202-456-1111
Switchboard: 202-456-1414
FAX: [phone]

Harry Reid
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

John Boehner
Washington, DC 20515
[phone]
[phone] fax

Eric Cantor
P: 202.225-2815
F: 202.225-0011

Mitch McConnell
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Nancy Pelosi
Phone: [phone]

On edit:

Here is the Gang of Six to add to the mix:

Tom Coburn
Main: 202-224-5754
Fax: [phone]

Mike Crapo
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Kent Conrad
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Saxby Chambliss
Main: 202-224-3521

Mark Warner
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Dick Durbin
[phone] - phone
[phone] - fax

[LanternWaste]

60. I find a relevant distinction between

I find a relevant distinction between asking a sincere question and the implication of accusations. But that's just me...

[Dappleganger]

61. Yes, let's wait until we actually see the treadmarks

over our bodies before we scream at the bus who's about to run us over!

In total agreement with the OP.

[Bragi]

64. Wait till theBill is passed

Once it passes, and the President indicates he won't veto it, then you are welcome to suggest constructive changes, which may be taken into account when the Bill is r reviewed in a decade or so.

[louslobbs]

72. Excellent question Stinky, I think the answer is pretty simple for those of us who live in reality

and use the past behavior of those in power as an indicator of their future actions. Thanks for this post. It's now, or in most cases, once the damage is already done, never.
Lou

[colorado_ufo]

73. Speak NOW.

[bigwillq]

74. K and R

:thumbsup:

[TrollBuster9090]

75. By all means, speak up. It helps Obama's goal of appearing to "moderate 'both sides'"

It also helps to push the Overton Window back where it belongs. Progressives have been far too timid about this, and that's the reason the Overton Window is now jammed way over on the right.

[loyalsister]

86. Thanks for the term

"Overton window" is one that I have been looking for. Do you think that the 24 news coverage of the * administration contributed? I think the mainstream dialogue shifted with the administration. People with limited political involvement followed- creating a very distorted range and a center to the right of Reagan.

[TrollBuster9090]

89. No, as I said, I think the Overton Window got shoved way over to the right because Progressives were

not noisy enough. That's why it IS so important to speak up now, and above all, start making noise to the politicians.

The Administration is trying to appear to be "centrist" to appeal to the independent voters. That's normal. The problem is that the definition of "centrist" has shifted way over to the right because the conservatives have made so much noise over the last 30 years while Progressives have remained largely silent. They're remained silent because they were spineless, and actually afraid of being called "LIBERAL." We should have fought back against that nonsense a long time ago.


I'm now very happy to see people like Howard Dean, Michael Moore, Bernie Sanders and Al Franken proudly fighting back against the labels.

This is one of my favorite posters from The Project for the Old American Century. There's another more extensive one that includes child labor laws, weekends, work safety standards etc. which they don't have up on their website anymore, but it was even better.

[Scottybeamer70]

77. Great post, Stinky!!!

Thanks!

[loyalsister]

80. We should all feel free to speak up anytime we want

While there may be plenty of disagreement, I don't think many oppose the right of anyone to criticize.

[Name removed]

81. Deleted message

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

[Jakes Progress]

82. In their view,

it is never okay to speak up if it means that you will say something that might be taken as a criticism of the supreme leader.

Me? I voted for him. I campaigned for him. I sent him money. He's my president. I get to tell him what I think he should be doing. And most especially I take it as a civic responsibility to keep up with the rumors and hints and leaks in order to tell him which way he should go. I write here and I write to the WH. The worst case scenario is the WH saying something like "But I thought you wanted me to compromise and make deals. How was I to know that you didn't want a SS cut?"

So it is our responsibility to sound of frequently and with verve. You know damn well the bankers and the corporate interests are telling him what they think.

The only reason to sit on your fingers and not write is if your goals are the same as the super rich and the corporate world because you can rest assured that they will be doing your talking for you. Knee jerk defense of what some seem to portray as a sensitive little man who gets his feeling hurt easily is not being a good citizen. Instead of screaming to leave Obama alone, tell us how you feel about the "deals" and the rumors. Let the president know if you side with the people or with the overlords. Keeping your mouth shut is just stupid.

[ZombieHorde]

83. I think you are misunderstanding the critique.

"There's no plan yet, so hold your criticism" means "there's no plan yet, so hold your accusations."

Consider the following OP...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x715919

In my opinion, a big difference lays between proclaiming a program to be great, and accusing President Obama of cutting a program.

[rbnyc]

84. +1

Speaking up is one of the ways we participate in Democracy.

[Change Happens]

94. If you make more than $100K per year you don't have to speak up...

If you make less, then it is time to start yelling at someone...

[fascisthunter]

95. you won't get honesty

but I'm glad you tried

[OwnedByFerrets]

98. I've called WH and my state representatives.....I WILL NOT wait

[Rex]

100. After the head hits the ground and the body dies.

If you go by what some posters here want. To bad I don't give a shit what they want and say what the fuck ever I want to. It is kinda funny how some people can't deal with it! :rofl:

[grahamhgreen]

103. And why is there no plan? UNLESS YOU'RE TRYING TO HIDE SOME UNPOPULAR BS????!!!!