I'm wearing my 'Yes We Can' T-shirt today and loving it

[bigtree]

Call me what you will . . . cheerleader, dupe, naive . . . but, I'm doing okay living with this Democratic president. I think his prospects for success on many controversial and desired issues has been overstated and exaggerated throughout his term. I really don't see the point in dismissing the progress he's made so far on many of the planks of his agenda and on many topical issues which have presented themselves during his presidency. I'm still pressing and hoping for a political equation in Congress which will better advantage his presidency in achieving his goals.

Yet, I'm also increasingly mindful that his presidency isn't occurring in a political vacuum. There is still a rabid and dishonest opposition which isn't about to provide much room in this election season for much more presidential progress, other than his batting down their nutty proposals and accusations as they hurl his way. I'm enjoying watching President Obama in the role of their agitator.

I can't imagine having significant success in defending a more radical presidency in this atmosphere. I think we can see the parameters of the political debates and it's hard to imagine maintaining our party's political influence with too strident an agenda, although I admit it would be interesting to watch our party and president try and prevent themselves from being torn to shreds on election day defending a truly progressive agenda. Destructive, but interesting.

I would agree that my rationalization is a poor substitute for actual progress on the issues and initiatives which concern us the most, but I don't believe our Democratic president's actions and agenda is so far removed from what I understand as effective 'politics' that I'm ready to abandon hope for prospects for the advancement of our Democratic and progressive agendas in this toxic atmosphere. Have we EVER had a presidency which has been able to persist and find partisan success in pressing a truly progressive agenda?

I've got to go with the fellow who has managed to advance our party and our agendas this far. It's not enough for me to look to folks for inspiration who haven't managed the political gauntlets which would place them in an actual position to effect change, no matter how much I would agree with their sentiments and proposals. I've got a strong and caring Democrat in place in the presidency right now and I'm looking forward to carrying his agendas into the next campaign and beyond, even as I press for more substantial, progressive progress. I'm excited to support this president to victory against the desperate and confused republican opposition. Steady as she goes . . . Yes We Can!

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

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

[Shagbark Hickory]

2. Zero job growth is a result of "effective politics" ?

[bigtree]

3. I missed the part

. . . where President Obama was deemed responsible for all of that.

[jpak]

14. Zero net jobs growth because of 45,000 jobs "lost" due to the Verizon strike

if it wasn't for that, there would have been net positive growth in August

Those jobs will be "back" in September

yup

[MannyGoldstein]

19. 45,000 jobs still 80,000 short of accounting for population growth

We need 125,000 more jobs each month to account for growth in the working-age population. So we're still losing jobs at a fast clip.

[jpak]

20. What part of "zero" net job gowth gets translated to "losing jobs at a fast clip"

math fail

yup

[MannyGoldstein]

24. 85,000 more people are jobless this month compared to last. nt

[jpak]

26. Really? according to the Dept. of Labor? - try again

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

fail

fail

fail

yup

[MannyGoldstein]

33. 400,000 Americans involuntarily went from full time to part time

Last month. BLS keeps that and other true measures of unemployment out of the publicized releases.

http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/zero_job_growth_made_worse_by_drop_in_weekly_hours

[Shagbark Hickory]

41. Ok $4/gal gas then.

And no energy policy other than to drill baby drill.

I guess this is effective politics as well. Working families across the country are struggling with these high costs.

[tblue]

4. You want mine?

I have about half a dozen and I will not wear them in public. Drone attacks on children, letting war criminals and torturers off the hook, letting drilling resume in the Gulf. I just can't stomach it. I am glad you feel good enough about this administration to fly its colors. Really. I'm glad somebody's happy.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

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

[dgibby]

32. Old Proverb:

He who has his head in the sand should not encourage others to pound sand.

[hlthe2b]

5. So, your "cup half full" runneth over?

I will only say that I applaud your positive attitude (if not totally with your sense of reality). But, I :toast: you anyway....Go get 'em!

[treestar]

6. Yes, I think we've done pretty good considering the tea party

and that the right wing owns the media and that the media is given to hyperbole.

And there has been some bad luck, earthquakes, storms, the oil spill.

[Rex]

29. The oil spill was bad luck!?

:eyes:

[southernyankeebelle]

7. My angry at Obama and the democrats is they don't act like democrats. I

want to see them stand up for us in a liberal fashion. All they are doing is giving us lip service.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[JohnnyRingo]

18. I want to see the money

All I read on this forum anymore is how we have to primary Obama with a true progressive, but I don't see any takers, and not one penny of support with a year to go.

Considering that a presidential campaign will cost upwards of a billion dollars, and a true progressive won't be able to count on corporate super PAC, fund raising should have started months ago. With no cash forthcoming from the Democratic party the only source will be grassroots support on a per-voter level that my Dollar General calculator runs out of display.

In the absence of a viable and well funded primary candidate the only solution voiced here is to stay home and allow Republicans to regain the White House in what will be generally viewed as a mandate from the voters to never trust Democrats again. If only our foot was further away it wouldn't be so easy to shoot.

[Stargleamer]

25. A Conservative Democrat who doesn't do much good. . .

and thereby alienates the electorate so that we get 12 years of a Republican White House afterwards (Jimmy Carter)is worse. I think Obama is headed down that path.

[Claudia Jones]

35. good point, if unintentional

As you elude to here, those controlling the party see the "super pure Dems" as the enemy more than they see the right wingers as the enemy.

[JohnnyRingo]

10. Rec'd to zero

I guess you'd have to find some Democratic-friendly forum to post these accolades. Someplace that didn't open the floodgates to Obama hating trolls by allowing an exception to bashing this particular Democratic president.

If Bill Clinton were to return to current office in a wayback machine, I wonder if we'd see such hand-wringing dissent about what a pushover he is for passing GHW Bush's NAFTA? Would admins allow members to call for his ouster for succumbing to Republicans and paring the welfare rolls and kicking poor people to the curb? Would we have to put up with those who would demand his immediate impeachment for objectifying women in an Oval Office tryst? Do you think loyal posters here would adamantly refuse to support his re-election because he caved on HillaryCare" and accomplished nothing in that regard?

What we have is a classic example of people who would strangle the bird in their hand so they can get a chance at the two lurking somewhere in the bush. What we'll get in the end is a Republican president who will flip us the bird when presented with progressive policies.

[nevergiveup]

13. I love your positive spirit!

Throwing in the towel is not an option. Cheers!

[Mr Deltoid]

15. At first glance your title looks like 'Yes We Can't'

Freudian slip?

[flvegan]

16. Does it say "But We Won't" on the back?

Cuz it should.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[bigtree]

22. in the debate over immigration and deportations, the Facts matter

from the WH blog: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/08/16/debate-over-immigration-and-deportations-facts-matter


As too often happens in the debate over immigration, anger and heated rhetoric from all sides dominate while the facts tend to get lost along the way. So it’s important to set the record straight. Fixing the broken immigration system so that it meets America’s economic and security needs has been and continues to be a priority for President Obama. The President has laid out a clear, detailed blueprint for reform (http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/immigration_blueprint.pdf), but the only way to do what’s necessary is for Congress to act and pass bipartisan legislation the President can sign into law. Failing to act simply perpetuates a broken system. Unfortunately, as the President has said, he needs a dance partner across the aisle to move legislation forward, and so far the floor is empty.

While the President continues to work every day to fix what’s broken about our immigration system, he has also been clear that the executive branch has a responsibility to enforce the law, and to do it in a way which is both vigorous and smart. So while legislation is pending, this Administration has focused on improving our immigration system by making enforcement smarter and more effective. The fact is, Congressional funding for immigration enforcement and deportations has been on the rise for the past decade. For the first time ever, those resources are being used in a strategic and targeted way to ensure we’re maximizing public safety.

Under the President’s direction, the Department of Homeland Security for the first time ever has prioritized the removal of people who have been convicted of crimes in the United States. The Secure Communities Program, which relies on a federal information sharing program that utilizes FBI fingerprint checks conducted by law enforcement officials as they fight crime in their communities, is central to this strategy. It is the primary reason that the deportation statistics show a dramatic increase in the number of criminals deported from the United States. The results of this strategy are striking:

* There was a greater than 70% increase in the deportation of those with criminal records from FY2008 to FY2010, and a decrease of those without criminal records.

*Today more than half of all removals are people with criminal records.

*And among those removed who had no criminal records, more than two thirds were either apprehended as they crossed the border, were recent arrivals, or were repeat violators of immigration law, meaning that they had previously been deported.

[Kingofalldems]

23. Hmmm.

[JohnnyRingo]

21. Self delete, wrong reply to wrong post

[Kalidurga]

31. Well I am on the fence so to speak...

I will vote for Obama in 2012, but it is because the alternative is the stuff of nightmares and that is a fact no one can get around. No matter how bad Obama is he has not violated the separation of church and state like Rick Perry. He has not participated in or advocated praying the gay away like Bachmann. He has not contributed to organizations dedicated to making abortion illegal like Huntsman. He is not a Ron Paul, randite. He is not a "corporations are people my friend" Romney even if it does look like he is acting that way(I don't think he believes it he is just a wee bit spineless I think).

In any case I will not vote for a Republican by default. Even if I am in Minnesota and chances are it doesn't matter how I vote in the presidential race. I will also be voting straight ticket. The more Democrats in D.C. the better. I think it is the only way we will see what can be accomplished.

[pintobean]

27. .

<snip>
Yes We Can' T
<snip>

I'm just clowning around. I'm glad you're enjoying it. :)

Edit: <snip> won't show up in the subject field.

[bigtree]

28. I've been away from the board for awhile

. . . I'm way below speed to catch stuff like that. Funny though . . .

[Rex]

30. I didn't know they were making Yes We Can'T tees!

Sorry, like the other poster above me I can't help myself! :hi:

Nice to see such a postive post!

We've got to beat back the horde of undead GOP candidates or they will eat our brains!

[mfcorey1]

34. Love it!

[inna]

36. huh?... wow. Obama, "a strong and caring Democrat"? o-kay. got it.

[RiverStone]

37. Yes ? - grants an item on Big Oil’s wish list at the expense of the health of children & seniors?!

Did you see what the Obama admin did yesterday? :shrug:

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/03/science/earth/03air.html?pagewanted=all

I worked like hell to elect him, but am truely wondering where that president went?

[grantcart]

38. Only get a few minutes a week to come to DU

So imagine my delight to find this refreshing OP from one of DU's brightest posters who supports the President even while he has had some strong disagreements with some of his policies.

Reminds me of what DU used to be like.

[NorthCarolina]

39. Blind allegiance?

[HockeyMom]

40. We can't afford NOT to

The stakes are too high, and keep getting worse and worse the more complacient and/or uninformed the average American gets.

[Scurrilous]

42. K & R

:thumbsup:

[malaise]

43. K & R n/t

[IamK]

44. cartoon....