immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 01:44 PM
Original message |
Has Obama made any initiatives that are not Republican? |
|
I was looking at the attack on California pot dispensaries. A friend recently said, "They always send out those letters. They never follow through."
Nevertheless, the JD has threatened to go after the landlords, confiscate the property -- that's booty, folks. So even if the threats are empty, who wants to take the chance? Why must they go after pot heads, medical or not? It goes against Obama's campaign promises. Is this a jobs-welfare program for justice types who would have no one to prosecute?
How about these ALEC written laws to "keep out the vote" in the Republican controlled states? Why isn't the constitutional professor using his communication skills and his justice department to help people who want to vote? (He never mentions ALEC. Why?)
And why is he a supply sider who goes along with the "job creators" scam? And his health care "solution" was limited to things already done by Republicans. The wars, the banks, the schools, the environment, pipelines, labor -- all follow Republican policy.
So what has Obama done that's Democratic, or liberal? (Note: Ending DADT extends the right to die or be disabled protecting the interests of the rulers. How about ending DOMA? Too progressive? Trite social concessions that cost little, and constitute a bone tossed to the base, are exceptions that prove the rule.)
So what am I missing? :shrug:
--imm
|
leftstreet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 01:46 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I've heard there's a List of his progressive accomplishments n/t |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. Now there are two of us, and pretty soon -- a movement! |
leftstreet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
5. I have a List of Progressive Accomplishments for Nixon. Will that do? |
|
Created the EPA Created OSHA Created Consumer Product Safety Commission Added COLA to Social Security Expanded Food Stamp program Cut Defense spending by 1/3 Engaged in Keynesian deficit spending to get people back to work
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:13 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
8. Remember the "negative income tax?" Not accfomplished, but a |
|
precognition of the age of automation.
--imm
|
leftstreet
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:17 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
10. Yep. We must be old. We should get off our own lawns!!11 |
|
Hell, Nixon wanted a Guaranteed Annual Income
:wow:
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:33 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
14. I miss him, mostly to kick around, -- but he was not stupid. |
Donnachaidh
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 01:55 PM
Response to Original message |
|
:popcorn:
chewing might drown out the crickets :rofl:
|
TheWraith
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 01:56 PM
Response to Original message |
4. What are you missing? Metric shitloads, frankly. |
|
You've been reading far too much of the bullshit propaganda from places like FireDogLake and other fifth column sites dedicated to electing a Republican president. http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:22 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
11. I think I accounted for most of the "accomplishments" on the list. |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-12-11 02:34 PM by immoderate
Some are laudable, but it's hard to find anything that inconveniences the ruling class.
--imm
|
Blue_Tires
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:10 PM
Response to Original message |
6. Well, when his Democratic stuff gets constantly kneecapped |
|
by congressional Dems, what can you do?
|
Romulox
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:12 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
7. Bust some sick people, I guess! nt |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
12. Do you mean DINOs will help him? That's true. |
boston bean
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:43 PM
Response to Reply #6 |
16. You shouldn't be bashing DEMS that do Republican shit on a Democratic Message Board! |
JDPriestly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:43 AM
Response to Reply #6 |
59. You threaten Dems who don't vote for your agenda with |
|
loss of national campaign-fund support in the next election cycle. There is no rule that a sitting president has to support the re-election of candidates who don't support his agenda.
But instead of doing that, Obama sided with conservative Democrats in the mid-terms. It's his own fault if he doesn't have a Congress that will pass his policies (few if any of which are liberal).
Obama should have gone after the bankers. That's what Americans, at least those, mostly undecideds, on whose doors I knocked in the 2008 campaign, wanted him to do. Instead he named the bankers and their representatives to his cabinet.
Americans are mad at Wall Street. Obama should have known that and acted on that knowledge as soon as he got into office.
Obama and Obama alone is to blame for his lack of support in Congress.
|
SidDithers
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:15 PM
Response to Original message |
MineralMan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:32 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Unrecced for ignoring much. However, I imagine this will |
|
soon be back in positive territory. The negative viewpoint gets a positive reception most of the time in GD.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #13 |
15. Ignoring? It's a question! |
|
Is it right to ignore all the opportunities to at least present a progressive view?
There are lots of small things. Nothing that upsets the rulers though.
--imm
|
TheWraith
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:44 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
17. It's a question which, to ask, you have to willfully blind yourself. |
|
Like standing on a beach and asking why you're standing in a desert. Then, when things are pointed out to you, move the goalposts to "something that upsets the rulers," a desire vague enough that nothing short of declaring property to be theft will satisfy.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #17 |
33. It's like standing on a beach, and noticing it's made of sand. |
|
I like analogies. :)
--imm
|
11 Bravo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #33 |
37. Some beaches are not sandy ... just as some questions are not worthy of serious discussion. |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 06:42 PM
Response to Reply #37 |
45. I didn't allow that analogies prove anything, much less a simile. |
|
Non demonstrandum foramen.
--imm
|
MineralMan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:45 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
18. It's a rhetorical question. You provided your answer in |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:42 PM
Response to Reply #18 |
29. So everybody just disdainfully concedes that I'm right? |
|
That's not playing the game.
All I am asking for is an Obama policy that didn't originate with Republicans? And I kind of precluded most social issues as many of them do not have economic consequences.
Have you noticed that there are people demonstrating and marching? Are their issues rhetorical? Are they expressing their happiness?
--imm
|
MineralMan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #29 |
32. I'm not playing any games. |
|
I'm just not in the mood to answer rhetorical questions today. Your asking doesn't impose any obligation on me to answer. So, I did not provide the information you requested. You'll have to address those who took the time to do so, not me.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #32 |
34. Got it. I did kind of set people up. |
|
But there is a part of me that was hoping for an answer.
--imm
|
LanternWaste
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #15 |
62. I imagine there's a qualifying difference... |
|
I imagine there's a qualifying difference between a sincere and honest question, and a question designed merely to editorialize in and through itself.
Although one not need be clever to discern the difference, I imagine one necessarily needs to be honest to admit to it...
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #62 |
66. Imagine no dichotomies. It's easy if you try... |
|
You must have missed my "Obama Is Great!" post where I compared him to Fred Astaire. (I may do that -- bet I can rack up 150 recs!)</sarc>
Look, I rang doorbells, made phone calls, and handed out leaflets. I didn't bargain for a center-right president. I listed the areas where I thought he was implementing Republican policy. His governance is neo-neocon. No one has refuted my basic assertion, which does not rely on my sincerity in posing the question. I guess that any question to which the answer is known could be called rhetorical. But I expected a variance in answers.
How did you find the question to be dishonest? Doesn't he mostly continue Republican policies, or resurrect policies they have posed?
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:54 PM
Response to Original message |
19. Obviously, you can recite the litany of FUD. |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:32 PM
Response to Reply #19 |
|
I didn't even know. Is that good or bad?:shrug:
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #24 |
31. Depends who you ask.... |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-12-11 03:46 PM by Bobbie Jo
But since you're asking me....It's downright sad.
There was a time when I thought DU'ers were more savvy than than your average Faux viewer.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #31 |
47. So you were disillusioned about DUers, but have no questions about the guy... |
|
...who is running the country? No vigilance for you, eh?
Who do you think really runs the country? :shrug:
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 08:26 PM
Response to Reply #47 |
|
I'm pretty sure I didn't even imply that. I don't think anything is quite that simplistic.
Do you?
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 08:32 PM
Response to Reply #50 |
51. Nor did you say anything comprehensible to me. |
|
You were not coherent enough for me to tell if it was simplistic. Hey, you were riffin' and I didn't want to break your rhythm.
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #51 |
|
You weren't interested in an answer to your "question" in the first place.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #76 |
78. Is there one? Has Obama ever pushed a liberal initiative? |
|
Does having an answer depend on my level of interest, as deduced by you? I commend your intuition, but is it relevant?
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 11:50 AM
Response to Reply #78 |
|
It looks like you've summarily dismissed anyone who attempted to respond to the contrary, even from from the outset.
Apparently, "having an answer" depends on your ability to consider it without rejecting it out of hand.
IOW...why bother?
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #79 |
82. I'm not beyond snark (if I know what that is) however... |
|
I'll tell you what I want in fairly objective terms, and then you can explain why you think I shouldn't ask this question, besides that I think that I know the answer:
The summary of the systemic problems in this country is wealth disparity (enumerated by the Gini Coefficient) which is rivaled in this world only by a few acknowledged plutocracies. The wealth disparity is the symptom of a conglomerate effect of all the workings of our society giving a casino type edge to those that already have wealth. The game is fixed. The house always wins.
I'm contending that Obama makes no move, even a feint, at anything that would reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. That's what makes his governance, IMO, Republican. That is what I am pointing out, and I have seen no refutation of that point, and I am nonetheless buried in unrecs.
People here accuse me of the crime of asking a rhetorical question.
The only thing I can think of is that Obama, being a political genius, employed corporatists and pursued center right policies because he knew that would unite the left and cause a public enlightenment, resulting in mass international demonstrations. You think that's it?
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #82 |
83. Oh, I see your goal post |
|
Way down there....
When you start here:
"I'm contending that Obama makes no move, even a feint, at anything that would reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. That's what makes his governance, IMO, Republican. That is what I am pointing out, and I have seen no refutation of that point, and I am nonetheless buried in unrecs."
and here:
"The only thing I can think of is that Obama, being a political genius, employed corporatists and pursued center right policies because he knew that would unite the left and cause a public enlightenment, resulting in mass international demonstrations. You think that's it?"
.....no one could possibly provide an acceptable response. That you heap "mass international demonstrations" and the trend of decades of RW entrenchment on the shoulders of one man to reverse in 3.8 yrs time, is myopic in the extreme.
Now...if only Obama were allowed to govern (read that RULE) in a vacuum, your question might be considered as something more than simply "rhetorical."
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 11:54 PM
Response to Reply #83 |
84. Nonsense. I set no such goal. |
|
I didn't say he had to reverse any trends. I just would like some indication that he wants to change the trends.
I have posted this same question several times in this forum. Succinctly, what has Obama done to bring down the Gini Index? What has he suggested? And you assert that no one could possibly supply an answer to that because...? :shrug:
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #84 |
85. What you're suggesting here.... |
|
Is a far cry from has he made any initiatives that "aren't Republican?"
Not only is your goal post far afield, it's a narrow target.
IOW...you asked the question with the expectation that an acceptable answer doesn't exist.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 11:43 AM
Response to Reply #85 |
86. I don't think there is an acceptable answer. And you can't find one. |
|
I'm saying that governance that maintains the status quo (wealth disparity) is Republican. And Barack Obama has not supported any initiative which would alter the flow of wealth to the top. And you can see the results. Where I put goal posts does not determine if Obama is governing as a Republican, Obama's actions do.
All I've gotten is people objecting to the question, or the form of the question, when one factual refutation would serve to put it to rest. Sometimes a rhetorical question, though provocative, may instill a learning experience.
If Obama were doing a good job, would there be those people in the park?
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 02:32 PM
Response to Reply #86 |
|
Along with all of the other responses you've dismissed.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #87 |
88. Oh no. You are trying to put me in a loop. |
|
I thought for a moment that you might have something that would refute my point.
At least I am willing to listen.
--imm
|
Bobbie Jo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 06:13 PM
Response to Reply #88 |
89. A loop you have created.... |
|
Your "point" has been refuted, and followed by a lot of "yeah, but's...."
You have set up a question for which AN answer doesn't exist. If things were only that black/white and simplistic, perhaps you would get AN answer.
Again....you're looking to Obama to govern according to your narrowly defined standard, without considering the entrenched system that exists NOW, among the multitude of variables that would ( and do )work to actively obstruct the bold initiatives that would be required to meet your standard. Instead, you just lump your markers on the far end of the field and call it failure.
You say you're "willing to listen," but are you willing to understand the hurdles that must be cleared to reach the goal?
When you say...."I thought for a moment that you might have something that would refute my point," You continue to ignore the points that have already been raised throughout this thread because they don't fit into the specific box have constructed.
To call anything that doesn't fit into your box "Republican," is perpetuating the loop.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sun Oct-16-11 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #89 |
90. I guess I'm ignoring all those great answers. |
JuniperLea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:55 PM
Response to Original message |
20. One more for the slag heap... |
|
I have no use for this bullshit... don't bother replying, you are now on ignore.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
|
And don't worry. This is not a reply. Nothing personal. :shrug:
--imm
|
RC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:26 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
23. The OP has a good question. |
|
"Has Obama made any initiatives that are not Republican?"
Has he? Do you have a list of accomplishments from this administration that benefit the people? I'll start with a list of the bu$h administration policies that Obama has rescinded. 1.
It is a shame that today's Democratic party is to the Right of where the Republicans used to be. What is worse is so many do not see it.
|
inna
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 08:57 PM
Response to Reply #23 |
53. exactly. pretty darn depressing. |
JuniperLea
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 02:56 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-12-11 02:57 PM by JuniperLea
duh
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
25. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 |
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:35 PM
Response to Original message |
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:36 PM
Response to Original message |
27. Stopped defending DOMA in court |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:51 PM
Response to Reply #27 |
38. Do you think that offsets shutting down pot dispensaries. |
|
The big pharma has nothing against DOMA.
--imm
|
Bodhi BloodWave
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 09:09 PM
Response to Reply #38 |
|
they are targeting the 'for profit' dispensaries after having been asked by the state.
Unless I'm wrong state law only allow 'non-profits' to give it out *shrugs* so i don't really see to a problem
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 09:23 AM
Response to Reply #54 |
57. I think you are wrong. |
|
The feds say they are targeting those, but they are harassing all of them.
None of the accounts I read said the state initiated it. (The WSJ says the state is building a taxing apparatus!) Where's your information?
--imm
|
Freddie Stubbs
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 07:38 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 09:28 AM
Response to Reply #55 |
58. Talk to some patients. |
|
Not that we shouldn't have both, anyway.
--imm
|
NYC Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:50 AM
Response to Reply #38 |
63. Good job moving the goal posts. |
|
You asked if President Obama has "made any initiatives that are not Republican" and you've received many answers. So now you're trying to shift the discussion to something else.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 12:45 PM
Response to Reply #63 |
67. No I hedged pretty well in my OP. |
|
I heavily discount social reforms, not because they aren't desirable, but because they don't disturb the wealth disparity that delving into the corporations, banks (reforms? they transferred the fees!) defense, surveillance, energy, etc. will, but they keep the base happy.
To find a non-social policy that doesn't wind up favoring the rulers, is difficult, and I submit most are Republican retreads. Exceptions, can be found I'm sure, but is there any attempt to change the direction of the country, to decrease wealth disparity?
--imm
|
JDPriestly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #27 |
60. You've pretty much exhausted the list, Freddie Stubbs, pitifully short as that list. |
JoePhilly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:37 PM
Response to Original message |
28. Buzz ... What are "Brain cells", Alex. |
blindpig
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 03:43 PM
Response to Original message |
30. The initiatives cannot be Republican, he is a Democrat, but..... |
|
they are certainly in the interests of the Capitalist ruling class.
|
mmonk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:31 PM
Response to Original message |
35. Not that I'm aware of. |
|
So far, just the first stimulus (which relied too much on tax cuts).
|
woo me with science
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:34 PM
Response to Original message |
36. Some token accomplishments for the list, but the core, significant policies |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-12-11 04:40 PM by woo me with science
in all major areas are neocon- and corporate-derived.
We are now seeing the beginnings of a push for war with Iran, that will make the military industrial complex and the banking cartels indispensable.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:53 PM
Response to Reply #36 |
39. Thanks. Looks like I'm unrecced to oblivion. |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 04:55 PM
Response to Original message |
40. Lots of unrecs -- but no answers (besides minor social reforms.) |
bvar22
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 05:07 PM
Response to Original message |
41. That is a LIST I would like to see. |
|
A compilation of purely Traditionally Democratic Accomplishments, Initiatives, or even Proposals that benefit the Working Class & The Poor without a HUGE BONUS for the Corporations & RICH attached.
One could be tempted to say that he got Unemployment Benefits extended for a year, and that would be factually correct. However, that was a CRUMB compared to what he gave away to the RICH at the same time, the Extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.
If one seriously goes down the The LIST of Accomplishments, a pattern becomes readily apparent. ALL of the minor "accomplishments" have been accompanied by a HUGE gift to The Already Rich.
You will know them by their WORKS, not by their excuses.
Solidarity! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
Tx4obama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 05:10 PM
Response to Original message |
42. Here ya go here's a list of lists. Peruse the links for relevant ones that answer your question. |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 05:32 PM
Response to Reply #42 |
43. Thanks. I appreciate your extensive efforts here. |
|
And I looked at some, and I have found things that I already conceded. And there are a few genuinely worthwhile things. But remember that some of them came with concessions to the Republicans.
I submit again the notion that Obama must show some progress to mollify his base. But a check on demonstrators will show that he is not really effective for what most people want.
--imm
|
Tx4obama
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 07:51 PM
Response to Reply #43 |
48. Also, here's something to see |
|
Edited on Wed Oct-12-11 07:51 PM by Tx4obama
Rachel Maddow On President Obama & Democrats Accomplishments (November 2010) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLQ-OKa6OZQp.s. Well worth watching :)
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 08:24 PM
Response to Reply #48 |
49. I'm a Rachel fan, and I have seen that. |
|
But I don't yet feel the change and it appears those "occupy" people have some doubts as well.
--imm
|
JDPriestly
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #48 |
61. That list Rachel read is embarrassingly short of truly liberal policies. |
|
Obama is a Republican. That's all there is to it.
|
Lil Missy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 05:42 PM
Response to Original message |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #44 |
|
Anyway, I appreciate succinctness. :)
--imm
|
inna
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Wed Oct-12-11 08:51 PM
Response to Original message |
|
props for critical thinking
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 08:52 AM
Response to Original message |
56. Still under water. Must be about 50 unrecs. |
|
Is this that scary? :scared:
--imm
|
LanternWaste
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:52 AM
Response to Reply #56 |
65. I imagine there's a difference between being scared and simply dismissing a thing |
|
I imagine there's a difference between being scared and simply dismissing a thing that, while possibly relevant, may easily be inferred as somewhat disingenuous also (at best).
However, I do understand the self-validation that may arise from believing one's opinions may "scare" someone else, as it allows us to feel as though we have a bit more strength of character than we actually do.
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 01:02 PM
Response to Reply #65 |
68. Well put. And speaking of disingenuous... |
|
You know that scare is used euphemistically.
And I never made any claims of character, and considering internet anonymity, you can assume the worst. :)
My hypotheses exist independent of my "character" and refutation has lost to denial.
--imm
|
NYC Liberal
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 10:51 AM
Response to Original message |
64. Yes, he has. What an absurd question. n/t |
B Calm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 01:50 PM
Response to Original message |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 05:06 PM
Response to Reply #69 |
72. Yeah, the auto manufacturers really hated that one. |
B Calm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 07:52 AM
Response to Reply #72 |
73. I drive for a company that makes bumpers for the auto manufacturers |
|
and that program got me called back from layoff. It did save US manufacturing jobs. . .
|
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #73 |
74. My point is that Obama never does anything to disturb the wealth disparity. |
|
Whatever he does to help us, actually benefits the wealthy more.
Did any of those US manufacturing jobs pay 1970 equivalent wages? The profits sure soared.
--imm
|
B Calm
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #74 |
77. and my point is it saved US manufacturing jobs. Of course the |
|
wealthy benefited, they always do. . I make $25.00 per hr not counting my benefits. I think I'm worth more and hopefully someday if we ever get a union in, I will!
I'm NOT happy with Obama, but the OP asked for one thing he's done and I answered.
|
deacon
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 02:07 PM
Response to Original message |
70. Wow. Welcome to another edition of trolling for dollars. -1 n/t |
immoderate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Oct-13-11 05:05 PM
Response to Reply #70 |
71. Congratulations on your new trade agreements. |
flvegan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 10:20 AM
Response to Original message |
75. He turned me into a newt. |
Jack Rabbit
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 12:05 PM
Response to Original message |
|
. . . the health care initiative initially wasn't anything the GOP would like. But, DINOs like Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson and Max Baughtkus watered it down while President Obama remained silent.
The wars, the banks, the schools, the environment, pipelines, labor -- all follow Republican policy.
No, it follows what GOP policy was thirty years ago under Reagan. Today's GOP policy is more extreme.
Which seems to bring us to Obama's re-election strategy: Who are you going to vote for? "Me, doing my Ronald Reagan imitation, or a George W. Bush imitation like Rick Perry?"
|
TheKentuckian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Oct-15-11 12:37 PM
Response to Original message |
81. I'll grant DADT (despite the obvious use of the military overall) and the small bore green projects |
|
as well.
Most proposals are out of the Reich Wing think tanks and some like unemployment extensions and maintaining key manufacturing industries (ie the auto bailout) used to be very, very bipartisan or more accurately non-partisan. You don't have to even fire up the way back machine, fucking Bush extended UI on multiple occasions and even started (seemingly very reluctantly as a "favor" to the transition) the auto bailout.
It is like a great many cannot see that the TeaPubliKlans are a substantial radicalization of what most people in western civilization would call extreme right already. Right now the "mainstream" left of the Democratic party mostly occupies the former non-partisan "common wisdom" and our spectrum extends to literally all the way right to the Bush era corporate "fiscal conservative" international interventionist which has now become the dwindling "moderate" Republican wing, hence this ideology is now "centrist".
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 05th 2024, 03:41 PM
Response to Original message |