been sorta out of the loop lately, has Obama made any comments on

[G_j]

police violence against Occupy protesters? I don't think he has, but I'm not sure...

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. Nope...

Well he has....for Egypt.

[G_j]

4. I was aware of the comments about Egypt

was just hoping he'd say something about us..

[Modern_Matthew]

2. No. Obama is merely background noise these days...

As are the 2012 elections and the terminally ill Republican Party.

[tblue]

3. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Yeah. That'll happen.

[SammyWinstonJack]

5. He couldn't be bothered too do that.

[Juneboarder]

6. No response means...

silent support. How can one in power sit back with all this violence occurring and have nothing to say. Police get slapped on the hand, protestors end up in the hospital, and no orders from the White House to STOP THE VIOLENCE.

Things that make you go hmmm...

[Hotler]

41. Nobel Peace prize will do that to you. eom.

[Quartermass]

7. He has made comments on locking up Americans for crimes he's sure they'll commit in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBdPEK5pNtE&feature=youtube_gdata_player

as in "pre-crime" and "prolonged detention" without charges.

In 2009 though.

[villager]

8. certainly the silent unreccers here require no bully pulpit of him

after all, gotta keep that gunpowder dry!

[Eric J in MN]

9. His spokesman did.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/10/28/press-briefing-press-secretary-jay-carney

Q And then on Occupy Wall Street, has the President had a chance to see the footage or get briefed on the alleged police brutality in Oakland, the injuries to an Iraq War veteran, and any reaction to that?

MR. (JAY) CARNEY: Well, I know that he's aware of it. I don't know that he's been briefed on it. He's aware of it from news reports. As I said yesterday, it's very important that we remember that we have a long and noble tradition of free expression, free speech, and protests and demonstrations in this country.

With regard to the situation in Oakland, this is a local law enforcement issue. I would note that the police are investigating that incident, so I don't really have much more to say about that in particular.

[clixtox]

29. There is some serious prevaricating! Noble tradition?

Of course most Americans(US) have no idea about the true history of the USA.

In fact the USA has a very brutal history of repression of "free speech" and "freedom of assembly"!

A long brutally consistent history of murder, incarceration, and unrestrained violence towards those with the temerity to believe in the "Bill of Rights", the first ten amendments of the US Constitution.

Just a couple of generations ago this, apparently archaic now, document was the ultimate law of our nation.

Throughout the history of the USA, though, the 1% of the time, hasn't allowed any diminution of their nearly complete domination.

Agitating publicly for even modest change has always been a dangerous "undertaking" in the "land of the free, and the home of the "brave".

That Jay Carney can lie so glibly indicates how perfect the POTUS spokesman job suits his lying ass.

None of the violence would have occurred without Obomba's "thumbs up"!

He hates the "Occupy Movement" with quite a bit of passion, I believe!

The 99% have really exposed him, and his ilk, for the conniving, hypocritical, criminal scum they truly are.

And that's the way it is...

[JohnnyRingo]

10. What were you hoping for?

Do you want him to cover the situation like he's a news reporter, or are you looking for an executive decision? Should he assemble a hasty news conference on the protests and demand the mayors of individual cities come under federal rule and step down?

Seriously, what were you hoping to accomplish in this Obama baiting post? It seems clear you already knew the answer to your query before you began typing your single sentence post.

I'm getting tired of the daily posts here in DU designed to rouse others against the Democratic president's re-election. Everyone of them is formatted in the same fashion: Obama isn't moving on (your cause here), the most important issue we face as a country today.

Obama has already earned my vote, and I'd cast it today if I could. You can be in charge of foot dragging the campaign.

[one_voice]

11. +1....

Agree! :thumbsup:

[msongs]

13. yes let's have no presidential leadership on protecting our constitutional rights aka foot dragging

[JohnnyRingo]

15. Going into the election year...

I'm prepared to call it the "DU NoBama crowd".

I recall how sickened I was seeing friends in '08 with their "Democrat For McCain" signs in their yards. I lost a couple long time friendships over that election, and I'm not going to pull any punches here among my DU friends.

You want your constitutional rights protected? Do it through the courts, that's why they're there. The president should have better things to do than comment on whether or not you can build a permanent tent city on public property. It doesn't even matter what his opinion is.

I've held my tongue out of respect for months on the Occupy Movement. While everyone cries about the great conspiracy between the big city mayors and Obama to do the bidding of Wall Street, there's one scenario that's always overlooked: Maybe the city mayors (and president) fear a permanent protest settlement in the center of their town.

Tent cities turn into shanty towns. Shanty towns turn into slums. Slums turn into public eyesores named after the mayor or president in charge (see Hooverville).

I'm behind the inequity movement as much as anyone and know things have to change, but perhaps the protest needs direction beyond what they're doing. I can go to downtown Youngstown with a sign and march around the square all day long. I can do it all month long, but once I and others set up a shack and announce "We're never leaving" I'll have a problem with the Democratic mayor and eventually the police.

Not everything has a complicated conspiracy theory behind it.

[BklnDem75]

37. +1000 Excellent post

[zipplewrath]

14. Remember when he commented on the Boston police?

He ended up having the "beer summit"? I guess he doesn't do that anymore.

He could have made a statement saying that he was looking for people on both sides to be responsible and not use acts of violence to further their goals. That he admires both the protestors and police that choose not to resort to violence and that he understands that in some of the recent incidents the local authorities shared his concerns and were investigating the incidents to ensure that everyones federal rights were being respected. He could have called Oakland and other locales and discussed his concerns directly with local mayors.


Or, he could say nothing.

[JohnnyRingo]

16. I see your point...

You're right, I guess he could make a comment or broker a deal between the protesters and the money Barron's, but it'll take more than a six pack of Yuenglings. The Oval Office sympathy you seem to feel a need for holds zero political payoff and volumes of dirty republican campaign sound bites.

Thank goodness Obama has the sense to let the states govern the small stuff while he works on the economy and national affair at the executive level. As I've pointed out, this battle between the police and protesters belongs in the courts, not the White House lawn.

I don't believe for a minute that an "attaboy" from Obama will stop the bashers from moving on to the next big thing that he isn't tending to for them. The OP's post was nothing but flame bait from a Kucinich supporter who has never been satisfied with any thing this president has or has not done. He has just moved from one issue to the next in his disdain for Obama. He's still waiting for the president to officially apologize for brutalizing Ghaddafi and the war crimes of the Bush years.

I know G_j is a good decent man with sincere progressive values, but he's never held back on pro-Obama posts, referring to them as "flame bait".
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5346722

[zipplewrath]

17. I don't call it sympathy

I call it leadership.

[JohnnyRingo]

18. The "nonleader" is representing us at the EU conference today.

Armed with the respect he's earned among European heads of state he's trying to stop the global economic downslide that began shortly before he took office. Economic disparity wasn't invented here, it's taken our friends across the Atlantic by storm beginning with riots in France and progressing through the collapse of the Euro in countries like Greece, Spain, and now Italy.

I guess he hasn't had much time to lead the "leaderless movement", but if he did I'm sure I'd hear that he was violating the first rule of Occupy if he offered any hint of critical advice. On the other side of the political fence, he'd legitimately be told to "butt out of local issues" and get busy doing his day job.

Obama is not the leader of the US court system, and problems with civil rights are dealt with via gavels and robes.

On edit: I cede final word on this issue to you.

[zipplewrath]

19. "He" is an office of over 200 people

He is an administration of tens of thousands. He is able to handle a wide variety of issues, simultaneously, because of this. He is able to handle determining the direction he plans on going in terms of holding prisoners indenfinitely, without trial, in Gitmo. He is able to handle figuring out what new "humanitarian" actions to take with the military. Amongst all of those people, I'm sure he can handle ensuring that the federal laws of this land are enforced, in defense of citizens exercising their right of peaceable assembly, and petitioning their government for a redress of grievence. I'm pretty sure he actually took an oath to do exactly that. I don't remember that he took an oath to "stop the golobal economic downslide", although I'm sure we'd all appreciate it if he would work on that too. He can do this overtly, or he can do it subtley through simple actions such as I suggested.

Again, it's called leadership.

[Zhade]

33. "and volumes of dirty republican campaign sound bites" -- so it's about political expediency...

...over principle. Good to know the priorities are straight.

Also, I believe calling out another DUer is against the rules. I know, I know, those aren't enforced here anymore, but still.

[JohnnyRingo]

39. I imagine you sported a Bob Dole button in '96?

After all, what with NAFTA and welfare "reform" your principles must have opposed Clinton's re-election, or maybe you just discovered them when Obama entered the office.

This place has become so rife with people working against campaign volunteers like myself, there should be a "Nobama" forum where you can all slap each other on the back for making him a single term president.

Sometimes I think the goal of many here is to suffer through four years of Mitt Romney in hope that he destroys the country severely enough that an extreme left candidate looks better to the majority.

I plan to work my hardest to get Obama re-elected next November, you can take care of endless nit-picking over principles.

[BklnDem75]

38. I remember he got flamed here endlessly for getting involved

[zipplewrath]

42. Once burnt, twice shy?

I don't remember him getting flamed here, but I do remember it more generally in the public forums. So one can understand some hesitancy to approach anything that appears to be "local".

I don't think one can sustain the position that the OWS movements are "local" anymore, or that the police response are "isolated" incidents. He's already commented on them in several ways, it's merely the violence committed against them that has generated a continued silence.

[JDPriestly]

20. Don't worry. Obama will be re-elected.

He is the best choice out of all the Republicans who are running.

[G_j]

25. FAIL

For reading into my comment a plethora of nonsense.:think::banghead:

[JohnnyRingo]

30. I guess I should have assumed you were too busy to see where Obama was today

Though I searched back to 2008 to find anything positive from you about the president, the earliest one post-election warns fellow DUers in early 2009 "It's our war now".

As the months flew by I saw you moved to Obama's apparent "lack of outrage and concern over war crimes". As you put it: "It surely caused me to seriously doubt him as a person of conscience". This was before the first even year ended.

Time went on, and your criticism shifted to "Why can't Obama express remorse over the way Ghadaffi was brutalized". I believe in that case, Obama's spinelessness "sickened you beyond belief".

I would have let it slide and assume you were just a Kucinich supporter who used that metric to judge any other candidate that made the office, but you showed little grace when someone posted a poll about how some DUers appear to be seeking impeachment. "Flame bait" is what you indignantly called it:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x5346722

As I pointed out elsewhere, I'm sure you're a decent man who's sincere in your progressive values and want what's best for the country, but I believe your post was meant as a statement rather than an actual query. I think, as others have mentioned, you were following a pattern of "ask a question you obviously know the answer to" and revel in the comments as Obama bashers battle it out with supporters.

You're certainly not under any obligation to support Obama in 2012, but you got what you paid for, and you'll get it in spades if we end up with a President Romney because you convinced people Obama is unworthy of our vote.

I'm on board to work for Obama's re-election next year, but you seem to be on the side of the road throwing garbage at the political bandwagon as it passes. Good luck with that.

[ellisonz]

31. +1

[G_j]

35. close to thirty thousand posts here

And that is what you dredge up? One brief grumpy exchange? Wow....just wow..all in an attempt to assign an ulterior motive to my simple post? What you seemed to have missed were hundreds of informative articles, videos etc. Think what you wish, I actually found the information I was looking for, as fellow Duers provided here (see posts 9 & 27).

[Skittles]

32. paranoid bunch, aren't they?

they remind me of the gun nuts

[SidDithers]

36. Well said...

:thumbsup:

Sid

[SidDithers]

12. Oh look, it's this thread again...nt

Sid

[CakeGrrl]

21. I think I see the pattern:

Question: Did the President do (something that sounds really great but that I pretty much know didn't happen) today?

Answers: No! He still sucks!


;-)

[JohnnyRingo]

23. Good observation.

How is it that half the country complains about the liberal economic policies Obama put into place, while the other half say he's just another big money conservative? Obama must truly be the president for all Americans (to bitch about).

When people go on about how he's no different than a republican, or that we wouldn't be any worse off with a GOP controlled White House, I post these two pix:

A Democratic president signing the Lilly Ledbetter Act that protects women in the workplace:


A Republican president signing a bill that restricts certain abortion procedures:

[G_j]

26. funny

Through the years I've brought many questions to DU knowing I would probably find the answers. Of course there are the occasional attacks that come with asking a legitimate question.

[Marr]

22. He said it was up to each city to decide how much force to use when denying citizens their

First Amendment rights.

[woo me with science]

24. I see what you did there.

And it is a valid point to make. Shame on him.

[upi402]

27. Obama has okay'd it (link)

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/11/16/1036948/-Obama-OKs-use-of-force-in-Occupy-crackdowns-:(

[Norrin Radd]

28. kr

[T S Justly]

34. I believe he's been mute on the subject (nt)

[hifiguy]

40. His silence implies approval and consent.

Nuff said.