Matt Damon: "The President has rolled over to Wall Street completely". I couldn't agree more.

[grahamhgreen]

Few of Barack Obama's celebrity supporters at the 2008 US presidential election were as committed to his cause as the Oscar-winning actor Matt Damon. Rather than merely support Mr Obama in an online video, Damon, one of Hollywood's highest-profile liberal activists, campaigned for the Democratic nominee in Florida. Not content with that, he provided one of the most cutting insults of the campaign when he described the Republican vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin as "really terrifying... like something out of a bad Disney movie".

___________________

He is upset that Mr Obama, who promised to "spread the wealth around", has extended the Bush tax cuts and that the inequality gap has widened.

"They had a chance that they don't have any more to stand up for things," he says. "They've probably squandered that at this point. They'll probably just make whatever deals they can to try to get elected again."

Damon appears so disillusioned that, playing devil's advocate, I ask whether he is considering voting Republican. "Good God, no! I just got a 3 per cent tax cut. Do you think I'm going to start a small business with that money? You're out of your mind if you think so. I'm going to put it in the bank. So is every other guy that makes the kind of money I make. I don't think that's what's best for the country. I think a stronger middle class makes for a stronger country."

As well as the economy, Mr Obama's record on education repels him. "They have to get people who actually know about educating kids in positions of power. Now they're trying to get business people to come and manage schools like they're factories. It's not going to work."


http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/from-no-1-fan-to-criticinchief-damon-takes-aim-at-obama-2233622.html



Sorry, but Obama can not win with his present policy positions in 2012. We need a challenger.

Someone who knows that returning to the 1950's tax rates on the rich will solve the deficit, like the other 81% of Americans do.

[ReggieVeggie]

1. uh oh...

:popcorn:

[Skittles]

2. it's not like it just happened

he's been sucking up to the same bastards who destroyed the economy since day one

[Lucky 13]

79. nope. probably just the first time someone asked Matt Damon about it.

I agree with him completely.

[LWolf]

137. That's the truth. nt

[TheWraith]

3. If you think Obama's not going to win in 2012, you're severely deluded.

There is no Republican or Democrat who is capable of beating him.

[Toucano]

26. Obama's the best Republican president since Ronald Reagan.

Why should the Republicans put up a genuine challenge when they've gone someone in the White House who gives them what they want already?

They didn't even have to spend any money to elect him.

[stillwaiting]

71. +1; They'll let Obama continue their policies and drag the nation down even further.

As we continue to fail the middle/working classes a large enough number of people will believe it's due to socialism/liberalism (because they are completely brainwashed).

Repubs will come out strong in '16 and lead us even FURTHER down the drain.

The Middle Class/Working Classes are completely screwed at this rate. No one is advocating for policy that can save them right now.

So, we have to change the system if we're going to save and protect our way of life from the elites. It's the only way.

[Chan790]

133. This is what for years growing up in Hartford...

I heard referred to as the Connecticut paradox. The last serious GOP challenge faced by Joe Lieberman was Lowell Weicker. After all, why waste a perfectly good candidate to challenge an office-holder utterly acceptable to you? As a result, we consistently faced tougher races in the House and the Governorship in what is arguably the most consistently liberal state in the country. (CT has no "deep-red" districts or counties, unlike CA or MA or VT)

The question isn't "Can Obama win?" (Will-win, not even can-win.) or "Should Obama face a primary challenge?" (No. All viable possibilities are as corrupted as him.), it's "Does he really deserve another term based on the performance so far?" (Also no, alas. If I knew how things would turn out, I'd have supported Clinton based only on being a more-skilled politician even as her positions are as crappy as the ones Obama has conceded into.)

[Toucano]

162. Very interesting.

I don't often play the "what if" re-visit the primaries game, but you've got me thinking.

Clinton was a known quantity wasn't she: a skilled corporatist politician.

Obama rose on the people's hope for something new, something different. He was unlike any other person to have reached for the Oval office, with both broad appeal and a voice that spoke of a particular dream.

Though the country cried out for a new Square Deal or a new New Deal, Obama has delivered the same old deal.

His rapid capitulation to the Republican fringe is so much worse than an imagined Clinton-esque "go-along-to-get-along" would have been because it cost us a generation of young voters who will never see the change the voted for.

[lfairban]

166. Must disagree with you here.

I don't see how Hilliary would have been better than Obama. The centrist triangulation was invented by her husband Bill Clinton, how would we expect her to be any better. Replacing the Big Dog with the Big . . . well, you see what I mean.

[quakerboy]

184. I think the idea not that it would have been better,

but that at least it wouldn't have been as disheartening to many, because it would have been expected.

[defendandprotect]

178. What we don't need are more Koch Bros/DLC Dems self-selecting for office ....

Hillary is DLC -- and I would never have voted for her because of that!

Had I known Obama was "New Dem" wouldn't have voted for him either!!

How about this time we try a great idea and vote our conscience!!

No more "hold your nose and vote" --

Let's draft Sen. Bernie Sanders -- he can run as a Dem --

and we need to bundle two anti-war Dems -- how about someone like

Tom Hayden for VP?

Biden, who was at his creepiest during his Chairmanship of the Clarence Thomas

Hearings, has been calling for more than a year now for Israel to attack Iran!

Biden says, "Israel would be JUSTIFIED in attacking Iran" -- !!!



:nuke:

[rury]

198. Go ahead, draft Bernie, Tom, Dennis, Howard, WHOEVER

and if you somehow manage to get the Democratic nomination watch your ticket go down the toilet when African-American-American voters stay home in DROVES in November.... :rofl:

[JDPriestly]

202. Are you suggesting that African-Americans would select a candidate

based on his or her race? Are you accusing African-Americans of being racist?

I think that African-Americans, like everyone else, will vote for the candidate who will best represent their interests.

Has Obama done anything that represents the interests of ordinary African-Americans?

I can't think of anything other than just getting elected.

[rury]

205. I'm not suggesting it...I'm SAYING it

Do not assume that African-Americans don't know what President Obama has accomplished OR that we all need the same things, OR that we are stupid enough to think that the president can do everything by himself.
Enough of us know his record of accomplishment and believe me we WILL sit the 2012 election out if someone other than Obama is the nominee.
Mark my word.
And if you cannot think of anything he has done to deserve re-election you need to quit bitching and pay attention.
Oh, and by the way, black Americans are paying attention to the fact that President Obama is being judged much more harshly than any other president has been, despite all that he has accomplished and MANY of us believe that it is just another manifestation of having to be twice as good for half the recognition when you're black!
No one was screaming about primarying Bill Clinton after NAFTA and welfare reform...but then the "Big Dog" has white skin!
So if you manage to deny President Obama the Democratic nomination in 2012, get ready to LOSE BIG TIME without the most loyal Democratic voting group...African-Americans!!

[JDPriestly]

209. What has Obama accomplished that makes you like his record so much?

[defendandprotect]

214. Oh, you think that AA buy your "Pink Pony, Chess Game" .... think they're smarter than that!!

[defendandprotect]

213. Are you saying African American Democrats aren't critical of Obama ... ? Wow!!

Or perhaps that they will only vote for an AA for president?

In fact, I think AA voters are much more aware and awake when they're victims

of betrayal and scams!

[LWolf]

138. +1

[harun]

141. *sigh*, you would be correct.

[piratefish08]

147. +1

[defendandprotect]

177. +1 --

[Plucketeer]

187. EGZACTLY!!!

Matter of fact, they'd do well to run Sarah Palin against Obama. They'..uh we'd get Obama again, and there'd be years of job security for comedians, thanks to Palin.

[cognoscere]

27. Was not something similar said about Hillary? I think you're right, but

it's not about any candidate's capability. It's about who the PTB want to win. Consider the rejects the GOP has put up lately: Quayle, Bush, McCain, Palin. For crissakes if they stooped any lower, they would be putting a dog turd in a suit, yet they somehow manage to get almost half of the votes. I suspect if a third party candidate as dynamic, charismatic, and moral as Martin Sheen's president in West Wing came along, the GOP would be spending millions to make sure the electronic vote stealing machines would be set for an Obama win.

[JDPriestly]

102. Hillary and Bill Clinton sold out to Wall Street before Obama's name

was mentioned anywhere outside of Illinois. We have to find a real Democrat. Maybe Matt Damon will run. We could do worse. And no, I am not joking.

[russspeakeasy]

113. Why can't Howard Dean be given new life ? Seriously!!

[JDPriestly]

148. Howard Dean is great!!!!

[2banon]

120. exactly,, ..

As it turned out, it didn't matter which Dem Candidate got elected after all. The day after election, before he took office, appointed were mostly Clinton's and a few Bush peeps in these positions. (HRC would have largely made the same appointments)

Unfortunately, Obama turned out to be just another "figure head" for the real PTB. The primary campaign was simply a dog and pony show that garnered an immediate cash flow windfall of hundreds of millions of dollars in profit for the Korporate Media. Not long following elections, Wall Street and the Banksters, BigPharm and Medical Insurance hucksters got their golden booties courtesy of you and me vis a vis this administration "economic policy decisions"

Gotta come up with a different paradigm altogether.. and until there's significant accountability, the only change we'll ever see is the wrong change.

[lfairban]

165. Thanks for the visual!

. . . if they stooped any lower, they would be putting a dog turd in a suit . . .

:rofl:

Thanks, I needed that. Been getting kind of depressed lately.

[lib2DaBone]

38. One term President.... he's done

[dionysus]

92. your wish will not come true...

[Name removed]

50. Deleted message

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

[Scuba]

54. Why can't someone on the left win?

[TheWraith]

75. Someone on the left did win.

Temper tantrums notwithstanding.

[russspeakeasy]

109. Actually it was someone who SAID he was on the left that won.

[markpkessinger]

203. Sad to say you are correct! n/t

[grahamhgreen]

95. I was called deluded when I said that Obama could win in 2008. He can not win in 2012.

Just wait til the corporate media "unfreinds" him, and starts with the swiftboating 6 months before the election. You do not have to be prescient to know this will happen.

They are playing nice with him right now - because they fear a real populist challenge from the left. And yes, the way they treat him now is nice because he stays inside the corporatist framing.

"Given the choice between a Republican and someone who acts like a Republican, people will vote for the real Republican all the time." - Harry S. Truman

He could not win as dog catcher in 2012 if he does not start saying "tax the rich to end the deficit", end the wars, and get his comfy shoes off of Jeb Bushes sundeck and into the WI winter.

Or does he really think Jeb will campaign for him like Damon did?

[russspeakeasy]

115. The problem is, he will say "tax the rich", but he won't mean it.

[TheWraith]

128. Your entire position is contradictory.

You insist that the media completely controls how he's perceived, and yet the way for him to win is to take a far left set of positions?

[grahamhgreen]

143. Not contradictory. You can fool some of the people all of the time,

And all the people some of the time, bit not all the people all the time。

Obamas pproblem is that he believes if he soft sells neo-con, pro corporatist policies that the corporatists will support him in 2012.

They won't.

He further believes that the reason he won in 2008 was because of the power elite.

It wasn't.

He has alienated his base and now thinks that the power and money people will select him for 2012.

They will bury him.

Only by building a Populist movement that can override the entrenched media does he have any chance of winning.

[rhett o rick]

157. I believe that the CorpAmerica cabal backed down in 2008 and that's why the Repubs ran frick and

frack. But in 2012 for the Repubs to win they will have to take back much of the right of center that Obama has catered to in the last two years. Obama had to make a choice. If he stayed with the left and left center, he would have a fight on his hands if the Republicans run a moderate like Jeb Bush to save the conservative cause and take back the right of center. I still dont rule this out. it depends on if the Citizens United money and KKKarl can smear Obama badly enough. But so far Obama has been willing to throw the left under the train to gain the right of center. So as I see it, CorpAmerica may decide they are doing ok with Obama (they have one of their own as his Chief of Staff) and back him. I can visualize Pres Obama walking arm in arm with the Kook Brothers thru the Rose Garden.

[defendandprotect]

181. You want a Dem president who "caters to the right of center"?

[rhett o rick]

201. Hell no! What did I say to make you think that? nm

[defendandprotect]

212. Apologies if I misunderstood --

Probably going back and forth from Revolution in Libya is disorienting me!!

I believe that the CorpAmerica cabal backed down in 2008 and that's why the Repubs ran frick and
frack. But in 2012 for the Repubs to win they will have to take back much of the right of center that Obama has catered to in the last two years. Obama had to make a choice. If he stayed with the left and left center, he would have a fight on his hands if the Republicans run a moderate like Jeb Bush to save the conservative cause and take back the right of center. I still dont rule this out. it depends on if the Citizens United money and KKKarl can smear Obama badly enough. But so far Obama has been willing to throw the left under the train to gain the right of center. So as I see it, CorpAmerica may decide they are doing ok with Obama (they have one of their own as his Chief of Staff) and back him. I can visualize Pres Obama walking arm in arm with the Kook Brothers thru the Rose Garden.

Though my outlook is quite different --

IMO, in going this far to the right, only "frick and frack" would run for GOP.

This radical right wing GOP is at the bottom of the barrel of humanity as I think you can

see from Boehner, DeLay, O'Connell, McCain, Palin, Newt -- the fat gun, now thin -- etal.

These are people who are complete fools in some cases and in other cases people who couldn't

get into the Mafia. All have criminal instincts, imo.

Also -- you're describing Jeb as a GOP "moderate"? Unimaginable, since he's as criminal as any

other member of the FBEE.

Guess this is the part that confused me ...

But so far Obama has been willing to throw the left under the train to gain the right of center.

and probably didn't give enough emphasis to this ...

I can visualize Pres Obama walking arm in arm with the Kook Brothers thru the Rose Garden.


Presume you won't be voting for Obama, either in 2012?

Who do you trust in 2012?

[rhett o rick]

215. Please an appology is not needed. I apparently was a little to flip to get my points across.

I believe there is a cabal of neocons and top corporate owners that actually run this country. Bush didnt and nether did Cheney. They were tools of the cabal and when told to step down, they did so like the scared cowards they are. I recently read a book that I will have to get back because there were some gems in there. "Endgame" by Derrik Jensen. Most is too dark to read but he did have some gems. And I cant quote him but i think the gist is that sometimes it's better to back off and regroup and come back stronger than ever. Said in another way, If you are winning the battle easily, watch out for an ambush. Obama and the left won the battle easily in 2008. I think the cabal backed off and gave the people their choice of Obama. To help, they helped the Republicans decide to run a couple of losers. Then the cabal has 4 years to undercut Pres Obama which will break the backbone of his support. Then in 2012, the Republicans can come roaring back. But to come back they will have to have a moderate and not a kookaboro. Now you and I know Jeb is a scoundrel but I guarantee the moderate Republican base will welcome him over their other idiot choices.

Whew I am going on. Buttt.... Pres Obama appears to be aiming for the right of center voters. the old moderate repubs and now New Dems. He has thrown the left under the ferry to help. So I am thinking that maybe the cabal will settle for Obama for four more years sense he hasnt hurt them much.

[defendandprotect]

218. See we are both on the same side ....

but that our ideas are in different languages!!

Or -- put another way -- same church/different pews!!

Generally get the idea of what your'e saying -- however.

:)

[defendandprotect]

179. Agree ... and all you have to do is look at DU --

a large majority of DU'ers are in a post-Obama frame of mind --

Skinner, himself, confirmed this in ATA when he said that if he were to put a

stop to the dissent re Obama here, he'd have to give rid of half of his members!

However, my advice to anyone still watching the corporate-press would be to put the

TV in the closet!

He could not win as dog catcher in 2012 if he does not start saying "tax the rich to end the deficit", end the wars, and get his comfy shoes off of Jeb Bushes sundeck and into the WI winter.

Let's draft Sen. Bernie Sanders for president -- he can run on a Dem ticket --

And let's not fool around with any more Koch Bros/DLC self-selecting candidates --

we need two strong anti-war candidates -- maybe Tom Hayden?


Biden was enough of a question given his assistance in putting Clarence Thomas on the SC --

for more than a year now he's been running around saying "Israel should attack Iran" --

Biden say, "Israel would be JUSTIFIED in attacking Iran" -- !!



:nuke:

[JDPriestly]

99. No one has challenged him -- yet.

[IamK]

152. He may be the republican nominee....

[defendandprotect]

180. +1 --

Darkly funny!!!

[Knight Hawk]

183. If you just look at polls

that may seem possible.But if you look at the electoral college map Obama is very vunerable.I cannot really see where he would pick up a state but Fl.NC. Vir.In. which all went for Obama in 2008 are trending red big time.

[thanks_imjustlurking]

196. So? That's discussing pragmatism

in a system that is totally @#$%ed up. Rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic.

[Joe Bacon]

197. Gee, they said the exact same thing about Jimmy Carter in 1979.

We know how that turned out...Honestly, The Republicans are going to pull all the stops out. I doubt Obama will win.

[cdcfbw1]

199. Obama winning.....

Well, you may very well be correct but that is a shame we can't at least have a chance to vote for a REAL democrat! If some people (like myself) think things are going to get really bad the next 2 yrs just wait for another 4 yrs of more really bad stuff.

[bluestate10]

4. Damon can talk and be taken seriously.

When he spends some of his millions setting up venture capital firms that will start and nurture small businesses. Until then, he is just another overpaid person with an opinion.

[Hannah Bell]

8. wtf?

[Enthusiast]

59. WTF, indeed!

OMG!

[Starry Messenger]

11. That was random.

:crazy:

Funny, the biggest enemy to education in the D party is Whitney Tilson, hedge fund asshole. Talk about overpaid with an opinion. At least when movies get made in Hollywood, people are employed. A big star vehicle means jobs.

[DaisyDeedles]

76. Also, Hollywood has done more to advance progressive ideas than any asshat politician

And movies are one of our biggest exports.

[bluestate10]

121. A ethical Venture Capitalist create more jobs than a movie actor

creates in a career of acting. If you doubt that take a look at the yearly gross of all hollywood movies, maybe with popcorn and candy sales added in the total of ALL movie receipts will match the earnings of ONE Fortune 500 company. If wealthy people like the Kochs are going to be counteracted and neutralized, ethical VCs and business leaders will be the people that get it done, otherwise progressives and moderates are destined for a life of street protests. Progressives seem to like the street protest scene, I prefer to defeat bastards like the Koch brothers in a quieter and more permanent way.

[Starry Messenger]

135. Ethical VC? What beast is that?

Whatever, I already know you're on your radical moderate kick and don't think this is cool. I'm not going to change your mind and you aren't going to change mine. Damon's remarks about Obama's education reform "efforts" and supporting teachers make me glad I have an ally speaking out. And you are wrong about the street protests. And the Koch's have been around for decades--if anyone with $$ was going to "defeat them" they would have made efforts in that area.

[liberation]

160. Ethical VC? It is that place down the street from the unicorn stable...

how could you have missed that?

[liberation]

159. "I prefer to defeat bastards like the Koch brothers in a quieter and more permanent way."

Sure you do, if we just shut up and hold our breath forever... the Koch brothers will learn their lesson!

[Starry Messenger]

163. "Any day now!"

The Kochs have been anti-left assholes since before the McCarthy era. Now that they've finally pissed off the moderates, the gauntlet is thrown now, forsooth! lol

[RetroLounge]

168. A ethical Venture Capitalist

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

RL

[roguevalley]

17. wow. he has done a lot of things with his money. he just doesn't

put his name on them like Bill Gates, et al.

[highplainsdem]

31. Don't know much about him, do you?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matt_Damon

http://www.looktothestars.org/celebrity/231-matt-damon

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/03/matt-damon-water-org_n_830930.html

[Armstead]

He puts a lot of time and money into philanthropy

He deserves to be taken seriously already

[Armstead]

47. He puts a lot of time and money into philanthropy

He deserves to be taken seriously already

[Lucky 13]

80. I see, so only people that invest millions are worthy of having their opinion heard.

I think Mr. Obama agrees with you considering his recent request of $60000+ donations from major donors.

Drop in the bucket. Only money speaks. Got it.

[lunatica]

82. You're entitled to your opinion.

I happen to think Matt Damon contributes quite a bit. Certainly more than I do. And probably oodles more than you do.

[treestar]

89. It's OK for entertainers and football players to make millions

It's just not OK for the OWNERS of the business to make any money. :sarcasm:

Or something like that. I've actually seen that sentiment on DU. So it's isn't being rich that is wrong. It's just starting a business that is wrong. Or something like that.

[JDPriestly]

119. No. There is nothing wrong with being rich as long as you pay taxes

that keep the country going.

Matt Damon is not suggesting that he shouldn't pay taxes. He supports repealing the Bush tax cuts. The problem is not being rich. The problem is being rich and greedy and unpatriotic, caring mostly only about yourself.

[JDPriestly]

104. Matt Damon is not a venture capitalist. And I don't want a venture

capitalist in the White House. The guys who are good at business should manage the businesses in the country.

I want someone in the White House who can see beyond the bottom line into the hearts of people. I thought maybe Obama could be that person. He has proved that he cannot. Maybe Matt Damon can.

Obama has shown no sympathy, no real sympathy for the poor and middle class. Look at the people at his public appearances and speeches. The homeless, poor, jobless, really struggling folks are either not present or seated and standing so far in the back of the crowd that they are invisible to Obama and the cameras.

Employment numbers have gone up, but as Robert Reich and Bernie Sanders pointed out on Ian Masters' radio show this morning, the new hires are receiving far lower pay than those who were laid off.

Even if the numbers of jobs rises, the wages decline. That is not good. We need more jobs at decent wages.

[bluestate10]

112. Ethical venture capitalists are and will continue to be the salvation

of the nation. Philanthropy is good, but "give a man a fish and feed him once, teach a man how to fish and feed him forever". Pardon the quote if wrong in wording. Matt Damon may give away money, but ethical venture capitalist create jobs and livelihoods. I don't get the anti-capitalist drift by some DUERs, even when applied to ethical VCs that think first of their communities and workers.

[JDPriestly]

153. I am not at all anti-capitalist, not at all. But companies like Exxon

and Bank of America should be paying their taxes.

Venture capitalists invest in companies that have legitimate tax write-offs. No one is asking people to pay taxes on money they spend or invest in hiring other people.

The problem is that very little money is being invested in the US right now compared to the amounts of the profits being earned here and the money that has, over the years, been placed in our stock markets, some of it by middle class people.

I for one want to see venture capitalists investing in businesses in the US that create jobs. The tax breaks for the rich as now structured do not promote the development of jobs in the US -- at least not adequately.

Most of the investment today is going overseas where labor is cheap (in part due to the currency manipulation) or into automation. These investments save businesses money but cost Americans jobs. That is why there is so much resentment against business on DU and across the country now.

The enormous savings that have been enjoyed by businesses due to outsourcing and automation have cost Americans their livelihoods and reduced our standard of living. At the same time they have bloated the bank accounts of the wealthy and raised their standards of living to unprecedented heights.

When the taxable incomes of ordinary people are reduced and the incomes that are increased -- those of the rich -- are not taxed, then you get a budget crisis.

At that point the rich, who pay for the campaigns of our politicians press for reduced wages for government employees and reduced benefits for the poor and middle class as well as reduced taxes.

So, the rich are squeezing the poor and middle class and taking an outlandishly large share of the benefits of automation and computerization and outsourcing for themselves. This is not going to work. That is why people are angry.

Read the history of politics following the crashes of 1893 and 1929. Conservatives fool some of the people for a few years. But when events prove their crazy economic theories to be unworkable, when the poor are sleeping and starving in the streets, waiting in long lines at soup kitchens, the middle class passes those soup lines shaking in their boots and fearing for the future.

If you want to see real change, then just keep giving these tax breaks to the rich while you cut back on those things that make life livable for the middle class and bearable for the poor.

Just keep this up. You will see real change. That is not a threat. It is a prediction based on history.

[Doremus]

186. +1000 n/t

[fascisthunter]

108. dumb... and I suppose we all need to do something equally grand to have opinions

get over it.... people are not all blind followers.

[russspeakeasy]

116. What?

[RetroLounge]

167. Awww, I'm sure he gives a shit what you think

Kinda like the rest of us.

:rofl:

RL

[Bluebear]

217. you said it. nt

[ProSense]

5. So the article takes a bunch of entertainers quotes to show what?

Entertainers have opinions?

Angelina Jolie

Actress

"Obama is fighting for international justice, he wants to intervene militarily in genocides abroad, and he wants to close down Guantanamo Bay."

November 2008

"How is Obama's approach to Sudan an evolution of justice? And when the administration says it intends to work to 'improve the lives of the people of Darfur', I would like to know what that means, besides the point that their lives could hardly get worse."

December 2009

Anyone really interested in Sudan?

All Damon is doing is using Obama to promote his new movie:

<...>

Damon appears so disillusioned that, playing devil's advocate, I ask whether he is considering voting Republican. "Good God, no! I just got a 3 per cent tax cut. Do you think I'm going to start a small business with that money? You're out of your mind if you think so. I'm going to put it in the bank. So is every other guy that makes the kind of money I make. I don't think that's what's best for the country. I think a stronger middle class makes for a stronger country."

As well as the economy, Mr Obama's record on education repels him. "They have to get people who actually know about educating kids in positions of power. Now they're trying to get business people to come and manage schools like they're factories. It's not going to work."

Damon says that he's excited to be playing a politician for the first time in The Adjustment Bureau, a sci-fi romance. But he has no intention of seeking office. "There's probably a problem with somebody who wants to be a politician in the first place."

That said, he does admire Bill Clinton. Damon based his portrayal of LaBoeuf, the loquacious ranger in True Grit, on the former president. "There's a little bit of Clinton's charm thrown in. I could listen to him talk forever."

<...>

[progressoid]

46. Like it or not, entertainers had a lot to do with his 2008 election success.

It's going to be a rough road if they don't show up in a year to help in the re-election.

[treestar]

93. BULLSHIT

It was the voters! Entertainers should not have that kind of power! How is that any more right than the "corporations" having power? :rofl:

[mochajava666]

72. Don't like the message, blame the messenger

Typical tactic by Fox News. Hope you are proud of yourself.

Maybe address the OP if you have any courage?

[Rex]

86. Not going to happen. One way means one way only.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

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

[defendandprotect]

83. Agree -- and how everyone doesn't "get it" is difficult to understand ... couldn't be clearer!!

[neverforget]

7. 2008 his opinion mattered. 2011 under the bus.

[theHandpuppet]

12. Bingo!

Lots of company under that bus, too.

[Enthusiast]

60. We're all bozos under this bus. nt

[ProSense]

13. His opinion didn't matter to me in 2008, and

anyone who says Obama sold out to Wall Street, but claims to admire Clinton is suspect.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

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

[rhett o rick]

16. Michael Moore stands with the unions, Pres Obama stands with Jeb Bush.

We need to primary Obama.

[ProSense]

18. "We need to primary Obama."

That's what this fake outrage is all about. Where's the challenger?

[Name removed]

22. Deleted message

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

[ProSense]

25. Here

dumb

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

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

[Foo Fighter]

48. Well, I can't respond to the other posts since "Name Removed" seems to be

your most common responder but I will say that if Matt Damon ran, he'd get my vote.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

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

[Lucky 13]

81. Ain't nothing fake about it...

[grahamhgreen]

Officially it's Randal Terry. Next up: Senator Mike Gravel, and ALAN GRAYSON!!!!

[2banon]

124. No. We need to Hold our Government ACCOUNTBLE

The primary obama campaign isn't going to change a damn thing. We need to hold the entire apparatus accountable, BEFORE and DESPITE campaigns and elections. We'll just get another korporate tool-lacky in office playing this same game, over and over and over again.

It's past time to change the entire paradigm.

[defendandprotect]

173. Believe me, criticism of Obama isn't "fake outrage" -- Who? Sen. Bernie Sanders ....

Would be an excellent choice -- he can run on a Dem ticket.

We need two strong anti-war candidates for Pres/VP --

And what we don't need is Koch Bros/DLC Dems self-selecting again for office!!

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

24. It looks like Obama is proppong up Jeb for 2016.

[ProSense]

28. You really believe Jeb can win in 2016? Really?

What does that say about any Democratic candidate?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

29. Ask Jeb's new buddy....

[ProSense]

30. Maybe

Chelsea will run?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

32. And how old will Chelsea be? And your link proves my point. Keep trying. Anyone who has open eyes

knows. Most voters are low information voters. 70% of the people bought Bush's Iraq lies. Bet you were one of them.

[defendandprotect]

84. Interesting .... agree -- this is a "humanizing" of Jeb ... if you don't pay a lot of attention

to what's really going on!

Maybe even makes Jeb less scary for people who know a bit about Bush family?

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

126. Also...the re-legitimization of the "Bush Brand"......

[Lorien]

43. Amen. nt

[Enthusiast]

62. No question about it.

Anyone that believes Obama is a "REAL" Democrat is sadly mistaken.

[slay]

20. He sold out to Wall Street

i don't claim to admire Clinton. :evilgrin:

Matt Damon's opinions don't matter to me either but I do agree with him on this.

[ProSense]

23. Damon doesn't even know the unemployment rate:

"Unemployment at 10 per cent? It's terrible."

[jp11]

70. In the interview with Piers Morgan it was Morgan who made the claim of 10%

Damon didn't correct him. Maybe he doesn't know the UE rate or simply didn't care to correct the host of the show he was on for a 'minor' error. Unless there is another source for him claiming that is the UE rate he could have either not known or simply ignored it to agree the point of rich people getting tax breaks was a bad idea which is what they were talking about before this quote.

"MORGAN: Again, does that come back to your sort of slightly disillusioned view of Obama, that when you voted for audacity of hope it wouldn't have been giving the rich tax breaks and watching 10 percent of your population remain unemployed?

DAMON: Right. And in his State of the Union he doesn't even say the worst "poverty." You know? I mean it's like you got millions of people languishing in it, and with no hope of finding a job or a good job, and it's just -- it's really -- look, I understand it's a tough job.

I appreciate that he is a deep thinker. I do appreciate that about him. He's a brilliant guy. But I definitely wanted more. And I believe that there was more there. I think -- I think most people want to do their share. You know, I think you're allowed to ask your citizenry to engage. And I think he had that moment to do it and he didn't do it."

http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1103/03/pmt.01.html

[Sirveri]

73. U5 unemployment is at 10.5%.

So depending on how you want to actually measure UE, he's correct. I personally consider U5 to be the superior measure. Also what the first response said. I don't know the perfect response off the top of my head either, I had to go look it up too.

[defendandprotect]

176. Only if you don't count long term unemployed -- otherwise

last I heard it was 22 million !!

Also sounds better when you don't count our HOMELESS and/or our 50 million +

without health care ... STILL!!

[Sirveri]

189. U5 IS long term unemployed. U3 is official. U5 is displaced and discouraged. U6 is underemployed.

[defendandprotect]

190. 10.5% is NOT long term unemployed -- that would be well over 15% or more ... !!

I don't know the numbers on HOMELESS -- don't think they like to spread that

around very much -- but LA HOMELESS we heard last week because of Osacars --

something like 83,000+ -- !!

[pinqy]

211. U3 includes long term as well...

there's no max length of being unemployed to count, the criteria are not working and currently looking for work. U4 are those who've looked in the last year but not looking in the last month because they don't think they'll find a job (discouraged), and U5 are those who've looked in the last year but not looking in the last month for any reason (including discouraged).

U6 adds in "Part time for Economic reasons," meaning cut hours or can't find full time work.

"Underemployment" is pretty much impossible to define and/or measure, so nobody really tries.

[BobbyBoring]

132. It's more like 16-18 %

in he real world. Of course truth is severely lacking these days.

[defendandprotect]

192. Last I heard it was 17% -- 22 million -- they've since knocked a lot of unemployed off the rolls,

for one problem!!

Bernie Sanders usually quotes the figures when I catch him on Thom Hartman -- !!

[ProSense]

33. Here's some information that may be of interest.

S.E.C. Proposes Crackdown on Wall Street Bonuses

Ex-Goldman director charged with insider trading

Former Mortgage Officer Admits to Fraud

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

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

[tomp]

66. i'll grant you that. nt

[jp11]

68. Suspect for admiring humanitarian work?

"That said, he does admire Bill Clinton. Damon based his portrayal of LaBoeuf, the loquacious ranger in True Grit, on the former president. "There's a little bit of Clinton's charm thrown in. I could listen to him talk forever.""

He's talking about a character and there aren't quotes on his opinion of Clinton as a politician or the policies he's gotten done it is an opinion based on the quote afterwards from Damon. One could admire Clinton for all the humanitarian work he's done since getting out of office or simply his charm, since Damon works with the Clinton Global Initiative there is 'strong' evidence of the former.

[BobbyBoring]

131. I agree 200%

That doesn't give either of them a pass though. At least Clinton admitted that CMFA and the GLB act were huge mistakes. That's all I give Clinton credit for. That and 8 years of relative peace and prosperity~

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

19. Boy, it's getting crowded under this chassis.

[Enthusiast]

63. They don't need to jack it up

to change the tire.

[treestar]

91. LOL, no I did not even know he HAD an opinion until now

for some unknown reason, he's getting coverage NOW.

But even so, are you saying one must be consistent in agreeing with his opinions? We cannot agree with him in 2008 but disagree now? :rofl: Like Keith Olberman and the like?

IOW, it is wrong to support Obama no matter what, but we'd better be loyal and slavish followers of the opinions of entertainers!

[neverforget]

117. just the opposite. it's the most loyal supporters attacking Damon

for voicing a critical opinion of Obama. But you knew that

[QC]

150. Bingo.

Sadly, it's standard operating procedure among a certain set.

[defendandprotect]

9. kr

[Ramulux]

10. Sounds like Damon has been reading DU

Its nice hearing a celebrity who actually seems to have a decent head on their shoulders speaking out against Obama's corporatism.

[Enthusiast]

64. PLUS ONE nt

[defendandprotect]

182. + 1 --

[emilyg]

14. k/r

[MissDeeds]

21. K&R

And yes, we need a challenger.

[Cali_Democrat]

36. I love Matt Damon!

Even though he's a Celtics fan

He tells it like it is.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

37. But but but he's only an entertainer, albeit a Brilliant and an Informed one...btw

I love him too! :)

[Raine]

39. Damon is totally on point! nt

:thumbsup:

[Modern_Matthew]

40. K&R! Can someone explain the motives behind the apologists? nt

[Kalun D]

42. someone

has to defend the corporate pigs

[ZombieHorde]

94. In American society, we generally think of people and things as good or bad.

Most of us don't consider most things to be both good and bad. Intellectually, we know there are gray areas, but we don't act like we truly believe it. If President Obama does something we generally perceive as good, people who have a bad opinion of him are likely to ignore it or say it is not good enough to be considered good. Likewise, if President Obama does something we generally perceive as bad, people who have a good opinion of him are likely to ignore it or say it is not bad enough to be considered bad.

Then there are additional complications, such as the perceived need for compromise, perceived budget restraints, perceived personal political priorities, perceived world view, etc.

This is my current perception.

[BlueIris]

144. For some, it's a job. A professional obligation, like any other.

So there's no room for empathy there, or reason. Backing his shit is how they make their living. I've stopped engaging with this kind altogether.

As for the others, I think many are locked into a desperate, delusional kind of loyalty to him and the idea of the society they wanted as a result of voting for him. To them, admitting failure would be the equivalent to giving up on that dream. I have met a few people who think that Obama's agendas actually make good political and economic sense. But their reasons make about as much sense as, well, Barack Obama's.

[OnyxCollie]

200. Just a guess...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x582516#582649

Information gathering in early childhood requires the formation of relationships (Weber
& Federico, 2007). Attachment theory states that relationships are sought in order to reduce
anxiety and provide a sense of security (Sroufe & Waters, 1977, as cited in Weber & Federico,
2007). Successful proximity-seeking efforts create a secure attachment style, inspiring selfconfidence,
curiosity and an openness to new experiences (Ainsworth, Blehar, Waters, & Wall,
1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Failed proximity-seeking efforts result in anxiety
stemming from the lack of security, compounded by distress over the failure to establish a
relationship (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2003, as cited in Weber and Federico, 2007). Recurring
failure or inconsistency (Ainsworth et al., 1978, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) in
proximity-seeking efforts creates two insecure attachment styles; anxious and avoidant
(Weber & Federico, 2007).

Anxious attachment style is associated with fixations on proximity-seeking and emotional
support (Weber & Federico, 2007). Avoidant attachment style abandons proximity-seeking and
instead relies on self-dependence to control anxiety (Weber & Federico, 2007). Brennan, Clark,
& Shaver (1998, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have determined that anxious and avoidant
attachment styles in adults manifest themselves as either elevated states of arousal with a fixation
on close relationships, or as an emotional disconnect with an aversion to close relationships,
respectively.

Duckitt (2001, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) proposes that childrearing practices
lead to the development of personality traits which endorse world views that form ideology.
Children who have attained a secure attachment style are open to new information more than
those with either of the two insecure attachment styles (Cassidy, 1986, as cited in Weber &
Federico, 2007), as well as being less dogmatic and less reliant on ethnic stereotypes
(Mikulincer, 1997, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007). Additionally, Mikulincer & Florian
(2000, as cited in Weber & Federico, 2007) have shown that secure attachment styles “mitigate
the effect of mortality salience on the denigration of moral transgressors” (p. 394).

It has been demonstrated that children who have attained insecure attachment styles later
as adults develop Right Wing Authoritarian (RWA) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a
dangerous place (Altemeyer, 1998; Duckitt & Fisher, 2003, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007),
or Social Dominance Order (SDO) ideologies, in which the world is viewed as a competitive
jungle (Duckitt, 2001, as cited by Weber & Federico, 2007). RWA’s are defined by a deference to
authority figures, an endorsement of severe punishment by authority figures, and a high degree
of conventionalism (Altemeyer, 2006). SDO’s differ from RWA’s in that rather than embracing
authoritarianism as a means of protection against an out-group which threatens society, SDO’s
feel that society has already fallen and that only the strong shall survive, prompting group
domination, punishment, and humiliation against out-groups (Altemeyer, 1998). Altemeyer
(1998, as cited in Jost et al., 2003) and Pratto, Sidanious, Stallworth & Malle (1994, as cited in
Jost et al., 2003) have shown that SDO’s correlate with Republican party identification.

Maybe this, too.

This phenomenon will become more understandable if we reflect
on the psychology of the communication process. A communication
cannot be viewed as an isolated stimulus automatically evoking a certain
response. The surrounding circumstances make an enormous difference
insofar as the response is concerned. If we want to predict the
response, we have to consider not only the content of the stimulus (what
the communication asserts), but also the predispositions of the recipient
and the perceived role and nature of the source. One of the most important
questions, in connection with this last-named variable, is
whether the source of a communication to me is perceived as a person
whom I know and trust, or as somebody having no person-to-person
tie with me. In the former case, I shall very probably accept the communication
as truth; in the latter, belief will depend on my image of
the basic motivation of the source. If the source's perceived role is that
of a mere purveyor of information who has otherwise no axe to grind,
I am likely to accept the content of his communication matter-of
factly, without an urge to look beyond. If I see the source as a human
being expressing spontaneous opinion, I shall take that opinions imply
as something with which I agree or do not agree, and if I wish I can
freely acknowledge the source as an authority whose views, as views,
carry weight for me. But if the role of the source includes elements
extraneous to the supplying of facts or views-e.g. if I see him as interested
in maintaining a power position in which I do not share then
a barrier will be set up between him and me, and I cannot spontaneously
internalize his message.

Kesckemeti, P. (1950). Totalitarian communications as a means of control: A note on the sociology of propaganda. The Public Opinion Quarterly 14(2), 224-234.

If you don't vote for Obama, SARAH PALIN WILL BE PRESIDENT!!!1! It'll be ALL YOUR FAULT because you wanted a pony. How's that protest vote gonna work for ya then, Mr. Professional Leftist?

[PufPuf23]

41. I agree with Damon and have more education and professional experience in economics

than either Obama or Damon.

I go with Damon.

Here is a new movie. I have read PKD since 1967 and have a massive collection.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adjustment_Team

I think highly of Matt Damon as an artist that has been a positive political voice for liberals and the Democratic Party at the risk of his career.

[xchrom]

44. Recommend

[BzaDem]

45. "Sorry, but Obama can not win with his present policy positions in 2012."

:rofl:

Good luck with that.

[upi402]

49. good luck if we get 4 more years of corporatism

not fucking funny one god damn bit!

[Badfish]

61. lol.

even my dog is laughing.

Oh , some people.

[Vidar]

51. Not to mention how impressive and presidential Obama looks, fetching

every bone and table scrap the investment bankers toss his way.

[madrchsod]

52. matt is stating the obvious...

obama is a neoliberal republican.

[katnapped]

53. But but BUT!

"666% of the liberals love him and agree with everything he says and does meaning he'll win with a LANDSLIDE in 2012!"

"Matt Damon (heart) Sarah Palin!"

"Why does Matt Damon hate America?"

:sarcasm:

[notesdev]

55. You vote for a CFR candidates, you get CFR policy

Congratulations! You got yerself there a genuine globalist there who is perfectly happy to see your standard of living equalized with Cambodia's.

[yellowwood]

56. Too Bad

I don't look to movie stars to form my opinion.

Here's the real situation: There's no one in the Democratic Party who could win against Obama. He has inherited so many issues. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. We don't even know some of the problems he is having to deal with, and Damon surely doesn't. I still like and respect him if he hasn't accomplished what I'd have liked, like getting us out of so many military situations.

I like his civility, even when he's in the presence of people like Jeb Bush.

So support him. If God forbid, Republicans should come back into the Presidency, who would be our President? Jeb Bush? Newt Gingrich?

So choose your side. There are only two choices, Republican or Democrat.ic The choice is clear. Like it or not.

[JDPriestly]

206. I would like to see a real progressive run against Obama.

I think that would at least give progressive ideas a national forum, an opportunity to be heard.

In 2008, I backed Edwards but once Obama was the candidate, I backed him 100%. I had great hopes for him. I really liked him. I worked for him so hard that I even traveled out of state and walked a number of precincts to help get him elected. I still really like him as a person. But he is not doing the right things. He is not standing up for the American people.

Our nation does not have the time to waste. We need a really strong president who is on the side of the people, not that of the corporations, the banks, the out-sourcers, the importers, foreign governments.

If Obama is on the side of the American people, if he is willing to have his Justice Department prosecute the bankers who defrauded investors, the mortgage companies that helped ignorant buyers get mortgages they shouldn't have had, if he is willing to put American jobs before trade agreements, if he is willing to really end the wars, if he is willing to clean up the environment (on this I think his record is pretty commendable), if he is willing to see that those who approved torture face criminal charges either here or in some other country. then I will believe that he is on the side of the American people and not on that of the wealthy who own most of the interest in the corporations.

There are more things that Obama needs to do. These are simply things that any decent person in his position would do. There is nothing really all that progressive about them. They are just things that are right to do, in some cases, just things that I think the law probably requires him to do.

A challenge candidate could, at the least, maybe move Obama toward doing the right thing about some of these issues.

If the only challenge to Obama is from the right, then Obama will move in that direction. If he has to answer a challenge from a progressive, someone with little to lose and a sense of what is right to do, then he will move toward the progressive side. That is why I would support a primary challenge from a sincere, honest progressive. I really would not ask more than that.

Obama needs to explain to the American people why he interfered with the investigation of torture by the Spanish court. He needs to explain why no bankers have been indicted. He needs to tell us how he can possibly argue that the US needs to maintain the free trade agreements when all the evidence shows that the more imports we allow into our country, the more jobs we outsource, the worse our unemployment gets, the worse our deficit gets, the lower the wages in the US. I think that the only way to get these explanations from him is to have him face a challenge from a progressive candidate

[Badfish]

57. If he rolled over for Wallstreet...

then why did Wall Street and the GOP fight Obama every step of the way ?

Fucking idiotic actor should keep him mouth shut till he gets informed.

[BobbyBoring]

139. I don't consider

Wall st donating 7.9 million to Obama is 08 as fighting him all the way. Might just be me and my crazy ways though~

[rury]

207. K&R Badfish, 1 Million times

[JDPriestly]

208. Wall Street did not fight Obama every step of the way.

Wall Street pretty much got the best deal it could possibly have gotten.

Obama did his usual compromise, and pleased absolutely no one in the end.

We shall see whether the compromise works.

In any event, some of the bankers and mortgage company managers and maybe even mortgage sales personnel who committed fraud should be prosecuted.


They ruined people's lives.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

216. Wow... so did you want that -

"Fucking idiotic actor..." to keep his mouth shut when he was out there promotinmg Obama for President in '08? Was he "informed" then?

[Safetykitten]

58. Gee Matt, ya think?

[tomp]

65. obama is an out and out failure for us and a total boon...

...for the rich.

as far as a challenger-who is going to do it? really, who? what person to the left of obama has enough financial support to mount any sort of effective campaign.

i'd love to see it but i'm not holding my breath. i think a stepped up mass movement is more likely and actually more necessary than a challenger.

[Shagbark Hickory]

69. I hope some day Jimmy Kimmell will save some time for him n/t

[The Backlash Cometh]

74. I'm liking that Matt Damon more and more.

Just saw his movie last night. Adjustment Bureau. Ass-kicking good. First time I noticed that the audience was predominately a 30-60 crowd.

[ProSense]

77. Here:

Holding Wall Street accountable and trying to rein in greed

[VoteProgressive]

78. Obama is not perfect. But the best shot at winning the next election.

[pam4water]

85. I wish there was some who was going to channel him :(

[treestar]

87. Still don't care what his opinion is

:rofl:

[Rex]

90. Of course you don't, it goes against Obama.

Duh.

[treestar]

96. so you only care because it DOES go against Obama?

You remind me of this jerk in third grade who remarked that I was always in the rest room at a certain time, overlooking that fact that she always was too, otherwise she could not comment on it.

Does he care about my opinion? Why should I care about his?

[Rex]

101. Then why should I care about your opinion?

Your line of reasoning is beyond jenuis.

[Rex]

88. And that is why we will see a primary challenger.

Everyone but a small group knows Obama is a failure overall and will be challenged.

[Ikonoklast]

129. You have it exactly backwards.

The vast majority of Democrats (notice I didn't say Greens, Naderites, Socialists, or various other third-party pipsqueaks) are very satisfied with this President.

Actual Democrats will vote for Mr. Obama again in 2012.

If there is a primary challenge, please name me the one person that could garner, say, 5% of a primary vote against Obama.

Kucinich? Nope. And he ain't runnin'.

Bernie Sanders? He ain't runnin', either.


Nader? Please.

[Rex]

130. Hey, I just hope the moderates don't blow it like last year.

They practically GAVE the House to the Repukes with their childish comments.

Oh we will have a primary challenger, just wait and see.

[Ikonoklast]

134. Bookmarked. n/t

[grahamhgreen]

136. Feingold/Grayson

[Ikonoklast]

142. For what? Unemployment line?

Or does the answer need to be in the form of a question, "Name two out-of-office Democrats who have no chance of being elected President?"

[grahamhgreen]

146. Down but not out - they have the vision that Americans already believe in.

Dont consider a swamp of citizens united money to be a rejection of policy.

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

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

[JDPriestly]

97. Matt Damon is a smart guy -- maybe he would make a good candidate.

He would certainly get the young and hip vote plus a lot of older people would vote for him because he makes sense.

[Jefferson23]

98. Among other truth's, " Obama's record on education repels me" That's a kind of way putting it imo.

[live love laugh]

100. "We need a challenger." Uhhhhm Okay. Who?

Who is going to do what Obama is NOT doing?

I'll tell you who.

Nobody.

Because the government is under siege by monied interests and no matter who sits in the Oval Office things will remain the same

Anybody who goes against the grain will be annihilated.

Period.

[Rex]

105. I really think that is the truth.

No matter who it is, the suit will still fit the same and the policies will always be geared toward helping those that don't need it and hurting those in need the most.

[ecstatic]

103. But Wall Street calls him anti-business

and since when do we turn to Matt Damon for political insight? :eyes:

[Bluenorthwest]

106. Wall Street recites their part well.

Good cop/bad cop. You take their word as sincere? Why? Why do you believe they mean what they say in any way?

[ReggieVeggie]

107. who's turning to Damon?

He has an opinion just like every poster on this website.

And who cares what Wall Street calls him? He's still kissing their ass every day.

[liberation]

155. Wait, so you're implying that you're turning to Wall Street for political insight then?

Quite interesting.

[ecstatic]

172. (Sigh). Of course not. I think Obama has struck just the right tone

with the business community--not pro or anti. Remember, this country does need it's businesses to stay here to employ Americans.

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

161. Kabuki theater. See Inside Job...ironically narrated by Damon.

[swilton]

174. Wall Street Disinformation

They never had it so good. Because Obama is a Democrat, he is being given more slack by his own party than they would give Republican counter-parts.

[fascisthunter]

110. anyone denying this is in denial

[liberation]

156. or on a payroll.

[MasonJar]

111. I totally agree.

[OhioChick]

114. Agree 100% n/t

[Brigid]

118. Amen and amen. Preach it, Brother Matt!

Can I get an "amen" from the congregation on this?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

122. Rolled over, played dead, and then scratched their back.

[democrank]

123. K & R

I`ve said it before....President Obama is not a leader, he`s a get-alonger.

[abelenkpe]

125. Agree.

Especially about education.

[colsohlibgal]

127. What Makes Barack Tick?

I'm not sure if he agrees in principle with progressives but has a fear of confrontation or if he at heart is just another wolf in sheep's clothing, another "DINO" with the gift of gab or what.

I do know that I feel betrayed. Should there be a challenger from the left in 2012? Maybe.....maybe not. Obama is going to be hard for anyone to beat because he's staked out the middle ground as it is in the 21st century and because enough liberals will support him because the alternative will be much worse. Another round of voting for not all that good to deny really bad, to in actuality vote against someone rather than for someone.

The biggest hope at this point of time is in the budding public involvement spreading out from the Koch brothers endgame gambit. A rising tide lifts all boats, or so the saying goes.

[liberation]

158. I don't buy the "fear of confrontation" argument anymore.

The reason is that if Obama was indeed afraid of confrontation he would have also rolled over and support the demands of the left. He and his administration have been rather aggressive and adamant when it comes to stand their ground against the left's requests. Also Obama has been rather forceful when it comes to things like extending funding for the wars, etc.

Obama has found far more common ground with the GOP than with the left, simply because he is a center-right politician, not because he is afraid of confrontation. When it has came to draw lines on the sand with respect to the left, he has had no problem whatsoever. It is about time people on the center-left side of things start getting that basic memo.

[iwishiwas]

171. The happenings in WI with Walker and his poodles (Repug assembly

and Senate) has awaken lots of people-and not just in WI.

[BlueIris]

140. I can't agree we need a challenger.

I think the president needs to eliminate the need for a challenger by stepping up and admitting he doesn't want this job anymore, and won't be running again in order to make room for a Democrat who does want it. (Obama can skip the part about not being able to win should he make another run, most of us paying attention can already see that.)

[BillyJack]

145. K and R! n/t

[thelordofhell]

149. Matt Damon!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PajyQrpu26I&nofeather=True

[crim son]

151. If he loses in 2012

we will have another, good chance in 2016. The other scenario, four more years of Obama and then the inevitable rethug win in 2016 would be really, really bad news for the country. It's very hard to know what to wish for but I do wish like hell Obama was the president he promised to be. Goddamn.

[swilton]

164. Truer Words Were Never Spoken

“Sorry, but Obama can not win with his present policy positions in 2012. We need a challenger.

Someone who knows that returning to the 1950's tax rates on the rich will solve the deficit, like the other 81% of Americans do.”


And no matter how much we demonize the GOP - it serves as a big distraction from the big problem within the Democratic Party. If we had strong Democratic leaders, the neo-con policies wouldn't have been allowed to see the light of day.


http://journals.democraticunderground.com/swilton

[Corruption Winz]

169. I can pretty much agree with everything Matt Damon said...

However, I don't see anyone on the Democratic side standing a chance. With that, the only realistic challenge would come from a Republican. If that is the case... I'm not even coming close to going against Obama.

Stick with the enemies you know.

[grahamhgreen]

195. Any candidate who can play to waht Americans are asking for in the polls can win this means

Out of Iraqistan

Tax the rich to end the deficit and bolster SS.

Medicare for all, or similar.

No "free" trade - bring the jobs back home.

Go after the banksters.

Anyone who does this can win.

This is what the majority wants.

[RetroLounge]

170. Matt Damon meet underside of bus

Well, at least the usual 6 Circle-D's will be tossing you there.

:rofl:

RL

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

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

[tavalon]

185. Just in case one of the junior staffers happens to read this,

You've already lost your ground troops, now it looks like your Hollywood donors and big name helpers may just be jumping off too. Do you have enough time to fix all of this?

[L0oniX]

188. Deleted message

If I said what I really think about Obama it would get deleted anyway so I just beat them to it.

[Mosaic]

191. I don't care anymore

We'll be a medieval country of peasants and damn royalty. I don't care anymore. Let's become third world, a banana republic. I'm getting the holy heck out of this shit hole and expatriate to a decent country. I don't care what Obama does anymore, let him do what he wants.

[Initech]

193. It's becoming clearer and clearer to me that Obama's not the one in charge.

We had a super majority and got nothing done. Someone else is pulling the strings.

[rury]

194. President Obama got the most progressive financial regulations

overhaul passed through a recalcitrant Congress and is now accused of "rolling over" for Wall Street??
The anti-Obama sentiment here on DU is why I will I choose not to donate again, my free iPad I won last summer notwithstanding.
That last statement might get me banned, but so what?
The president is not a magician or a dictator and has STILL done an admirable job considering the shitstorm he inherited and all the forces arrayed against him.
I really do think many bloggers are just professional complainers and dilletantes who like to scream, march and protest, but don't have the patience for governing or understand what it takes to bring progressive change about in a basically center-right country.
I thought people on this board were politically sophisticated, but boy was I wrong.
Apparently there is as much ignorance and narrow-mindedness on the left as there is on the right...sad.
Here's a book you might want to pick up and read when you're not criticizing from the comfort of your keyboard.
It shows what our president is fighting.

http://www.amazon.com/Kabuki-Democracy-System-Barack-Obama/dp/1568586590/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1299467065&sr=1-1

[grahamhgreen]

204. We needed to repeal all of the financial de-regulation of the last 30 years, go back to

Glass-Stegal, and repeal the financial services modernization act, and jail the fraudsters who created the 1 quadrillion dollars of derivatives.

Instead, we gave them hundreds of billions.

[amborin]

210. the new "regulations" are a joke; otherwise, candidate Obama fought for the $14 trillion bailout

it was in fall of 2008 that candidate Obama worked the phones and promised to get the bailout through.....

[Shining Jack]

219. "We need a challenger. "

I agree, but that challenger must be the real deal, a
liberal, not someone pretending to be one then back-stabs all the people who put him/her in the WH.