The left needs to god damn well learn once and for all how to establish and control a MESSAGE.

[RBInMaine]

We elected Obama, and then too many went to sleep. "Well," too many said, "the job's done." No. It just began. Then what happens? The TeaScum with help from their corporate sludge backers hold hundreds of rallies, disrupt town halls all over, and scream that the healthcare law destroys freedom and that Obama and Dems are against the constitution, bla bla bla, and they literally cheered for billions in insurance company profits at a rally in Missouri. What SHOULD have been a massive populist uprising against "greed is good" mentality and how the rich steal from us to gamble on Wall Street turned into a right wing uprising as too many Dems/Progressives went to sleep.

And then the country instead received the message that all our problems are because of the "lazy welfare queens," "the lazy minorities," "the stupid people who took out high interest loans," "the evil illegal immigrants who've come to steal our jobs," and "those horrible cops, firemen, teachers, and social workers with their fatcat unions, giant paychecks, and grab-bags of bennies." Then they clobbered us in the elections as too many D's and Progressives were still asleep. ** I'm not saying everyone, but too many. Too many were lamenting that "D's and Obama aren't progressive enough..." even though (even according to Maddow who outlined it all) we had the greatest amount of progressive accomplishment in decades.

So now they're in power in too many places and have more power in DC, and we are finally waking up because they are ramming the stick up our asses and breaking it off, just as OBAMA warned us they would by saying over and over and over again that they would stop the progress and go backwards again. Well, guess what, they are doing just that with their right wing radical agenda that has nothing to do with creating "jobs jobs jobs."

So now we are waking up, and it is time to TAKE BACK THE MESSAGE: that the TeaPublicans are right wing radicals beholden to their corporate masters, that they and their rich masters are out to destroy the American middle class, and that the recession was caused by THEM and their rich masters who turned Wall Street into a gambling casino. They want the poor, and the middle class, and cops, and teachers, and firefighters to bear the brunt and make all the sacrifice, and yet they want to keep giving billionaires tax breaks that don't create any "jobs jobs jobs". Killing PBS has NOTHING to do with "creating jobs." Nor does killing family planning funding, nor does killing environmental laws, nor does killing collective bargaining, nor does killing clean elections laws, and on and on.

The message is simple. The message is clear. Progressives just need to form and control it from the bottom up, make the D's in government take it to the halls of government, and also start damn well uniting progressive organizations and investing in alternative media to counter right wing corporate media. The right wing has 80% of the talk radio time on the airwaves. This is scandalous. Will we ever learn?

[monmouth]

1. It's a difficult task when the meda belongs to the other side....n/t

[RBInMaine]

4. Organizations and wealthy progressives could unite to fund it. It COULD be done.

[northoftheborder]

2. Message clear. Where is the megaphone? Are the streets our only outlet?

[KurtNYC]

70. The average age of a Fox News viewer is 68; the net is much younger

but this is, I think, a herd of cats problem.

I don't think this is because we don't have a 'Fox News' on our side. I think it is because by nature it is easier to be against something than to be for something. Bush unified the country against him and big government but that all splintered when Obama went in.

[Riley18]

3. Well said and so very true. Thank you.

[Angry Dragon]

5. the elected officials can not hear with their fingers in their ears

Obama demanded that we tell him what we wanted and he listened not
He went the other way ......

[RBInMaine]

9. Where does this nonsense come from? You Tube Maddow and refresh your memory on the accomplishments.

[Angry Dragon]

14. I stated my opinion

you disagree with it ...... that is fine
Use your own words and show me I am wrong

[Radical Activist]

25. It comes from people who need to believe Obama will always fail.

Because they need to believe that only the Green Party/Socialism/Revolution will solve our problems. Admitting that Obama did something good would undermine their core belief system so they have to distort and belittle everything he does. It leads them to argue from a position of intellectual dishonesty and makes them a roadblock to the progress they supposedly believe in.

For example: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=570631&mesg_id=570631

Much like a cult, they need to believe that they are the only ones who have the ONE TRUE PATH to progress. Therefore, any sign of progress through a method other than their own must be shat upon.

[stillwaiting]

90. The top 1% are continuing to WIDEN the inequality gap during the Obama Admin.

When that happens in today's America, the average American loses ground. There's no way around that.

Wages for newly created jobs are ridiculously low (there's plenty of data to substantiate this claim) and prices for things we actually spend money on (food, energy, education, health care, etc.) are increasing so much that the AVERAGE American (i.e., most of us) has lost ground the past few years.

Corporate profits, corporate cash on hand, executive pay/benefits, and Wall Street stock prices are through the frickin' roof. They are NOT sharing the wealth.

The above trends would NOT be continuing if we were not continuing down the same economic path our country has been on since Reagan. Our working/middle classes can not take too much more.

P.S. It's funny you talk about us being in a cult. If we are (and we're not) it's certainly not a cult of personality. ;-)

[Radical Activist]

91. huh

Nice list of statistics, although the need to address climate change trumps all of that right now. Obama has enacted policies that will slow the march of inequality and begin to reverse it. That includes more shareholder power to limit CEO pay and good paying green jobs created by the stimulus bill. Isn't that great?

[Poboy]

6. "just as OBAMA warned us they would"

?

That guy is a major part of the problem. 'Our' message has to fight him too.

[RBInMaine]

8. No, and you have the most progressive person who could ever win nationally. Get real.

[Poboy]

10. Get real? Why don't you get real and admit he isn't progressive at all.

I'll leave you to your ridiculous thread though. There's no arguing with an obama worshiper.
He 'warned' us of nothing. He is a worthless empty suit.

[sendero]

89. Obama...

.. is not what he advertised himself to be, he is neither a progressive nor is he a fighter. I've never seen a politician so ready willing and able to capitulate to the other side at the drop of a hat.

It's almost like he agrees with Republican viewpoint more than he does Democratic ones.

[Raksha]

22. That's a huge part of the disempowerment message too.

"It's not possible." Believing something isn't possible pretty much guarantees that it won't happen, doesn't it?

But maybe it *IS* possible?

SI, SE PUEDE!!! YES WE CAN!!!

[Radical Activist]

23. Pissing all over every positive accomplishment is disempowering as well.

"It's not possible for anything Obama does to be good. It's not possible to elect a good Democrat so give up. Let me tell you why the bill that just passed was a waste of time so you won't bother trying next time."

[Raksha]

32. Sure, IF it were actually true.

Re "Pissing all over every positive accomplishment is disempowering as well."

But unfortunately for you and your spin I know the difference between a positive accomplishment and a negative one, and I haven't seen too many positive accomplishments from Obama. Nine times out of 10 he comes down on the side of the corporatocracy and against the working class and the poor.

[Radical Activist]

38. I don't think you're living on planet earth.

I look at what Obama has actually done and not at the Green party spin about what he does. And he has done many things that the real world lobbyists for corporatocracy fought tooth and nail against and are very angry at him over passing.

Consumer financial protection agency. And who's in charge of that agency now?
More support for clean energy than Clinton and Carter combined.
More regulation on the lending and banking sector. The same industries Clinton deregulated.
More regulation of the health care industry.
More regulation of credit cards.
Clamping down on the coal industry and other polluters.

And yes, I'll know you'll come up with a "shit all over everything" list of blogger talking points about what's wrong with every bill. And that will only prove my point that in the face of progress in the direction ALL progressives believe in, some are content to throw shit at the wall. They don't know what progress looks like. Progress isn't standing for the perfect ideal of what you want and getting nothing. Progress is progress toward a goal and that's what Obama is delivering: movement in the direction of our common goals with a path toward even more progress.

Obama has passed more regulation over every sector of the economy, and the limitation of those efforts is attributable to the conservative Senate in almost every case. That's not what service to corporatacracy looks like unless your real problem is that he isn't socialist.

[Mojeoux]

87. I agree, progress is progress!

Even in a shit storm!

[ReggieVeggie]

27. soft bigotry of low expectations

[Drix]

7. Too busy apologizing to Fox News etc.

When Dean apologized for the "Dean scream" I thought I would scream. I saw them making a big deal out of a candidate making noise at a rally I kept saying to myself,"Don't you dare apologize. And one by one Hannity hammered faux liberals into criticizing Dean until Dean capitulated. If it wasn't for that non-incident Dean would have won the primary and the election.

[WingDinger]

11. Wrote a song about it, and it goes like this

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/WingDinger/40

[mdmc]

12. here is why we can't control the message

i will use health care as an example-

we think that universal health care / single payer is the way to go..
our leader - O - feels the same way - campaigns on it..
O wins
O reforms health care
O has a super majority
yet
the GOP is firm in defense of the rich, the corporations
and so is the dem party
WE HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY yet
O can't deliver single payer
O can deliver reform
arrested development adults can stay on their parents insurance
the donut hole is fixed..
and this is our signature achievement.

[Radical Activist]

18. Problem 1. Obama didn't campaign on single payer.

Why exaggerate to make your argument? The left blagosphere has a bad habit about that.

Problem 2: You expected Obama to deliver it for you. That's a pathetically subservient, passive mindset.
We lost the public option because the SENATE blocked it, not because Obama didn't want it. In other words, WE the left lost the public option because we nagged Obama instead of focusing on forcing the Senate to do what we want. The idea that WE THE PEOPLE have the power is more than a campaign slogan. We failed because you expected Obama to do something that was YOUR job.

[leftstreet]

26. He called it "universal healthcare" Wink. Nudge

I think he also said something about the evils of mandates

[Radical Activist]

29. You were under the impression that universal healthcare=single-payer?

That's a delusion of your own creation. Obama never suggested he was introducing a single-payer plan. You're not just moving the goal posts. You're retroactively creating imaginary ones.

[leftstreet]

37. Millions of voters were. Why didn't he say "cheaper insurance premiums?"

:shrug:

The funny thing is, he would have still gotten a degree of support just on that

And no, I didn't personally believe the tossed word salad. The Democrats have been disingenuous about single payer since FDR

[woo me with science]

82. "Cheaper insurance premiums"? We didn't get those, either.

Even using the name, "Affordable Health Care Act," is a blatant lie. There were never any serious cost controlling measures in this corporate monstrosity, and we knew it from the start.

[DaisyDeedles]

30. Progressives got called something really nasty by Rahm when we tried to pressure Senators.

And we didn't "nag" Obama because he kept telling us he was for the public option even after it had been cut out of the package.

Why are you revising history?

[Radical Activist]

33. Oh poor babies.

Being called a name. The horror! Again, so the fuck what and get the fuck over it.
Besides, you're spreading a popular lie if you're claiming that he called all progressives a name. He criticized a specific tactic suggested by a specific organization. Why are you revising history?

Yes, Obama spent months pushing for the public option and the Senate blocked it. What's your point? He might have won the public option if he had the united efforts of left groups who were instead too busy making Obama look like the bad guy.

[DaisyDeedles]

35. Name calling seems to get posts deleted pretty quickly here

Calling people names, especially when you are ostensibly on the same side, is inappropriate behavior and divisive. Rahm used a disgusting term to denigrate a progressive group who wanted to run ads to pressure conservative Dems in Congress to support HCR. They were going to run ads! Oh the horror! IOW, they were trying to do exactly what you are accusing the left of NOT doing.

[leftstreet]

39. snap!

"they were trying to do exactly what you are accusing the left of NOT doing."

:rofl:

Welcome to DU!

[DaisyDeedles]

60. Thanks for the welcome!

[treestar]

49. Exactly, the left expects others to do it for them

unlike teabaggers.

And they faint off in weakness long before the teabaggers would.

And then complain that the teabaggers get what they want! Or at least, disproportionate to their numbers.

They just have so much more energy than the left.

[DaisyDeedles]

61. Huh?

What do you call what's going on in Wisconsin right now?

[AndyTiedye]

42. Putting it In Caps Doesn't Make It So

WE HAVE A SUPER MAJORITY

We did, briefly, on paper, if you count Lieberman as a Democrat.

There is no way any kind of public option was going to get LIEberman's vote, the insurance companies own him and most of the state.

There is no way any kind of oratory by Obama was going to sway any wavering Republicans, because there were no wavering Republicans.

[DaisyDeedles]

66. Then he never should have promised it.

All of this stuff he had to know while he was assuring us the public option would be in the final bill until well into the fall of 2009.

[sandyo--ERA]

13. Getting out a MESSAGE

Like the Rs have done since 1970s, the Ds need to focus on messages and get them out. For message control, read and APPLY Mr. Lakoff's Don't Think of an Elephant. Our marketing director tells us it takes 6 times of hearing a message for it to be assimilated by the audience. It is the ONLY way to get out of this hole; LOGIC HOLDS NO POWER IN THIS FIGHT for the survival of the United States middle-class! That' YOU and ME.
No more BRAGGING that you don't belong to an organized Party.
Get with the game that's being played now.

[DaisyDeedles]

78. Amen!

So many Dems still want to play college professor and "educate" the voters.

[bvar22]

15. Blaming The People for a failure in Leadership....

...will NOT solve the problem.


Who fights for THIS American majority?



"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[treestar]

50. That's the essence of expecting other to do it for us

That describes the problem in a nutshell.

Sitting back and expecting "leaders" to do it all. That's the laziness of the left.

[bvar22]

74. The Essemce of "Leadership" is to inspire the troops.

THAT is what "leadership" means.

"Come On!!! Follow ME!".

"However, there was no call, no empowerment, no mobilization. Despite his promises on the campaign trail, Obama never pushed to enact the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which would have challenged and better enabled labor to organize the millions who wanted organizing. For all of his professions, he never instituted major national service initiatives to afford programs, internships, and apprenticeships to young graduates to remake America and themselves. And for all of his preaching, he never rallied citizens to mobilize and fill the public squares and spaces—before the Tea Partiers did—to fight for a national health care system that would not just control prices and cover everyone, but also encourage further progressive campaigns to extend and deepen freedom, equality, and democracy."

"Once sworn in, Obama failed to energize his fellow citizens and engage them in the process of renewal. Instead of harnessing the hopes and aspirations he had encouraged to help him win the presidency, he left them hanging. And two years later Americans feel let down and detached. We are not conservatives—other than in the sense that we want to conserve and build upon the good and the great that is America. We remain progressives at heart—but now, it seems, hopelessly so."

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/atw.php?id=293

After his election, Obama had a standing army and a huge mandate for "CHANGE".
IF he had called, MILLIONS would have answered and stood by his side.
Instead, we got a bunch of
"Chill Out. I got this."

A mandate unused is a mandate wasted.
An army left standing in the field without leadership is an army wasted.
Blaming the troops never won a battle.
Changing the General to one that knows how to LEAD has.

"If we don't fight hard enough for the things we stand for,
at some point we have to recognize that we don't really stand for them."
--- Paul Wellstone

[Radical Activist]

75. You're an authoritarian looking for a leader.

But, that's never what Obama's campaign or governing philosophy was about. You don't get it.

Your quoted article is a lie. There was heavy mobilization with OFA. You remember the group that many progressives were too independent and self-righteous to participate in? Don't want to be one of the sheeple, right?

Meanwhile, OFA was doing the kind of organizing Wellstone spoke and wrote about. And you missed it.

[bvar22]

93. The irony is RICH in your post.

I normally don't respond to personal attacks and logical fallacies,
but I couldn't pass this one up.

YOU want to brand ME an "authoritarian" because I disagree with an OP calling for Unquestioned Fealty and Lock step Support for a President who is veering off somewhere to the Right of Reagan.

LOL.
It must be Opposite Day and no one told me.



Who represents THIS overwhelming American Majority?

[Radical Activist]

95. Always battling imaginary foes.

Even if this mythical army demanding everyone march in lock step existed it wouldn't matter. No one has the power to enforce it. There's no lock step. There's no unquestioned fealty. Get the fuck over it and try living in the real world.

Some of us are trying to work together to accomplish something. That's what the OP is about. Obama is working on the side of progressives for all the things in the pic you posted. Obama represents that American majority. Are you helping?

I too find it ironic that you defy the suggestion of "marching in lock step" in one post right after you demand that Obama lead an army. Which do you want? You want Obama to lead an army of troops but you won't be part of it because you never march in step? It sounds like you're big on slogans but have little concept of what it would look like to follow through.

[Bluenorthwest]

16. Been a pretty good set of years for me and mine.

All Democrats re-elected, DADT repealed, good motion forward on DOMA slight though it might be, my message seems to have been heard. Lots of noise was made, tons of activism, most of which was roundly scolded by much of the DNC, they chided us all, from GaGa to Choi, for every action that helped get us where we were going.
The 'message' of Tim Kaine and Barack Obama is up to them to convey. Not sure what they believe, other than the dogmatic opposition to marriage equality. They could and should speak up and out, and deliver this message. That is in fact their job. The message or lack of message they deliver will always be up to them.

[DaisyDeedles]

19. Thank you.

If we'd bided our time and been "patient" as we were counseled to be by the Dem establishment I doubt we'd have anywhere near the progress we've seen.

[riverwalker]

17. what if the Madison numbers were with Cindy Sheehan in Crawford?

We would have changed the course of the war.

[Radical Activist]

21. Not really.

Much more than the Madison numbers were at other protests all over the country. At some point we have to recognize the limitations of protest rallies. What's more significant in Madison is that the Senate Democrats are preventing action by leaving the state. Their tactic is accomplishing something. The protests in support of their action help, but the protests alone are not enough.

[Radical Activist]

20. A slice of the left only know how to lose in opposition to something.

They don't know what it looks like to be FOR something and make progress. Too many left pundits and bloggers don't know how to contribute to progress in a meaningful way.
It's a serious problem after a generation of progressives doing nothing but losing. Some people only know how to continue knee-jerk opposition at all times. Any victory feels wrong because losing is how they define their ideology.

You can get people to unite against the Republicans for now but it won't solve the problem of those who are only capable of throwing shit at the wall and being cynical.

[Fumesucker]

24. Eh, I was *for* single payer..

Then even a limited public option was given the heave-ho before negotiations ever started and we ended up with a quintessentially Republican health care "plan" while Democrats held the Presidency and both houses of Congress.

What's the point of being for things that will never ever happen in our political system?

[Radical Activist]

28. "What's the point of being for things that will never ever happen in our political system?"

Interesting question. In a similar vein, what's the point of flailing Obama for not passing something that was never going to happen in our political system (with the conservative Senate blocking it)?
It's a good tactic to spread cynicism and disgust. But, I don't see it encouraging any kind of effective action that might accomplish something. There are ways to work toward single payer but obsessively berating Obama for not pushing a policy he never campaigned on probably isn't one of them. And the fact that people always go back to that one issue after all that Obama has accomplished is kind of bizarre.

[DaisyDeedles]

31. But he DID campaign on a public option.

And then he sneered at us for being "purist" and "sanctimonious" for being disappointed in his capitulation.

[dionysus]

44. first, he never "sneered" at anyone. second. the senate did not have enough votes for the public opt

you might want to read up a bit on how legislation gets created and passed.

[BlackHoleSon]

46. Leadership

involves being willing to lose the battle to better position yourself to win the war.
Arguing forcefully for single payer/public option and losing in the Senate would then force those Senators in thrall of Big Pharma, the insurance co.'s, etc. to out themselves.
People like to pretend that the Senate is exempt from political pressure and shifts in paradigms. You don't get shifts in paradigms by refusing to lead and being willing to lose in the short term in order to force the ARGUMENTS for (indeed, the necessity for) single payer/public option into the public's consciousness.Single Payer in 10 years would be preferable to the few good things in the HCR plus the load of giveaways to and protection of the the Big Pharma/Insurance Co. Complex that we got.

[leftstreet]

53. +1

[Rex]

54. Yep, that is what has the rah rah brigade so upset.

They see the lack of leadership and yet want to blame the victims out of honor to the POTUS.

[Poboy]

56. Welcome to du. Spot on post.

[hulka38]

71. That is the truth. n/t

[Radical Activist]

76. You'd prefer to LOSE passing any bill AND lose the Senate.

You're kind of making my point that a slice of the left only knows how to lose and doesn't know how to contribute to an effort that's meant to win. Millions of people would suffer while you hold your breath and wait for a future victory that may or may not come. It's cruel ideological fanaticism.

Obama did something that will get more people health care and he brought us close to single-payer by allowing states to set up their own single-payer system. We're more likely to get single-payer in 10 years because of what Obama did. He's pushing the progressive movement forward. Wake up!

[BlackHoleSon]

80. I would love

to wake up to the scenario that you portray.
The last 30 years of triangulation by Democratic leadership and moving every argument to the right does not, however, make me a believer in incremental change.
If we can REALLY get single payer at the state levels than you and Obama are right and I am wrong - I'm just not holding my breath.

[Radical Activist]

83. Did you notice how triangulation worked?

Clinton moved us right with deregulation and much more.
Obama is moving us left. Yes, there have been compromises that meant we didn't get everything we want. But, there's still a big difference between progress and moving backward. We're making progress. That's not triangulation, and Obama has been making strong progressive arguments.
The 90's are over! Wake up and see what's happening around you!

[BlackHoleSon]

85. With regards to HCR

the triangulation was aimed at liberals/progressives and those in the center who recognize the health care crisis in trying to convince us, as you are now, that this was a "move to the left,""progress," etc. They're are a # of things in the law that I readily admit are "progress." But the price we paid for them was steep - essentially ensuring a huge new market for these for-profit, beholden-to-investor Insurance Co's, delivering customers to them that would through demographic trends have been lost to them for good. I will agree that that is progress if "progress" is taking 1 step forward and 2 steps back.
Health insurance is by no means health care - to address the crisis we have to get patients IN the system so that potentially bankrupting diseases and conditions can be caught early.
With these incredible deductibles plans have today, the amount that patients pay before Insurance Co's even kick in a dime, there is a huge financial disincentive for patients to seek even the most rudimentary care.
Your points on this thread on very well argued. However, as someone who both works in the health care field and spends a fortune on his own family's medical care, even with health insurance coverage, I think you are wrong that this law goes the right direction in fixing what is wrong with our health care system - the ability for everyone to afford access to healthcare so that relatively inexpensive to treat problems when caught early don't blow up into huge, bankrupting ones - all because people can't afford their deductibles.
Again, if all this leads to individual states establishing single-payer somehow, my hat is off to you for seeing the wisdom in Obama's strategy.

[DaisyDeedles]

64. If that's the case Obama should never have promised us a public option

If they "did not have enough votes" at the time of the vote they never had the votes to begin with so the promise shouldn't have been made.

[Poboy]

55. Welcome to DU!

And what he did was quietly kill any public option, extend the ban on drug reimportation, forbid government from negotiating price, and forec people into for profit insurance. All of this benefits the corporations at the peoples' expense, and is in opposition to what he campaigned on.

For our objections, we were accused of being on drugs and needing to be tested, and were wanting 'world peace'. Obama himself scolded us malcontents.
And you are right, after being chastised by even some here on this thread for being too demanding, now they say we weren't demanding enough. Its pathetic.

[DaisyDeedles]

59. Thanks for the welcome and I agree 100%

A lot of us are working really hard in our communities for Democratic politicians and for progressive values. I don't appreciate being lectured by the asshats in DC that I helped to put in office about what I did or didn't do. We've been pressuring them for more progressive policies. They don't listen to us.

[TheKentuckian]

57. I have never once berated Obama for not pushing Single Payer.

My issues with The Wealthcare and Profit Protection Act were all achievable, if we had the sense to push for and essential to the function of a market based system.

I don't get this sense of achievement in pushing through a national version of the Heritage Foundation/Romney, Dole-Gingrich reform system.that sets in concrete the worst parts of our existing system while extra-constitutionally dictating most Americans be forced to accept their work's decision of a health insurance carrier and pay as directed, essentially demanding individual Americans buy from the company store. A disastrous precedent, no matter how well intentioned. It maintains cartel status by maintaining a monopolistic anti-trust exemption. It gives the insurance cartel a de facto key to the treasury via the largely insufficient subsidies rather than any price controls and little cost containment.

For cost containment it accepts the right wing notion that the problem with costs is that people are not "wise consumers of health care", making the entire effort operate from a false assumption which ensures not only structural stumbling blocks to providing quality, affordable health care to all Americans but reinforces a system built to deny such reasonable goals by building in self denial making for a system where many are herded into a situation where they are effectively are forced to pay for something they cannot afford to use.

Over a hundred Republican "poison pill" amendments were accepted without gaining votes, including Ensign's "wellness" bullshit which back doors price increases an additional multiple of three in addition to age. Piss poor politics and a near abdication of duty to the people.

Speaking of poor politics, in order to achieve a number under a trillion dollars for essentially sales and "feel good" reasons implementation was put off for about four years after allowing an exhausting 18 month debate which allows for all kinds of shenanigans from every direction to derail the whole deal.
Meanwhile, little benefit is felt and the cancerous insurance cartel continues to jack up rates by appreciable amounts every year.

Taxing benefits directly counter to campaign rhetoric, further going down the right wing rabbit hole of blame the sick "over user" bullshit mentality.

We maintain state oversight and enforcement of regulation leaving the American people to the mercies of the same over extended, captured, and overwhelmed states.

There is nothing to build and improve on because this is a castle made of sand, it is designed on the wrong assumptions meaning broken mechanisms and building on the existing system of extraction and gobbling up GDP and corporate capture of the government in exchange for essentially the concession of taking everybody's money.

Then just to ensure the whole deal blows up in our faces we stick in further encouragement of our stupid existing model by plunking a turd into the punchbowl with the MLR which logically only encourages overall systemic costs to increase. In order for the cartel to make more money they must find ways to get more of the economy to go through their grubby mitts. Fucking stupid way to enhance the model they already work on.

Plus, it is set at where the industry supposedly is anyway so if the numbers are right it would have no effect whatsoever.

There is no ramping to allow access to the exchanges meaning they remain stunted little ghettos and the masses are forced to pay for a for profit product sold on the open market selected by their employer, further tiering and segmenting access to care in the country.

We enshrined health care as an obligation rather than a right.

Essentially the reason we have this "historic achievement" is that previous Presidents had the sense not to accept piss in the eye in exchange for a notch on the belt for some in name only legislation. Reform isn't changing the trim. We got a few nice features operating in the same frame. Nice features that people will pay for. Cover anyone-Take our money. Kids coverable until 26-Take our money.

Hell, we failed to even really defeat recessions, other than lip service, since the language just allows them the same bullshit excuses the cartel already used to justify their criminal denial of service.

Not to mention reinforcing Hyde just to throw another turd on a shitpile with a few minimal concessions trade for accepting right wing framing of the issue, reinforcing the present system cog by cog, foisting a seemingly desperate and arguably insane mandate on every citizen, largely using a right wing prescription for what ails our health care system with a little tinkering on the edges like a little increase in Medicaid access and the clinic money, and aiding the cartel's cost shifting schemes instead of putting a leash on the middle men.

This fucking turkey is a rehashed disaster being sold on a couple of door prizes that the winner must purchase at full sticker.

[Fumesucker]

86. My point is that for every "against" you can point at me I can show you a "for" alternative..

That I support.

Are you going to blame me for having high aspirations and lofty goals?

I'm cynical and disgusted with our political system after watching it for forty plus years as an adult, is it any wonder that my posts reflect my mental state?

[tekisui]

45. "...those who are only capable of throwing shit at the wall and being cynical."

Who are you talking about?

Name names. Who are these people who have so much power?

[Radical Activist]

77. Why?

There are plenty of easy examples. I don't see any point to dissecting them all individually but Tom Tomorrow, Dave Sirota, and Ted Rall are three who seem incapable of anything but spewing all negative cynicism all the time. It works when they attack Republicans, but they're incapable of seeing the good in anything at all that Obama does.

And let me guess, you're about to repeat the talking point that left pundits are blameless because they have no power. I find it sadly pathetic for someone like Cenk to suggest that the thousands of life hours he spends talking about issues amount to nothing. How pathetically self-abasing for him to claim that his life's work has absolutely no impact or influence.
Left pundits COULD play a powerful role if they acted as allies pushing the rest of the media to better address progressive issues. That's how right-wing talk radio browbeats the corporate press into covering everything they want. But, the Jane Hamsher crowd would rather attack Obama than attack the press and Republicans in some kind of coordinated, productive way.

[tekisui]

79. You don't want them to act as allies, you want them to act as non-critical

mouthpieces and support every position 100%.

I still don't think they have the influence you are attributing to them. I think the actions of the Administration stand or fall on their own. The WH has done some great things, and has impressive support this far into Obama's first term. When the WH has not been with those on the left, the criticisms are warranted. I think constant critiques from the left are a good and valuable thing.

It serves at least two functions. It frames actions by how they could be better. It also allows the conservatives to view the WH as 'not-the-left'. You should be thanking them.

[Radical Activist]

81. Wow, it's amazing how you got inside my head to read my thoughts

and have absolutely no fucking clue what I think. The straw-man about people expecting conformity is fucking old. It's a crutch used by people who get called out for making weak arguments.

I'm not sure what influence you think I've ascribed to anyone. I didn't comment on their influence, merely their self-defeating tactics. Although their ultra-cynical approach does make them less effective at accomplishing anything. Perhaps you're replying to the same imaginary people who want 100% conformity? But since I've heard this Cenk talking point before I'll respond to it.

In order to accept Cenk's cowardly cop-out to avoid defending his own behavior one must believe that left pundits:
1) Have the power to pressure Obama and hold his feat to the fire, and
2) Have absolutely no impact on public perception of Obama or power to pressure Congress.

How can both of those contradictory statements both be true? Well, they can't. It's just Cenk's lame way of refusing to justify his "shit all over everything" attitude.

Yes, critiques from the left are a good thing. The inability to praise the positive or help push for Obama's progressive agenda items doesn't help the progressive movement. Neither does the kind of misleading, dishonest exaggeration we get from people like Jane Hamsher. Neither does Cenk's vague, mindless hand-wringing over every move Obama makes. It's not that hard to say how Obama could do better in a productive way without the hyperbolic denunciations about Obama betraying/failing us again.

And the Fox crowd will paint Obama as socialist no matter what anyone else says, so no it doesn't paint Obama as "not-the-left."

[tekisui]

84. "It's not that hard to say how Obama could do better in a productive way"

It seems we are in complete agreement, then. I can't speak to your hang up on Cenk of Hamsher. That is your deal.

"Yes, critiques from the left are a good thing." Again, we are in complete agreement. I have no problem praising the positives. And there are positives to praise. What gets tired and old is when honest criticisms, needed criticisms, get dismissed and tossed into the pile of 'mindless hand-wringing' or 'dishonest exaggeration'. I accept and support when I see positive actions.

I have to ask are you willing to criticize when the WH is in the wrong. Because there are more than a few who will defend EVERY act, EVERY position, EVERY decision whether right or wrong. When that is the case, credibility is equally and justifiably lost.

[WiffenPoof]

34. I've Been Saying This Since Day One

One of the fundamental lessons of politics is controlling the message. None of were worried about this because Mr. Obama was such a good speaker during the campaign. Then. for reasons I still can't figure out, the President has not taken advantage of one of the most powerful tools he has...the bully pulpit. He who controls the message, controls the electorate. Sad, but nevertheless true.

-PLA

[Xenotime]

69. somebody needs to control the tea baggers

[Curmudgeoness]

36. You said a mouthful. And I am still surprised at the number of people

who are making excuses why there cannot be a way to control a message. When I see that the teabaggers are able to form a message and drive it home, even with the very limited intellect that they appear to have, I see no reason why we could not do it.

Get real, people! We sink or swim based on our ability to convince others that our opinions and policies are for the good of the country and the people of the country. And to do that, we need to put a mirror up to the whacky right and show how little they are doing to remedy any problems.

[Rex]

40. That is very nice, but it is a failure in leadership

that just begs a primary challenger.

[dionysus]

43. herein lies the problem. you'd rather fight the elected democrats than the republicans.

no wonder they keep getting back in office.

[Rex]

48. Wrong I voted for Obama and I will vote for his primary challenger

or HIM, AGAIN if that is all I have. Herein lies the true problem, you and others have no idea how to critique Obama or won't and it will ultimately lead to Repukes winning, like they did last November when the DLC caused us to lose seats in the House.

But ya hey, easier to blame me then the actual guy I voted for. :eyes:

[ReggieVeggie]

68. and Obama fights Republicans?

where? when? link?

[Rex]

72. I asked the same question in another thread

and of course got nothing as a reply.

[treestar]

51. If you're just a follower

Don't expect to get anything out of the political system.

[Rex]

52. Excuse me for expecting my leaders to live up to the vote I gave them.

Won't happen again. Oh and if you are only an Obama robot, then talking to you is a waste of time.

[LWolf]

41. "The Left" and "progressives" are not the same. nt

[treestar]

47. It is never simple and clear as it is for the right

they take the low road. They have that advantage. Dumb down the populace and it adds to it.

Voters are like children, needing to be entertained and coddled and giving in to their worst impulses. Won't take the time to read or think about a thing. We need to get people back to feeling responsible, shame them into it, whatever. But we can never package the message to cater to the least thinking the way repukes can.

[TheKentuckian]

58. Translation: Accept, adopt, implement, and support rehashed Republican policy and politicians

from when they pretended to offer policy solutions.

While the "Sensible Centrist" shtick sounds better than what passes from the psychopaths in the Republican party it promises unmitigated failure and wrongheadedness as well. It's just yesterday's failed corporate enabling agenda with increased inclusiveness.

Focusing on loud mouth extremist for political purposes does not change the horrifying direction those with smiles instead of smirks and more tolerable rhetoric insist on going with a bit more caution than their mouthbreathing foot soldiers and foils.

[DaisyDeedles]

67. It also redefines where the "left" is.

The Sensible Center is now the uber-liberal socialist far out fringe left as far as the Beltway crowd and the MSM are concerned.

[TheKentuckian]

73. Yup, yup.

[dkofos]

62. It would be so easy if the Left controlled the messenger.

[TheKentuckian]

63. The OP seems to believe the left should back whatever the messengers come up with.

I'm not inclined to parrot Difi, Baucus, Conrad, Schumer, Reid, Lieberman to a large extent, the Clintons, and the Administration toss out to have message discipline.

[Name removed]

65. Deleted message

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

[mmonk]

88. The left does. The Democrats aren't providing a real left.

Therefore, no real soundbites from them.

[LeftinOH]

92. +This+

[jtown1123]

94. We have the powerful messages on our side. We just need to use them effectively.

Don't know why we can't get our shit together.

[Rex]

96. Because we don't have a billion dollar industry like the M$M in our pocket.

The GOP does...we need to change that ASAP imo.