Tweet
by Tom Lohdan
There simply isn’t a facepalm on the planet big enough for this.
Mr. Obama’s senior adviser, David Plouffe, and his chief of staff, William M. Daley, want him to maintain a pragmatic strategy of appealing to independent voters by advocating ideas that can pass Congress, even if they may not have much economic impact. These include free trade agreements and improved patent protections for inventors. [...]
So far, most signs point to a continuation of the nonconfrontational approach — better to do something than nothing — that has defined this administration. Mr. Obama and his aides are skeptical that voters will reward bold proposals if those ideas do not pass Congress. It is their judgment that moderate voters want tangible results rather than speeches.
“If you’re talking about a stunt, I don’t think a stunt is what the American people are looking for,” the White House press secretary, Jay Carney, told reporters on Wednesday. “They’re looking for leadership, and they’re looking for a focus on economic growth and job creation.”
Memo to Jay Carney: putting forth half-assed, small beer proposals that you know will accomplish little because you think, cynically, that’s what “independents” want is a stunt. It’s the definition of a stunt. It’s also craven and cowardly when we’ve still got over 9% of the country unemployed.
Also, “leadership” doesn’t mean trying to guess in advance what the Teabillies in the House will agree to, which by the way — is nothing.
These people are absolutely pathetic.
92 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Obama is a Stunted Stoopy Stupe.
I refuse to call them “pathetic” until they actually lose an election. Until then, they merit due credit for having neutralized America’s progressives.
If you want to see how pathetic this strategy is. Look to the status of Democrats in Georgia.
I quit the Democratic Party a couple of months ago. So I am now an “independent.”
So giving people jobs is a “stunt”? Guaranteeing healthcare is a “stunt”? Protecting Medicare and Social Security is a “stunt”? Forcing the richest people imaginable to pay their fair share, like all the “little people” do, is a “stunt”?
As an “independent,” I say you’re full of shit, Obama. Go fuck yourself.
Now it’s come down to pure WH comedy. During the Vietnam protests the favored technique was for people to simply quote government officials word for word. Nothing else was required.
The WH, in its cumulative wisdom, approaches independents as a cohesive, monolith of ideals and a political party. What a unique way to deal with individuals that according to my highly scientific WHAG, are anything but cohesive or monolithic, but instead eschew both Democrats and GOP as hopelessly corrupt and a pledge of a plague on both houses. God, talk about a bubble mentality.
well put. of course those r the same stratemgists who concocted the plan to alienate the base. it’s amateur night.
The president (even now, I still try to speak respectfully) has said it out loud and unembarrassed when he told a group of college students: Don’t set your goals too high, or you will be disappointed if you don’t achieve them. He holds out half a glass of water, and tells us we should be happy that it isn’t clear empty.
Mr Obama is “President Do Nothing and Don’t Even Try”. He is the steward in the bible story who was given one talent (a thousand dollars worth of silver) and buried it in the ground, and he expected to be praised because the took no chances and did not lose it.
When you’re elected President you put forth proposals that you believe in and let Congress take the heat. This is exactly what Truman did in 1948 and labeled the Congress as “do nothing”. It seemed to work for him. Centrists view Obama as weak and I’m not so sure independents want a weak President/
Great line in the American President movie when Michael Douglas says “I was so busy trying to keep my job, I forgot to do my job.” I wish Obama would have a “come to Jesus” moment like that one.
Dont blame me. I voted for Hillary.
Pretty neat magic trick:
Barack JFK/MLK/FDR/Abraham Lincoln Obama ===> Barack Ronald Reagan/Herbert Hoover Obama
Obama and his people have forgotten that when you try to please everyone you please no one. I have never seen anyone like Obama in my life. Can’t take a position on anything. I can’t imagine how he decides what to have for breakfast.
That is their despicable legacy. The have-nots have no one to speak for them.
This isn’t pragmatism, it’s cowardice. Not that the corporations and the ultrarich are complaining, mind you.
I voted for Kodos…
Independents won’t be impressed by anything other than a big drop in the unemployment rate. That ain’t gonna happen in the next 15 months. The only people who may be impressed by ineffective stunts are partisan Democrats.
See? It’s your fault! (I wrote in Kang.)
We had an Obamabot troll in the Late Night thread last night. Wish he’d turn up right about now with his fearmongering not-voting-for-Obama-is-just-like-voting-for-a-Republican crap.
Read a bit further, and it only gets worse:
Reelect Obama so he can cut government spending and our social insurance programs. Voilà! Fixed economy.
I was planning not to vote for President in 2012. If Rick Perry is the candidate, I guess I’m going to have to vote for Obama. He will be an absolute disaster and every Jesus freak out there will vote for him.
Perry has stated openly that his plan for the nations problems is to pray and put it in God’s hands. This really scares the hell out of me and it should scare you too. By all accounts, Perry is dumber than Dubya. I have a hard time believing that is possible.
It must bug them that Clinton already solved for all time the school uniforms and V-chip crises.
Their fundamental problem is this– the people who corrupted the financial markets (which has poisoned the rest of the economy) are the same people bankrolling the President’s re-election campaign. The economy can’t recover until Wall Street is put on a leash (securities transaction fees and breaking up TBTF banks for starters) and that was only possible if upon Obama taking office he had, as diplomats say, astonished the world with his ingratitude.
King Chaos has already started to play the pity card. In his speech on Thursday he said he has tried but the government was broken and he could not get anyone to work with him. There were things he could have done on his own if he had the backbone to stand up and oppose those in opposition. His inability to be a leader is only surpassed by his inability to negotiate.
The country would have been in better shape if the tax breaks had not been extended. He supported this extension.
Criminal is criminal regardless of who you are. He refused to have the DOJ investigate and bring to justice those involved in war crimes.
The wars are draining this country dry. Instead of bring troops home he has escalated the war to new levels.
Approx. 50% of the budget is military. Instead of decreasing this amount he has allowed various entitlement programs to be attacked.
He has not listened to the people in one things he has done. Everything he has done has been to sell out the people and support the special interest. He has surrounded himself with self-important morons that blow smoke up his kester instead of telling him the truth.
Even though intelligent his biggest failing is not realizing there is no sane in insanity. How many times does it take to realize you can’t negotiate with insane individuals. Yet, now he wants to use this as a defense and believe the people will buy this excuse.
King Chaos needs to realize the train has left the station and he is not on it.
It should be lost on no one that these “small beer” next to nothing actions are just the run of the mill, republican SOP . This is what mitch mconnel or john mcaion or john boehner would propose doing.
not that perry could win, but we would be better off with rick perry as president. “the left” or whateverpasses for it, would have a neccessary ally in the democrats again. there would at least be an “opposition” .its worth saying again, that jhohn mcain couldnt have done the damage that oabama accomplished. democrats would have had to fight him. rick perry wouldnt be able to either.
The WH problem isn’t stupidity or incompetence. Their problem is they are dead set on satisfying their corporate masters yet somehow have to devise some way to spin the results enough to win re-election. They are unable, or unwilling, to admit that their anti-public policies won’t win votes from the public.
Is it not beyond the scope of possibility for Obama to run the first-ever $1 bil campaign.
And lose.
I’m here to suggest again that our best hope is organizing a “Dirty Dems” strategy based on the movie “The Dirty Dozen”: NO votes for ANY Dems at any level unless Obama and Joe the Banker’s Bitch are dropped from the ticket.
Sure, the risk is a short term GOP takeover of local, state, and federal legislative bodies and executive offices. But it would be the shortest reign in modern political history, and result in a massive top-to-bottom restructuring/purging/revitalization of the Democratic Party.
Independent voters will vote for whoever runs the most commercials during American Idol, and my guess would be that’s going to be Karl Rove and the Koch Bros. “Independent voters” is a kind term for these voters who basically can’t make up their minds because most of them are non-informed and they have no inclination to become informed. Setting your presidential agenda on the basis of this group of non-thinkers is an asinine and cynical approach. It’s time that someone asked Obama to consider an LBJ type moment: step up to the plate, admit failure, and get the hell out of the way so a real Democratic leader can run on the party ticket.
I hope you set the troll straight.
Problem is that Perry could do quite a lot of damage with executive orders and who he put in charge of agencies like the EPA. I wouldn’t be surprised if we lost one of the conservatve SC justices in the next 4 years. Scalia, Thomas, and Kennedy are possibilities. Of course, the Republicans would filibuster any progressive and Obama would appoint a
compromisedcompromise candidate.I agree with this idea. The progressives in the Dem party have to confront this dipshit of a President and tell him to get the hell out of Dodge, or he gets ZERO of our support, and that ensures his defeat. So Obama, what’s it going to be: Rick Perry or a Real Democrat as President ? It’s your choice.
Independent Voters is a lie.
Its a D.C/Media creation to highlight the moderate middle, while the Progressives/Liberals are consider hard left of issues and the RNC is consider hard right of the issues, creating a so-called middle of independents.
If that middle existed, how come when asked over 70% of the country wanted Single Payer Health Care? How come a majority of the population identifies with Germany or Sweden when compared to how our society works?
The point is that Washington DC is behind the curve as usual and we can be a more progressive country if there weren’t so many interest to keep the Status Que.
SCOTUS worries me but I have decided that to vote for Obama would violate every principle I have ever believed in. I also won’t ever vote for Boxer or Feinstein again.
I believe the same could be achieved by letting them know that incumbents will be taken out in the primaries. Like the teabaggers have done. No dem should be supported without a strong progressive view. If enough people e-mailed and called the dems and made this stand known maybe we could slow down the destruction before the next election.
Not that I mean to pry or anything, and obviously it ain’t none of my business, but isn’t there a socialist type party or a green party in your state you could have registered as? Independents are always treated like they are between the two parties. I’m still a registered dem but at this point it is because I just haven’t registered Green yet– but I don’t mean to assume anything about what party might be best for you.
You also have the problem with Ginesburg getting up there in years. A Republican President could shape the court for the next 20 years.
I call myself an independent as well. I don’t call myself a Democrat anymore.
As an independent voter, I don’t find kowtowing to Republicans appealing. Nor do I find cutting Social Security and Medicare awesome. Nor do I find sending jobs overseas with rigged “free” trade agreements neat.
Obama is really proving himself to be quite a tone deaf idiot.
“Reelect Obama so he can cut government spending and our social insurance programs. Voilà! Fixed economy.”
Oh come on, F me. And really F all of us.
They don’t even hide it anymore. What happened to lying to us and then doing the opposite?
Maybe the above can be his new slogan.
Elect me, so I can F you, your children, and this country. And Dawg bless … Reagan.
Roberts was confirmed by a vote margin of 78-22 (or roughly around there). It wasn’t like the Dems put up much of a fight with him.
again, what could perry get on the supreme court that would vote any worse than obamas two picks?..perry couldnt get a rabbidly anti choice justice on the court, not with an active opposition that would filibuster it (remmber, dems only roll over for republicans with obama around). so whats that leave? the same kind of pro-corporate picks that obama got rubber stamped by a compliant dem caucus…
Sorry, with all due respect:
Voting for O is voting to destroy SS/Medicare/Medicaid, with a very good chance that he will succeed; look at all the damage he has already done to these programs for the people.
His new slogan:
Elect me, so I can F you, your children, and this country. And Dawg bless … Reagan. Oh ya, hopey changey BS …
In 2007 Obama was the leader in Wall Street money, out of everyone who was running for Pres at that time, both parties included. So, if you follow the money one would conclude that this guy’s goal was yes, indeed to marginalize the progressives in the country. How can the pillaging of the Gov. Treasury continue when you have a bunch of observant, intelligent liberal people saying “hey, wait a minute, you’re all criminals.” So that was and is Obama’s role, as he was instruced by Goldman Sachs and Jamie Dimon. “We’ll get you the cash, get you elected, and then neutralize these smart ass observers who seem to have figured out what the hell we’re up to.”
I think we should focus on catfood members along with reid and pelosi and fill their e-mails and phone lines with calls. This is the only way we might be able to have any effect on the future outcome of this group. If they feel there will be a reckoning at the polls they might rethink their positions.
The big O talks the talk but when it comes to walking the walk the fucker is a paraplegic.
“Sixth Estate August 14th, 2011 at 12:18 pm
19
Read a bit further, and it only gets worse:
Administration officials, frustrated by the intransigence of House Republicans, have increasingly concluded that the best thing Mr. Obama can do for the economy may be winning a second term, with a mandate to advance his ideas on deficit reduction, entitlement changes, housing policy and other issues.
Reelect Obama so he can cut government spending and our social insurance programs. Voilà! Fixed economy.”
That’s what voting for O will mean. All else is verbiage or just plain nonsense.
electing a reublican (absent a primary challenger to o-bomb-ya )would force the dems back into the opposition,if for no other reason than they would get the smaller slice of corporate graft as the minority party, without holding it for ransom. where gutting SS and medicare would be more difficult with a dem opposition, than it will be with them playing right along.
he dosent even talk the talk anymore. not unless “the talk” is Mitt Romneys stump speeches.
Give the Democratic partisans crumbs, and they stay in line. Keep them playing the electoral game, always reaching for the brass ring of “more and better Democrats”, and they won’t become so disaffected that they leave the party and look for ways to create social change outside of electoral politics.
Targeting incumbents in primaries is a good idea, but not enough. The incumbent machine politicians have such an advantage that it’s an uphill fight with — in most cases — little chance of success. I know: I live in CA-36. Marcy Winograd captured 38% and then 40% of the vote in two races but still failed to unseat Jane Harman.
There are two huge advantages to the “Dirty Dems” strategy:
a) It means that winning a primary doesn’t put the incumbent in the driver’s seat.
b) It can help break the linkage between federal candidates and other down-ticket races. One huge advantage incumbents have is their ability to marshall impressive sounding endorsements from city council members, county commissioners, civic leaders, unions, and legislators at their level and above or below. Once those folks start to get scared, the fear spreads like an epidemic.
The first step in rescuing the Dem party is driving a wedge between down-ticket office holders and those higher up. That will lead to a wedge between those in Congress and Zero.
A “more combative approach” that might improve the US economy is considered a “stunt”? So maintaining a “pragmatic strategy” means being more concerned with getting done what is good for those with serious money and power than the importance of winning in 2012? If “ideas that can pass Congress, even if they may not have much economic impact” and therefore don’t produce “tangible results,” then what is the difference between such actions and making speeches?
I suspect that many independent voters would like real representation, not “leadership.” If you don’t want to be led, where does that vote go?
listen closely to what the dog whistle speak is saying…hes talking to wal st donors, not “the little people” of 2008…hes an opportunistic, self serving scum bag and anyone who votes for him votes for the destruction of the American way of Life.Amazing but the teabillies got that right in an incredibly f-’d up and wrong kind of way.
I don’t believe the Senate can filibuster a supreme court nominee that makes it out of the Judicial Committee. I think Alito only got voted in like 52-48. But just like now, we had a democratic senator named Pat Leahy who had his head stuck up his ass and allowed Alito to get through the committee, I remember the hearings when Ted Kennedy was putting the screws to Alito with tough questions, and Alito’s old lady was sitting behind him and making faces in reaction to Kennedy’s questions. That alone should have signalled the totally classless asshole that Alito is and was. Weak Democrats are the problem. Remember, it was Joe Biden who exluded five witnesses who corraborated Anita Hill’s testimony, and that allowed the thug known as Clarence Thomas onto the court. Weak Democrats are the problem.
Exactly. Stop blaming the R’s and put all the blame where it belongs, on the D’s.
If I were a member of the owning class and were interested in increasing the upward migration of wealth, what more could I ask for than a federal government that could do nothing to improve the quality of life for most of the citizenry? Cowardice and incompetence would be precisely the characteristics I would be looking for.
executive orders come and go. they are usually executed as a way of spreading around graft, or punishing disloyalty…if the “changes” are made to “entitlements” that obama has made his “legacy” issue (sick isnt it) they wont be so temporary. i would trade perrys half assed executive orders for obama destruction of SS ANY day
Your first paragraph nails it.
heres a suggestion to those who are all torn up about it. Vote AGAINST whoever raises the most money. fuck the SCOTUS.
Obama is an opportunist, just like almost all of the Congressional Democrats. All Obama cares about is his status in society and how big his payout will be when he leaves office.
The longer that Obama is president, the more favors he can do for the plutocrats, and the bigger his payout. According to a Washington Post article that was written while Hillary Clinton was running for president, “Goldman Sachs paid [Bill Clinton] $650,000 for four speeches in recent years… The banking firm Citigroup… paid [Bill Clinton] $250,000 for a speech in France in 2004.” If Obama were only a one-term president, he might not be able to command such high rates from the MOTU.
I live in Texas, Perry’s been governor for over a decade now and Texas is doing just fine for the most part, we’re doing better than most states. Not that I’m saying Perry has been a good governor or he can take credit for that, but he hasn’t blown the place up and he’s not worse than Obama.
and FYI all of the “Insane” Perry quotes people dig up come during primary seasons, like right now. he’ll stop spouting nonsense as soon as he wins the republican primary… he’s the king of pandering to the base. He’s also full of shit cause last year he insisted repeatedly that he wouldn’t run for president.
But really, Perry praying for rain in an auditorium during republican primary season, or talking about secession during last year’s primary season… this is about as relevant as how Barack Obama said he supported single payer and opposed the patriot act back in 2007. They’re both completely full of shit. They’ll say anything to be president. They’re just saying what they have to say to get out of the primaries. Don’t get fooled. Other than the rhetoric there’s hardly a difference between them.
Maybe he isn’t tone deaf; he’s just listening to another group’s music.
Obama stated long ago that he was comfortable being a one-term president. Did that mean that he was willing to risk his presidency to fight for what he believed in? Absolutely. What you must realize, as I have, is that what Obama believes in (what he fights for) is not the same things he says to impress the people he fooled into voting for him.
As David Sirota points out:
Sirota’s article is a very good, enlightening read:
http://www.salon.com/news/david_sirota/2011/08/05/obama_fdr_debt_ceiling
Obama will leave the presidency in 2013 and be rewarded with millions of dollars of gratuities (called “speaking fees”) from the people whose music he danced to.
Obama has gone from praising Reagan to outright adulation.
– Barack Obama, USA Today, January 24, 2011
Obama doesn’t even try to hide his political sympathies anymore.
I don’t buy that argument that Obama is doing exactly what he wants to do that Sirota puts forth. It gives Obama too much credit and makes it sound like he’s a Machiavellian genius.
It’s similar to the Obamabots argument about how he’s playing “11th dimensional chess” with the GOP.
Obama is simply a political huckster who rode the progressive populist train to win the election, then sold out immediately at his inauguration day. It’s blown up in his face repeatedly.
Besides, Obama didn’t get his “grand bargain” during the debt debate. He desperately wanted the grand bargain as part of his legacy, and he didn’t achieve it. The GOP dragged it out until the final deadline, didn’t get any revenue increases, and downgraded the US’s credit rating on Obama’s watch.
I love that picture of him signing the debt deal. He was completely alone.
That I do believe, which is why he’s probably “OK” with being a one term president.
This election presents a real opportunity for liberals to increase their political muscle, but I doubt that many will wise up. (I hope I’m wrong.)
It is a near-certainty (baring something truly far out of the ordinary, like the Republican nominee getting a fatal heart attack in late October 2012) that Obama will lose the election to a like-minded Republican. That’s because the unemployment rate will be higher in October 2012 than it was in January 2009. So, no matter how scary the Republican nominee is made out to be, it is imperative that liberals in large numbers refuse to vote for Obama. This would have the same effect for liberals that the 1992 election had for conservatives: it would give them respect and leverage, something they have none of now.
Obama has contempt for liberals because he is not one. Cornel West got wise to this and is among those who have described that contempt:
ttp://blogs.abcnews.com/thenote/2011/05/is-cornel-west-a-bellwether-for-obama-on-liberal-support-in-2012.html
Even Reagan raised taxes and didn’t target social security and medicare for “reform” (cuts). So I put Obama to the right of Reagan whom Obama credits (with admiration) for changing the trajectory of American politics.
I think you will eventually come around, but you are being stubborn about it.
Please consider something I often say about Republican politicians: They only seem stupid if you believe they have good intentions. For Obama, change the first part of that to “he only seems weak if….”
well I guess Indies don’t lose their jobs. I guess Indies don’t lose their homes. I guess Indies want to have their SS Medicare and Medicaid cut. I guess Indies want to continue with a over bloated Defense budget. I guess Indies like being spied on by the govt I guess Indies want to continue with these insane wars, I guess Indies like to see world being polluted
What I can say…I guess Obama’s advisors know it all!
Alienating your base in the pursuit of the center with bad policy is not a net gain. Progressives may not vote for Republicans but they still need a reason to vote for Democrats; apathy is the result when voters can’t see any difference between candidates.
Problem of course in applying Matthew 25 to this situation is that the master was returning favors to those that work hard for him – and saying no favors would go to those that do nothing for the master, no matter how poor they are. Being poor does get you automatic favor. And not trying to improve the situation is not a good thing.
Obama reads it as “go to the bankers”
Sad
I wish Obama understood the Bible.
Hear, Hear! Sadly, they won’t agree at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue any more than their predecessor would have agreed with Nancy Pelosi. I guess that the definition of insanity fits, they keep trying to do the same thing time after time and expect a different outcome.
Obama was really a smart lawyer/law professor? Prove it. Please.
Someone needs to get through to them that independent voters lean the way registered voters do, but more so: most are left of center, but they’re farther left than the D party.
So what he’s doing is going to fail, because they’re chasing votes that don’t exist.
I’d go independent, but I want a voice in the primaries. And there aren’t any parties in my state that I like.
Sold out to whom and towards what ends?
Here are the problems I have with the Obama-is-just-inept argument:
1. Obama is not stupid.
2. Obama is surrounded by a team of professional strategists and policymakers (all are guardians of the establishment and were selected by him). He does not operate without support.
So, yeah, he is a Machiavellian genius.
Someone ought to make him listen to ‘Mr Perkins’s Privy’. (There are videos of it; I remember hearing it told by Jean Shepherd.)
What kind of job situation does Texas have?
Are the jobs available paying enough to live on, are are they all minimum wage?
Do minorities and women get the short end all the time, or can they get good jobs without having to brown-nose?
What about taxes: are sales and property taxes sky-high, or are they low enough that people don’t feel like they have to deal under the counter?
If y’all think Perry is so wonderful, y’all are going to have to explain why. It doesn’t come across to the rest of us.
He’s a nothing burger.
There’s a kernel of truth in all writings. :)
Obama represents the establishment until they need someone from the other side to keep the other half of the plebs from rioting.
Declare independence from both parties.
The thing is, doing his job means getting results, not wasting time by pushing legislation which won’t get passed.
That’s the same kind of question people asked bout Bush and he showed us how bad his decisions could be. Bush was not like Gore and none of today’s Republicans are anything like Obama.
Not really. Executive orders are far more important than that.
Obama is not destroying Social Security. He and the Congressional Dems are protecting it.
I’m an unaffiliated voter, and I resent your tone. I’ve never watched American Idol, and I”m unaffiliated because I prefer to think for myself and not declare myself to be part of anyone’s tribe. I was a 42-year registered Democrat, albeit an unhappy one for the last half of that time, and I’m not going to be any political party’s bitch again.
No, doing his job means proposing legislation and standing on your principles. What we learned is that Obama has no principles. He just wants bills that he can call bipartisan. I don’t think he cares too much exactly what’s in the bill.
Just look at debt ceiling debacle. In the end what did Obama stand for. Really nothing. All he wanted was the debt limit to extend past the next election. Of course, if we wind up in another recession, he may have to deal with it just before the election.
Obama, Dems and Republicans better fear one man in particular: Ron Paul
With the gaping hole Obama has Left, many of us from all walks see him as the one who may have the right stuff to finally sneak thru to home base.
I see Independents flocking to him as the one sanely consistent adult at the party.
I fail to see how not voting gives a bloc respect and leverage. Just the opposite. How did sitting out in 92 (if they even did) give conservatives more power and leverage after Clinton won?
Consistent, perhaps. Sane, no. Come on. I think most of us can agree with him on the anti-war stance. Everything else? Batshit.
Well-said, Blue Tex.
“Also, “leadership” doesn’t mean trying to guess in advance what the Teabillies in the House will agree to, which by the way — is nothing.”
Here is the true essence of leadership, courtesy of Dr. King:
“And I had to answer by looking that person into the eye, and say ‘I’m sorry sir but you don’t know me. I’m not a consensus leader.’
I do not determine what is right and wrong by looking at the budget of my organization or by taking a Gallup poll of the majority opinion. Ultimately a genuine leader is not a searcher for consensus but a molder of consensus.“
That’s easy. They couldn’t be taken for granted.
You can always vote for someone other than a Democrat or a Republican. Anti-tax conservatives voted for Perot in 1992 and they’ve been more powerful within the GOP ever since. Do you dispute that? And they lost nothing since the economy doomed Bush’s re-election anyway, just as it will doom Obama.
You have no leverage if you are unwilling to apply leverage. Without leverage, you have no power. Only a whore never says no, and no one respects a whore.
Good point BP…I have been saying this for over a year. Obama is a Wall Street lackey who uses the Republican Party as his “beard”, a convenient excuse for not living up to his campaign promises and acting as a Democrat. We must purge the Dem Party of this DLC, Third Way, Clintonisque ilk and make room for real Dems. Any Republican in the field now will be an abysmal failure and the Country will unite to evict him/her from the White House in 2016. The same holds true for Congress and the Senate. As far as the Supreme Court goes, Kagan is no friend of the middle class and the working person. Just ask Don Siegelman. Purge the Democratic Party and send a message to the party…no more frauds like Obama.
What results are you talking about. Not much has gotten done in 3 years…2 of those years were with strong Democratic majorities in congress. It’ not that he’s weak or a bad negotiator…he’s a middle-right Republican…and a damn liar.
1) Ron Paul will not make it out of the GOP Primary Race. If he drops out to become an Independent or some other groups candidate. He might gain some traction there, but it will mostly be with young people that identify with something he’s saying not his entire platform.
This might be the perfect time for a 3rd party candidate to come forward, but who that is and what impact they will have is a question that hasn’t been answered yet.
Liberals often want to blame Nader for Gore’s lost. Why didn’t Liberals just push Nader into office? What really happen is most of you didn’t believe he would win a general election. Most of you didn’t think Obama could win a primary challenge when the GOP was rubbing its hands together for Hilary to win the nomination.
That’s why voting for Green Party candidates makes sense on many levels but the most important one, actually winning!
Voting for Nader now is likely a bad idea, he’s too old since we’re a youth obsessed culture.
Also running somebody to the left of Obama without any chance of winning in the primaries is a mistake. If you’re going to bother with that, find somebody that can actually BEAT Obama and beat who ever wins the GOP Primary.
I have NO IDEA how that is, likely a media figure as there’s nobody in the current pipeline of Democrats or Green Party candidates. It also has to be somebody who can collect enough money and votes in early primaries to get on TV.
I’ve been saying that. The Congress will do basically whatever it wants and its up to the President to either veto it or sign it into law and take whatever backlash or praise comes by it.
Being President is like being the Star QB of an NFL/College Team. Too much credit when they win and too much credit when they loose. FDR gets all the credit for the New Deal, however it was a mostly Democratic Congress that forged ahead with the actual passage of legislation.
I agree that the hangover and leftovers from the Clinton Presidency is mostly the problem here. Clinton was the benefactor of the dot.com boom and given too much credit for the increase in prosperity during his last term.
Just as GWB is given too much blame for the dot.com BUST and recession that happen behind it. He didn’t help by adding two wars to the federal budget either and expanding Government with Homeland Security.
Honestly the thing is so broken that basically our economy MUST FAIL for it to rebuilt from its ashes. Then and only then Progressive will need to scream as loud as they can for creating a social safety net that exceeds Western Europe and tax the Rich accordingly.
There are Rich tax dodgers in Europe, the DIFFERENCE is EU tax dodgers live in Monaco or Switzerland. We can’t seem to get rid of our tax dodgers, they live in some our riches neighborhoods. If certain Americans don’t wanna pay taxes to fund a 21st Century social safety net, then they need to leave.
How does Europe still force the rich to pay a higher tax rate yet those that feel so punished by it, move to another country? We can do that here!
The people who really run this country will never allow Ron Paul on the ballot. They will take him out at the first sign he might have a real shot. The only reason Obama is in there is because he was a Trojan horse. The press will be fed a juicey story that destroys him just before their convention, and if that fails, they will kill him. Cynical—maybe, but I think the same is true of anyone from the left that might upset the Plan. Kucinich, Nader, anyone that wants to stop us from the endless war.
Kodos the Executioner?
It’s what corruption looks like.