General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsI'm Sorry... But I Gotta Ask... People Here Keep Saying We Have To Have The President's Back...
and I guess I can see that in a first term, trying for a second term...
But now that he is re-elected, resoundingly, and NOT running for re-election...
Isn't it time for him to have OUR BACK ???
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)but then, I am not a cutten runner, sad sam or debbie downer like the media is.
dawg
(10,777 posts)I will always be with you
Doesn't matter what you do girl, oh girl with you
No matter what you do
I will always be around
Won't you tell me what you found girl, oh girl won't you
Knock down the old brick wall, and be a part of it all
Nothing to say, nothing to see, nothing to do
If you would give me all, as I would give it to you
Nothing would be, nothing would be, nothing would be
No matter where you go
There will always be a place
Can't you see in my face girl, oh girl don't you
Knock down the old brick wall, and be a part of it all
Nothing to say, nothing to see, nothing to do
If you would give me all, as I would give it to you
Nothing would be, nothing would be, nothing would be
No matter what you are
I will always be with you
Doesn't matter what you do girl, oh girl want you
Oh girl, you girl, want you
Oh girl, you girl, want you
Read more at http://www.songmeanings.net/songs/view/42395/#zgGqMAe42IzLlDOp.99
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)
narnian60
(3,510 posts)sheshe2
(97,337 posts)
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)
Skittles
(171,464 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Skittles
(171,464 posts)I have a HUGE heart.
progressoid
(53,120 posts)is another person's day to day real world struggle.
BlueNoteSpecial
(141 posts)We have to have our own backs, yes?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)You think your work is done? You think you can go back to watching American Idol? I think we have a lot of work ahead of us. And we need to help him understand what We The People need. Blind worship isnt in the Democratic nature. We need to fight for issues like saving SS and Medicare. Repeal of the Patriot Act and other Bush programs that violate the Constitution.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)
roguevalley
(40,656 posts)
-p
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Thank you! 
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)He has information we don't have
I trust him to do what's best
Shut up, you are hurting the president
etc
in this thread eg
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2193117
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)be it Barack Obama, or anyone else who has ever held the office, is NOT in a position to have knowledge that the rest of us don't have?
Are you really that naive - or that downright stupid?
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)allowed to criticize the President, the administration, & the government generally on the basis of the information we *do* have.
Hitler had information German citizens didn't have, so the fuck what.
(and no, for all the little trolly types, i'm not making an equivalence between obama & hitler; i'm pointing out how ridiculous the principle of "our leader knows things we don't know so we mustn't criticize!" is.)
“keep making your voices heard, to keep holding me accountable, to keep up the fight.”
- Barack Obama
Are you saying the president didn't mean it when he said that?
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)then calling them stupid.
Pres Obama is way better than the alternative. I personally worked hard to help him get reelected. I recognize that I wont get all that I want. I further recognize that he may not agree with what I want.
However, as a good citizen, as a good Democrat, I feel it is my responsibility to express my opinions and promote my beliefs. And I am disturbed with those that call themselves Democrats work so very hard to not only suppress contrary opinions but disparage those who might have them.
Blind worship is neither democratic nor Democratic.
A Simple Game
(9,214 posts)But when your Presidential candidate wins, you should expect at least a majority of what you like to be pursued and fought for. You shouldn't expect it to be "placed on the table" as a bargaining chip.
Cha
(318,713 posts)resort to silly sarcastic shite.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)I trust him because of what he has done, and not what people on message boards say he should have done, or speculate what he will do without any facts to back up their assertions.
I trust him because he is intelligent, has proven time and again his commitment to the citizenry, his recognition of veterans and the sacrifices made by them and their families. I trust him because he has stood up for gay/lesbian rights, and has finally put the country on the path to healthcare that covers the many, instead of the few.
I trust him because he continues to speak out against the obstructionist agenda of the GOP, and the Republicans' incapacity to put country before political party.
What I decidedly don't trust is keyboard warriors who KNOW how to govern a nation despite the fact that they have never held any elected office, no less the office of the presidency.
And you can always tell the know-nothing warriors by their posts - which usually sum up their knowledge of how government works with phrases like "he knows all, sees all, i trust him, bla bla."
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)who don't share your views about the value of trust in politicians.
trust away. i don't care.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...you minimize and downplay and criticize those who are not like you. Just look at your first post. You complain that others are shutting down the argument and fail to recognize the moat in your own eye.
look at your post #91, and at the likes of RhettORick #74. "Holding feet to the Fire" while not attempting to shut down the conversation, my ass.
sendero
(28,552 posts)... it's the "standing up" part in which he is lacking.
Another test comes soon with the debt ceiling. He holds ALL THE CARDS. He should do what he has been saying he was going to do ever since the fiscal cliff negotiations, he should draw the line and NOT BUDGE.
But any honest observer would admit he has a habit of flinching and I will not be surprised if he does it again, nor should anyone else be given his track record.
The Republicans are USED TO HIM FLINCHING making the whole thing a lot more dangerous than it should be.
If he holds firm on this one you can come back here and beat your chest over him finally standing up to the Republicans. I give it 50/50 at best.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)RC
(25,592 posts)I wish Obama would stop appointing Republicans. I also wish he would do more to bail out Main street and less to bail out the banks and Wall Street. It would also help if he would go after the shenanigans of the people running the banks and Wall Street that are keeping Main Street from any kind of a proper recovery. And another also, Why is he also NOT protecting Social Security and Medicare?
Puzzledtraveller
(5,937 posts)As there are many who in their eyes the president can do no wrong.
dorkulon
(5,116 posts)If only, my friend; if only.
raouldukelives
(5,178 posts)
dotymed
(5,610 posts)and we need the corporatism out of our government.
BrainMann1
(460 posts)Your over analyzing this. Why would someone post this, not as a reference to stop what you just started. Besides I like the movie pun.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)And if you mean that my post was too much for poster #1 to comprehend, then I agree. He only sees blind devotion and doesnt want to be confronted with specifics. He needs to go back to the "I worship the ground Pres Obama walks on to the exclusion of all else" group otherwise known as the Barack Obama Group. In there the only issue that is discussed is who loves Obama the most. "I do, no I do". And yes I caught the movie reference and thought it was maudlin.
Skittles
(171,464 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)spare me the search for perfection. I repeat to you also. He's better than the thief, actor and ex-cia chief we have had as a POTUS in the last 30 years. He, I dare say is more courageous than Clinton, the telecommunications act that helped the murdochs of the world finished him with me, but he had to do it. Just as this POTUS is going to have to make some compromises in his political life. You want perfection, never happen. 
Go Obama!
Logical
(22,457 posts)
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)the vote to hide was amusing. I was juror #0
================
At Tue Jan 15, 2013, 09:35 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Lol, and you are what is caled a 'blind supporter'
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2193142
REASON FOR ALERT:
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)
ALERTER'S COMMENTS:
personal attack. adds nothing to the conversation.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Jan 15, 2013, 09:42 AM, and the Jury voted 1-5 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: graham4anything is indeed a blind and passionate supporter. The truth is the ultimate defense. g4g needs to quit wasting our time with such alerts. RL
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: As a badge carrying grammar nazi; I vote to hide it...
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: I had this all set to hide, cuz I'm sick of the Obama bashers/whiners getting a pass on their shit, and Obama defenders getting their posts hidden. But started over cuz I knew that was wrong. Logic's comment DOESN'T add anything to the conversation but isn't hide worthy.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Tell you what, the quality of alerts is going down the tube. This is as benign a jab as ever appeared in DU. Whoever alerted on this should be gently reprimanded.
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
reflection
(6,287 posts)or even know that it was alerted in the first place? I am ignorant on the subject. I looked through Meta but didn't see this thread referenced.
ProgressiveProfessor
(22,144 posts)If the post is locked, the poster also gets the results.
There have been calls in Meta to make all results available in a new group.
These were being circulated due in no small part to the comment by the sole vote to lock...for grammatical reasons.
reflection
(6,287 posts)I always wondered how people run across that info. Appreciate you taking the time to respond.
Logical
(22,457 posts)pam4water
(2,916 posts)riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)Not that Logistical's post deserved jurying - just saying that the system is deeply flawed in general imho and experience.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)pam4water
(2,916 posts)grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)pam4water
(2,916 posts)JReed
(149 posts)I remember those days, sigh.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)
laundry_queen
(8,646 posts)pam4water
(2,916 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Even if he only agrees with 80% of your dream agenda, he's got your back.
What we need is a congress that won't do ANYTHING in their power to hold him back and make him fail.
Any of the older folk among us will tell you that NEVER has there been such an obstructionist congress.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)Never in my long lifetime have I seen such a horrible, do-nothing, obstructionist and destructionist Congress
RKP5637
(67,112 posts)savings to the nation.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)RKP5637
(67,112 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Hekate
(100,133 posts)... and here we are today. I can't say anything more damning that that.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)But then Newt came along 2 years later with his Contract on America and things started going downhill pretty quickly after that
Hekate
(100,133 posts)Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)so "Newt" is a very befitting name for him
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)We need to have his back now more than ever.
Politicub
(12,327 posts)He needs to know he has our support through the gop's obstructionism.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)“keep making your voices heard, to keep holding me accountable, to keep up the fight.”
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)Thank you, NYC_SKP!
Well said.
she
sad-cafe
(1,277 posts)I believe he honestly wants the best for America. He also has people only interested in trying to break him.
greatauntoftriplets
(178,925 posts)And I recall those obstructionist congresses that you mention. I am decrepit!
Cha
(318,713 posts)where's the fun in that.. when you can endlessly whine about President Obama.. "It's Obama's fault!"? How would the profiteering left make any rent money on anybody but Pres Obama?
"Even if he only agrees with 80% of your dream agenda, he's got your back."
bowens43
(16,064 posts)NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)What should he do?
Use the Bully Pulpit, then fail, just to prove to you he's good enough?
Maybe he should declare a dictatorship and just throw congress out altogether?
zipplewrath
(16,698 posts)And he said so himself. I am decidedly NOT on the sides of the torturers, and he is. He will defend them to the end of his presidency.
pam4water
(2,916 posts)
ellisonz
(27,776 posts) WillyT
(72,631 posts)Provide them with the information they are lawfully allowed to see...
Stop signature drone strikes.. or maybe ALL drone strikes... especially the one's that kill women, children, and wedding parties...
Call off the DEA on busting medical marijuana clubs, pardon the guy in L.A. that just got 10 years in prison...
State loudly and proudly, that ANY "fixes" of Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid will NOT result in any reduction of benefits, nor a rise/raise in the age of those who qulify...
Too name a few.
pscot
(21,044 posts)People are going to be dieing by tens of thousands and he sits there mute, like a bump on a log. A bit of leadership would be welcome, but I no longer expect it. He's a charming technocrat with no vision or imagination.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Stop Keystone...
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)Because terrorists don't kill women, children, and wedding parties?
Obama has shown no intention of actually agreeing to reductions in benefits of those programs or of raising the retirement age.
He would risk our chances of taking back Congress if he made any move on the War on Drugs.
It is what is.
Response to ellisonz (Reply #48)
Post removed
Response to Post removed (Reply #52)
Post removed
WillyT
(72,631 posts)But YOU...are is such lovely company.
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)BTW - in case you missed it. The people we by and large have used drones against murdered American civilians and soldiers in horrific acts.
Have you bothered to learn anything about the people we've targeted or are you just ranting?
The sitting Democratic President of the United States, 60% of American independents, and 58% of the Democratic Party.
http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/06/13/global-opinion-of-obama-slips-international-policies-faulted/
Americans overwhelmingly approve of this policy.
End of Conversation.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Apparently for you... it's worth that collateral damage to get one guy.
I... don't like the math.
Let alone the immorality.
dotymed
(5,610 posts)Most people that I know, did the same.
I don't overwhelmingly approve of the policies...quite the opposite.
End of conversation.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)will continue to kill innocents."
This is an honest question, and I think it's the crux of the problem some of us have with Obama:
Please tell me how you know the above. Also, I assume you would include Alawki's son (aged 16) in the group of "horrid people".
Thank you.
ellisonz
(27,776 posts)Yemeni officials said the dead from the strike included Ibrahim al-Banna, the Egyptian media chief for al-Qaeda’s Yemeni affiliate, and also a brother of Fahd al-Quso, a senior al-Qaeda operative who was indicted in New York in the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in the port of Aden.
The strike occurred near the town of Azzan, an Islamist stronghold. The Defense Ministry in Yemen described Banna as one of the “most dangerous operatives” in al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, often referred to by the acronym AQAP.
http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2011-10-17/world/35279713_1_anwar-al-awlaki-ibrahim-al-banna-aqap
...I suggest you take it up with the Ombudsman.
truth2power
(8,219 posts)that makes an even better case against the killing of al Awlaki's son.
As the 16 year old's grandfather said, "They want to justify his killing, that's all."
NorthCarolina
(11,197 posts)taking back Congress for at least a decade.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)ellisonz
(27,776 posts)
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)"If a mandate was the solution, we could try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody buy a house." - Obama.
Public option. Take it up.
The vast majority of Americans want one.
Obamacare was passed with the promise of it being fixed - Obamacare supporters knew the margins it would be passed when they made the promise it would be fixed after we passed it. But I guess they were joking in order to guarantee even more profits for big crapsurance.
RomneyLies
(3,333 posts)I'll continue to have his back this term
End of story.
bama_blue_dot
(224 posts)People were grumbling before he even had his first Inauguration.. They will never be satisfied..
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)Wrong.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)were criticizing him over and over and over. Good thing both ultra-Leftists and Libertarians are in the minority.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)we are pressing for are supported by a majority of americans - both Republican and Dem.
For example, most Americans support:
Ending the costly trade agreements
Ending the war in Afghanistan
A public option or medicare for all
Increasing taxes on the rich
These are not ultra left positions - these are centrist positions.
If we didn't push him, he would have introduced chained cpi - in fact he's still working on it, isn't he?
What is his plan for the next budget crisis - you cant tell me because he hasn't released it because he want to cut the social safety net in the next fake budget panic attack.
Now get back in there and start fight for the Democratic wing of the Democratic party!
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)have besmirched that once proud label to include Libertarians, and those blogs do nothing but work for clicks and dollars while undermining this president almost daily.
Three out of four on your list ain't bad.
He's ended the war in Afghanistan.
His admin is working on that public option since three months before the election and what will open in October 2013. Robert E. Moffit, a senior fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation, said he worried that “the nationwide health plans, operating under terms and conditions set by the federal government, will become the robust public option that liberals always wanted.”
He's increased taxes on the rich.
And he hasn't even begun his second term.
The Infamous Chained CPI:
Chained CPI would save social security that's scheduled to see 22% cuts in 2035. The Chained CPI would NOT cut social security, but merely slow the rate of growth of benefits by 0.3% - a heckuva lot less than 22%, don't you agree?
We get paid out MORE social security benefits than we put in.
For example, a single man who earns the average wage throughout his career ($43,100 in 2010 dollars), works every year from age 22 to 64, and then retires at age 65 in 2010. Over his lifetime he has paid $345,000 into the system. But he is likely to get back $72,000 more than that, or $417,000 in Social Security and Medicare payouts, according to recent Urban Institute calculations.
A single women with the same work and tax history will come out even further ahead due to her longer life expectancy, likely netting $464,000 in lifetime benefits, which is $192,000 more than she paid into the system. These amounts are in constant 2010 dollars and assume a 2 percent real interest rate.
Also, keep in mind that the president would only accept such a deal if seniors and other recipients closest to poverty can be protected from adverse effects, while boosting benefits for the most needy. As with each of the previous iterations of this proposal, it will likely come with a new special minimum benefit to ensure that for the first time ever, no senior on social security has to live in poverty. Actual liberal policy think tanks like the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities and the Center for American Progress have endorsed approaches exactly along these lines.
This is why I consider myself a Pragmatic Progressive, rather than a Liberal. I'm for progress and I'm pragmatic about it.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)1) War is not over yet! Those responsible for the boondoggle should be forced to pay (ie, rich war profiteers), BUT I'm willing to accept this snail like progress, but not the drone strikes, rendition, torture and the end of habeus corpus.
2) Those health plans are new to me - but who is underwriting them? If the OPM are just negotiating with Big Crapsurance, it's may actually be a step towards de-regulation (bad).
3) He actually cut taxes on the rich, compared to what would have happened had we simply let the Bush tax cuts expire (example - short term capital gains went from 40% to 20%), but.... whatever. We really need to return to the rates of Eisenhower. Those who pushed us into and profited from the wars should pay for the wars.
4) Chained CPI is a scam - all we need to do is raise the cap!
But, I'm glad you believe in him - gives me hope!
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)He certainly has John Yoo's back.
Terra Alta
(5,158 posts)Do I agree with every single thing he does? No. But I agree with him much more often than I would a President McCain or a President Romney.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)I'm not looking for 100% perfection by any president because that's not possible, but I understand the political realities. I'll disagree with a LOT of things he has to do, but I refuse to attack him on a daily basis while completely ignoring that he has a GOP House to contend with. Some people believe being the president is equal to being a dictator. I guess they didn't learn about politics until Duhbya.
I don't understand how some "DUers" here seem to believe that this president has to be the numbero uno ultra-Liberal president of all time, and if he so much as stumbles once, he's immediately labeled a Republican and excoriated.
Having someone's back doesn't mean you agree 100% with them. I'm sure the president could find fault in all of us, too. Nobody's perfect and I'm sick and tired of Liberal/Libertarians attacking him for every tiny thing. I'm pretty damn sure they didn't even vote for him even though they'll scream from the rooftops they had.
Politicub
(12,327 posts)In fact, out president is trying to protect all of America's back.
If you haven't noticed the GOP is attempting the outright destruction of our democracy.
Educate yourself about politics. We have three branches of government and one is being used to bring our economy to its knees.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)IOW - if he wanted to make sure that the economy doesn't nosedive, he has a few viable options.
IOW - He could go AROUND the House.
So either he has them "boxed in" and perfectly positioned for defeat... or the economy crashes.
I do NOT like being the ping pong ball.
Shove the 14th Amendment right up their right-wing asses Mr. President !!!
Politicub
(12,327 posts)I fully support and trust my president and believe he has the long view in mind. Even when I disagree with certain policies I feel fortunate that we have a thinking person in office.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Are we just keeping those programs intact for a future republican president?
Politicub
(12,327 posts)While I don't agree with those policies, I remain committed to president Obama.
I don't see the point in bashing the dems since they need all of the support they can get. As Humphrey said, don't allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good. And there is a tremendous amount of good in my party.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Now why would you do that? I disagree with Pres Obama's stand on the Patriot Act. THAT ISNT BASHING. So why would you use bashing? Maybe you think that might intimidate me into stifling my opinion because I sure wouldnt want to be accused of "bashing".
The fact that I dare to question specific policies doesnt mean that I dont support Pres Obama. In fact I believe my support is more genuine than that of people that blindly support everything he does or says.
Politicub
(12,327 posts)And do demonstrate to us plebes the right way to support the president.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)There comes a point where you have to trust the experts a little on these things. That doesn't mean give him a blank check but for you to imply that this is 'all he needs to do' is ridiculous.
I'm a computer programmer. I know that when a developer starts off telling a user, "All you have to do...", you're in trouble.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)& statecraft, just as there's no analogy between plumbing and statecraft.
+1000
Cha
(318,713 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)Very nice post.
pinto
(106,886 posts)That's the big picture.
(ed for grammar)
alarimer
(17,146 posts)But the cheerleaders will criticize you for this. To me, he's a giant disappointment. Illegal (and immoral) drone attacks on citizens, illegal indefinite detention, war on whistleblowers, etc, etc., kowtowing to corporate shitheads, appointing said corporate shitheads to departments like the Treasury, and so on.
Actually, let me rephrase. To say I am disappointed in him assumes I had any faith that he would be anything other than a corporate tool, or a warmonger, so, in that sense I am not disappointed. I am sick to here of our political parties. I'm not a registered anything at this point, because the Democrats are so woefully spineless in every possible way, with rare exceptions. So Obama is in that sense just another run-of-the-mill Democrat.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)I'm still registered as a Dem, though. I'm looking for a new FDR, but I'm settling for better primary choices.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)...I dropped out of DU for a bit more than three years. Maybe the few months prior to the election, DU had his back, but certainly not at this time four years ago.
If this is how we "have his back", I would say that he owes us nothing.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Just doing what he asked.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)He needs nudging, and I'm all for that. Your OP sounding a little different than that. However, I will not pretend to have some special insight into your motivations other than what you just said.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)Unless You Send A Copy Of Each Complaint To Him
His Feet Will Not Be Held To The Fire If You Don't
He Is Not Here
He Is Busy
Thank you Amonester
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)It clealy has NOTHING to do with holdng feet to the fire.
If so, cc's to WH.com (or whatever), would have been apparent.
Stirring, venom and discontent amongst portential voters....the more clear agenda here.
treestar
(82,383 posts)You get to hold his feet to the fire and he has to have your back! Are all your relationships this one-sided (though our relationship to the President is not one on one or personal, you talk as if it is) - the other person does all they can to please you and you simply criticize where they failed to? Good grief.
CakeGrrl
(10,611 posts)Funny how 'holding his feet to the fire' often amounts to no more than talking about him in a tone as if he's a servant who works for free..."He needs to do this", "He'd BETTER do that". I've seen someone say he needs to be 'bitch slapped' into doing the right thing about SS. Disgusting undertones.
patrice
(47,992 posts)EVERYTHING, rank ALL issues as life-or-death, international treaties equal with the legalization of cannabis equal with conspiracy theories about how PO wants to do evil to us personally for the sake of corporations, insult everyone, including the person whom you want to advocate for you, and do not much else and then people hop to give you what you want? Where is that world?
That's not politics.
It's a recipe for FAILURE at their own hands on their own issues and I just can't help but think that, with the rather strong drive towards Social Darwinism coming from various quarters lately, that failure IS the point.
This board is so depressing. We, that's WE, us, the people, the kickers and screamers, are getting ready to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory on our own issues by our very own volition. We really could get closer this time, but watch this crowd throw it all away and then congratulate themselves with demagoguery and "See, I told you so"s.
It's making me very sad.
I need to stay away from here for a while.
Cha
(318,713 posts)And, yes, those who are soooo "disappointed" can call me a "cheerleader" for our President. I want him to succeed. Instead of tearing him down every damn chance they get and not giving him credit for ANYTHING.
sad-cafe
(1,277 posts)I truly think he has America's best interest at heart, he just has an obstructionist opposition party with their own agenda.
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)[url=http://postimage.org/image/9gqp3t819/][img]
[/img][/url]
Two, Four, Six, Eight who do we appreciate....Obama, Obama. Hooray!
Thanks Cha
You can be the head Cheerleader, however I want to play second!
she 
I'm voting for you, she, to be head CHEERLEADER! 
You've got the gift!
Two Four Six Eight.. Who Do We Appreciate?! President Obama! 
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)see the posts below yours...now I am considered corrupt for supporting PBO.
Sigh, really want to just cheerlead!
[url=http://postimage.org/image/i0a31kgdp/][img]
[/img][/url]
she
Cha
(318,713 posts)they're projecting 
Oh yeah, we're here to do battle with sociopathic republicons and anyone who doesn't deal in reality.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Having the backs of politicians smacks of corruption rather than democracy.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)Are you serious?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)a corrupt democracy supports a leader, regardless of his actions, as opposed to its people and the principles it was founded on.
Obama has disregarded too many of our principles for me. Is he better than the alternative? Sure. I'm just looking for a better battle cry than "Guaranteed Not As Bad As Bat-Shit Crazy!"
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)There are three branches of government. You expect him to fulfill all of your hopes and dreams on his own? When the hate and opposition is overwhelming! Are you Serious!
You voted for him? If so, you expect him to do this alone? You vote then you just sit back and criticize the man.
What exactly has he done to compromise your principles. Please enlighten me.
http://www.randirhodes.com/pages/rrnews.html?feed=393046&article=9880240
By Paul Glastris, Ryan Cooper, and Siyu Hu - Washington Monthly
1. Passed Health Care Reform: After five presidents over a century failed to create universal health insurance, signed the Affordable Care Act (2010). It will cover 32 million uninsured Americans beginning in 2014 and mandates a suite of experimental measures to cut health care cost growth, the number one cause of America’s long-term fiscal problems.
4. Ended the War in Iraq: Ordered all U.S. military forces out of the country. Last troops left on December 18, 2011.
7. Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry: In 2009, injected $62 billion in federal money (on top of $13.4 billion in loans from the Bush administration) into ailing GM and Chrysler in return for equity stakes and agreements for massive restructuring. Since bottoming out in 2009, the auto industry has added more than 100,000 jobs. In 2011, the Big Three automakers all gained market share for the first time in two decades. The government expects to lose $16 billion of its investment, less if the price of the GM stock it still owns increases.
9. Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”: Ended 1990s-era restriction and formalized new policy allowing gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military for the first time.
Check out the full list of 50 HERE.
Read more: http://www.randirhodes.com/pages/rrnews.html?feed=393046&article=9880240#ixzz2I0zzU5y2
Do not Ever intimate that I am Corrupt for Supporting this President. Not Ever!
Cha
(318,713 posts)to show how big bad and serious they are. 
It says nothing about supporters of the President and everything about them.
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)[url=http://postimage.org/image/hiwulb3e5/][img]
[/img][/url]
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)That is just so hilarious! What a peach!
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)You certainly assume a lot on very little evidence.
But, to answer some of your questions: Yes, I voted for him, twice. Also contributed, canvassed, cold-called, GOTV and was a poll-watcher.
Am I aware we have 3 branches of government and the President can't do everything alone? Sure. I also know he has made a habit of bargaining with himself, to the detriment of the country. It's something I thought he would leave behind by now but he hasn't. And, since he keeps offering it up, it appears the Grand Bargainer in Chief is willing to cut the safety net as a sacrifice to the Deficit Idol. Sorry, that idea is tremendously, outrageously stupid and I don't support it.
Also, although he has accomplished some, even many, good things, his record on civil liberties, Wall Street, and the priorities of DoJ is abysmal. Still, Guaranteed Not As Bat-Shit Crazy As The Other Guys!
If you are looking for an apology, why don't you ask the person who is actually doing things that will hurt you, and all of us?
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)You have one hell of a Nerve to call me corrupt ..in my support of this President!
Back at you...
....and you know nothing of me!
You are one lucky person to have been invited to the Whitehouse for all these negotiations. You know all this info first hand. Absolutely Amazing. Wish I could have had all that info up front. I had no idea, that it was a done deal to demolish the safety net!
Please fill us in on the details...the President sure has been remiss in filling us in....so please, you were there...let us know!
Response to sheshe2 (Reply #159)
HangOnKids This message was self-deleted by its author.
Cha
(318,713 posts)
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Welcome to ignore.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)interesting.
Cha
(318,713 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Are citizens just to meekly accept whatever he does? Do we work for, and take orders, from him?
forestpath
(3,102 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)Blind obedience is never a good thing.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)blind supporters of Kim Jong Il?
Pretty insulting.
UnrepentantLiberal
(11,700 posts)I was merely saying that blind obedience is not a good thing. All leaders should be questioned.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)and you come up with these pics as a response?
of course, your insult is clear..
pam4water
(2,916 posts)
okaawhatever
(9,565 posts)voters. What do you think the fiscal cliff negotiations are? The last time the fiscal cliff fight happened our credit was downgraded and it ended up costing us more. Do you really think they're doing this to reduce the deficit? And if so, wouldn't they change tactics after it added to the defecit last time? They announced their plan the first go round. Obstruct EVERYTHING he does. When they learn that they will not turn ANY of us, during these crisis' they construct, they will stop trying. Obama is taking a stand on this issue, much more so than in the past If we completely support him it will be easier for him to get policies passed in the future. He likely has a SC Justice to appoint, the Immigration Dream Act to get through congress, and others. Forward!
For a song how about, "I'll stand by you" The Pretenders
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)...over some trumped up nonsense before long.
There may yet be an opportunity for you to be rid of him.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)You're into that Royalty thingy, no ???
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)But don't forget, we voted for someone who said he represents ALL Americans, not just those who vote for him. His job is not to "pay" those who voted for him. His job is to run the country and exercise his thoughtful judgment as best he can, following the Democratic Party platform as a goal.
His job is not to do as any one group of people tell him to do, if he thinks another way is better for the country and for all.
So w/o knowing what you're referring to, it's hard to give an opinion on what you're upset about.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)You've been here long enough... and you know what the complaints are.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)to know what the complaints are - or to know how ridiculous many of those complaints have been, and will no doubt continue to be.
Such complaints are not rendered valid just because they're posted on DU - or FR, or ConservativeCave - or anywhere else.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)isn't obvious in its motive and intent?
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Silly me.
Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office#United_States
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)always whining about Obama, instead of just coming out and saying: "I don't like this guy. He wasn't my choice for POTUS, and I will not get over it, now or ever."
If you'd just say that, openly and honestly, you wouldn't have to spend your days looking for things to back-up your reasoning when it comes to whining.
The minute you post about how Obama never had your back - despite all evidence to the contrary - you give yourself away.
Be up front, WillyT - be honest! You can't stand the fact that Barack Hussein Obama is president.
I wish you and your like-minded buddies would just come out and state the obvious - and obvious it is.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Election Night At The Win: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021742021
EarlG Posting Such Joy: http://www.democraticunderground.com/electionnight2012/#bottom
I just don't do the worship thing.
THEY WORK FOR US !!!
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)"they work for us" is meant to imply that elected representatives, including the POTUS, work for us.
That's true. And what is also true is that "us" includes Democrats, Republicans, Independents, Greens, etc. It also includes those who voted for those presently in office, along with those who didn't vote for them, but are part of the constituency they represent nonetheless.
But before you change the subject yet again, let's get back to your OP, shall we?
Did you really believe that posting "Yeah, baby!" with a bunch of emoticons jumping up and down on election night is some kind of proof that you support him? Especially when you are now posting an OP about how he never had your back, or anyone else's?
If so, you are even more delusional than I initially surmised.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)you have no explanation for your OP or other postings, other than that you can't stand the fact that Obama is president. The fact that you pretend otherwise is always amusing.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
Response to WillyT (Reply #103)
Post removed
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)in fact, the fact free methods you employ are not amusing at all. They are pretty transparent.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)not you, not me, not Republicans.
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)Thanks, Summer!
sheshe
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)and you know I question their reason(s) for not wanting a black man as POTUS.
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)floating around out there in the atmosphere. Some real, some planted, some by people still pissed off that Dennis....what's the name of that little fella politician that lost his election? ....anyway, still pissed off that he didn't win the presidency (or anything else).
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)I'm happy with Obama's performance so far. Reminder: His new term hasn't begun yet.
Summer Hathaway
(2,770 posts)and will no doubt continue to do so in his second term.
Maybe some people (not naming names, mind you) are just too busy whining about what he hasn't done to recognize all that he has accomplished. And many of them started whining on day one of his first term - and are already whining about the second term, which hasn't even started yet.
Of course, as we often hear from the whiners, "It's not the man himself. I just don't agree with his policies" - and said 'policies' they disagree with often include things he hasn't said, things he hasn't proposed, things he hasn't even remotely hinted that he will do, or ever plans to do.
It's all fair game here on this "Democratic" website - get your whining in early and avoid the Inaugural Day rush! No complaint, regardless of how trivial, turned away! No whinging, no matter how speculative and devoid of fact, refused! No source cited, despite its shady origins, dismissed as the RW rhetoric it obviously is!
Get.A.Clue.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)NEVER!!
And you can take that to the bank! 
forestpath
(3,102 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Talk about the "middle class" is so distant. We distance ourselves from the reality with that polite economic term.
We are really talking about American families, our families.
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)And the 30 million people who will be getting health care this year and next year that otherwise would get nothing.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)Just like how FDR marched with the Flint sit down strikers in 1937.
But I'm sure you'll just find something else to bitch about no matter what anyone says.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Link: http://my.firedoglake.com/mmonk/tag/labor/
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)I'm totally shocked there was no response to that quote.
Drunken Irishman
(34,857 posts)What a ridiculous point. I think this post sums up why you're too irrational to even care about. You have a comeback for everything. Obama ended the Iraq War (but you'll come back and say we're still in Afghanistan). Obama came out in support of gay marriage (but you'll come back and say he's not fought enough to legalize marijuana). Obama signed the Lilly Ledbetter Act (but you'll say Obama hasn't done enough on poverty with women). Obama ended DADT (but you'll say he's in the back pocket of the military industrial complex). Obama's healthcare plan opens the door for women to finally get the healthcare and coverage they really need (but you'll come back with how it wasn't progressive enough). Obama saved the auto industry (but won't walk with unions). Obama killed bin Laden (but is a war criminal). Obama passed the most expansive immigration act in the past 30 years (but he didn't get amnesty). Obama saved the economy from a great depression (but unemployment is still high). Obama managed to get the Republicans to raise taxes (but he didn't raise 'em high enough). Obama became the first president to appoint two women to the Supreme Court (but he's a corporatist).
You seein' a trend here, Willy? Basically, everything Obama has done is irrelevant in your eyes because it's not enough. People list the multiple times he's stood up for us, had our backs, and you move the goalposts. Let's be honest, Willy, in your reality, Obama could never, ever have your back because his accomplishments would have to be endless to satisfy you.
That's sad. But outside maybe voting for him, I don't recall you ever having Pres. Obama's back. This post right here proves it - you'll shoot back with snark on every accomplishment listed because it's never good enough for you. Obama could turn water into wine and you'd demand for him to also provide a feast.
sheshe2
(97,337 posts)Thank You,Irishman!
That was Beautifully Stated
she
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)He has enuf on his plate to run the country.
He made his positions known. That's all he should be doing when it's state government that's involved.
Can you imagine how effective he'd be, if he started traveling from state to state, getting involved in and taking positions in individual state government issues? That's so silly that it shows you just don't understand the different jobs that different politicians have.
There is a long list of accomplishments of this President. There are things that individuals such as yourself aren't happy about (you are keeping them a secret, except you mentioned the Constitution, which I am guessing is about the 2nd Amendment)...there are always things to be unhappy about. If you look for them.
No one is perfect. Clinton pushed NAFTA, one of the most damaging treaties ever passed by our govt. But I'm guessing you applauded his speech at the Dem Nat'l Convention.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)
Mimosa
(9,131 posts)Back in the 1980s I remember 'paid vacations' and company health care. In the 1990s it went away.
Now we know it doesn't exist. It won't come back . I'm glad i won't be alive 320 years from now.
patrice
(47,992 posts)principle since 2008.
Yes, the ante has been increasing, but to an adult that doesn't mean that we are just observers.
liberalmuse
(18,881 posts)Except going on the internets and being hypercritical, if that can even count for anything at all. Don't get me wrong - we should be aware and stand up for what we believe, but we also need to get out there and get involved in the non-cyber world and help this man because it's too easy to criticize him from the comfort of your computer room.
Then again, maybe if you rub his belly, he will give you 3 wishes...
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)... with their jobs, their families, etc. Calling the entire nation lazy isn't productive.
NashvilleLefty
(811 posts)to win an Election. OUR work just begins.
It is up to WE, THE PEOPLE to make sure that our President has OUR support.
That is part of our Constitutional government - we are not choosing a Dictator. This is a government of THE PEOPLE, and if there are problems, we have no one else to blame but ourselves.
which means WE have a lot of work to do.....
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)The president serves the people, not the other way around. To support the man rather than his policies is backwards.
Should we work to make it easier for him to enact the policies we like? Of course. Does the public have a responsibility to do so? Of course. Should we criticize him when we disagree with him? There is nothing more important.
President Obama is light years better than President George W. Bush. But we have a duty to speak out when he doesn't meet our expectations. Whether it's continuing and enhancing the national security state, extending tax cuts for the very wealthy (and $400,000 is very wealthy), negotiating away the public option in the ACA behind closed doors and denying it, or failing to lead on civil rights, these are legitimate and important issues, and we are right to demand that he do better on them.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)Exactly !!!
patrice
(47,992 posts)insulting.
Even though you may not be able to imagine the rational processes that go into people's decisions about what they support and what they don't support, that does not mean that reason has nothing to do with what people have decided.
I will not insult your reasons for what you think about PO if you will refrain from insulting mine.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)... if I made that assumption. But I didn't make such a sweeping generalization. Where did I assume that anyone who supports President Obama is engaging in a cult of personality?
It's perfectly reasonable to support the man, if by support you mean that you think he generally tries to do the right thing and shares your beliefs and priorities. But idealizing him, or any person, beyond that is dangerous territory, I think. I'm afraid some people have decided they will support virtually any policy that President Obama enacts or will bend over backwards to justify any apparent compromise he might make. That's where I get frustrated.
To me, if we think a policy is bad, we shouldn't accept it because of who supports it. There are times when the fact that Obama supports something might make us reconsider, since he's an intelligent person. After all, I let Paul Krugman greatly influence my opinions on economics issues. But certain things we shouldn't compromise. Instead, we now accept increased government surveillance that we criticized under Bush. When Obama backtracked on the Bush tax cuts in 2010 and 2012, we argue that what he got was the best he could do, or even called it a victory. When he was slow on gay rights we say he's still better than all the others, even though times have changed, and counsel people to wait until after the election. Those who argue that he and the Democrats could be doing more are derided as concern trolls or wishing for the impossible.
treestar
(82,383 posts)Who is that, exactly? The President serves "the people" not just some of them.
In fact the President acknowledges his constant critics and never has acted as if he did not support them. Unlike Republicans, who ignore us or tell us too bad, we lost.
Autumn
(48,947 posts)NOTHING to do with the deficit.
Cha
(318,713 posts)when they don't know what the fuck they're talking about.
BlueCheese
(2,522 posts)Did I accuse you in particular of being in one? I don't think I did. So why the aggressive response, complete with profane language?
humbled_opinion
(4,423 posts)MrSlayer
(22,143 posts)We aren't the owners of the country and we aren't his boss.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)
truedelphi
(32,324 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)without leaving out some of your fellow citizens?
We were pissed when Bush acted like WE didn't count.
Amonester
(11,541 posts)a liar, a profiteer, a lazy alcoholic, a stupid wrongdoer, and more...
President Barack Hussein Obama is none of the above, and you (and me) know it.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)being President means that millions of people will worship you no matter how much you betray them.
politics is very strange. and sad.
Silly of me to think that people were rational and could be persuaded by facts. I shoulda known better.
hopemountain
(3,919 posts)he has a much bigger picture and a greater responsibility than to much more than any of us will ever have.
it is impossible to do everything and meet every one of your high and mighty expectations in 4 years. But, ultimately, he DOES have the backs of elderly, the poor, the disabled, our vets, and the middle class.
his list of priorities does not match mine - but i trust him to do the right thing - which he has - one thing at a time despite all the shit that has impeded his way. he has my back and i have his.
i trust what i do not know about a lot of things - and it is hard to trust blindly on every facet of what it takes to run this country as justly and fairly as possible. but i do trust this president. more than i would every trust a negative nelly and persons who find every opportunity to scream about not getting everything arranged perfectly on their plates. life just isn't like that.
Marr
(20,317 posts)I used to think this was a right-wing thing, but we certainly have our own contingent of celebrity worshipers and sycophants who will defend the Leader, no matter what, without question.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)dorkulon
(5,116 posts)It's incredibly narcissistic. Nobody on earth gives a fuck what gets said here except us and some assholes from Freerepulic.com.
Why anyone would ever pay anyone to do anything here is utterly beyond me.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)1) Post one diary every quarter
2) Never tip
3) Never completely disagree - just throw the comment thread off track
4) Post at the top of the diary
5) Never recommend (only gives issue more visibility)
6) Work in shifts so are ready 24 hours a day - 7 days a week
7) When comments get troll rated - dump ID and move to new ID
8) Use multiple IDs' and computers so can post under as many as 8 names in a single diary
9) Have an alert system to have other post on diaries that are "dangerous" to their employers (most likely a Koch brother front group/health insurance co employee)
10) Mostly make hard to read cutting edge stories in their infancy - mainstream popular diaries get too many views for paid trolls to have much of an impact
11) Discourage new diary posters
12) Turn off readers with a hostile tone, vicious, or condescending attack
13)Call your statistics arbitrary, ask you to check your figures, doubt your analysis or facts,
14) Tell readers your story lacks facts, that your story lacks depth, that your story lacks research, that your links prove nothing, that your conclusions are wrong etc (of course a troll will never offer a shred of "evidence" to back up a single of their assertions)
15) Write using a dismissive, surly tone
16) Dismiss diary writer or comment posters as not quite right
17) Have a tag line about anything but what dKos is about - but not actually opposing what dKos is about
18) No personal identities on their page
19) Never offer any constructive ideas
20) Complain that someone is not following the dKos "rules"
Conclusion: sadly: paid trolls work
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/21/978170/-20-Habits-of-Paid-Trolls#
dorkulon
(5,116 posts)Accuse those who disagree of being paid trolls.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)treestar
(82,383 posts)ANY politician? That's what it sounds like.
So if Bernie Sanders were elected President, and had to "cave" to a Democratic Congress, you would hold his feet to the fire, right, and never ever have his back?
Marr
(20,317 posts)And I'm amazed that you can't see it.
There are politicians whose work I appreciate and support-- but I do not have loyalty to them as individuals.
treestar
(82,383 posts)And how do you hold their feet to the fire?
No one said they have loyalty to the President as an individual - they said they support him and don't believe that criticism alone will cause him to "have our back."
Oh and by the way the OP demands that he "have our back." So he should have loyalty to us as individuals (laughably impossible) but it is somehow wrong to support him as an individual? Laughable.
Marr
(20,317 posts)Look at this thread and tell me these aren't expressions of loyalty to an individual. Are you actually going to try to say that, "he had me at hello" is something other than hero worship? Really?
As for your last point, the OP was obviously referring to the principles the party claims to stand for, not that Barrack Obama should come over and help you move your refrigerator.
Hekate
(100,133 posts)Bernie Sanders wouldn't have any unicorns to give away either.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)"So if Bernie Sanders were elected President, and had to "cave" to a Democratic Congress, you would hold his feet to the fire, right, and never ever have his back?" You are making the assumption that "having his back" and "holding his feet to the fire" are mutually exclusive. They are not. Holding your Congressional representative's feet to the fire (asking them to honor their promises) is your obligation as a participating citizen. It would be nice after working to "support" a candidate and getting them elected one could relax and sit back and watch American Idol. But that isnt practical. As I see it, we choose a candidate that supports our values and then, once elected WE HELP THEM REMEMBER THAT THEY SUPPORT OUR VALUES.
As far as "having his back", I would say that I would have Pres Obama's back if he took the risk to strengthen SS by raising the cap. He would get a lot of resistance but I would "have his back". But I am guessing that your definition of "having his back" would mean that should he cut SS, you would support the decision irregardless of the reason. If I am wrong about that, please clarify.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)No Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Rahm Emanuel or Eric Holder.
Sanders would undoubtedly have chosen more progressives, and since the Senate was more Democratic in 2009, there would have been fewer problems in confirming folks to the left of Geithner and Holder.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Sen Sanders also wouldnt have appointed the following conservatives, Lawrence Summers, Ben Bernanke, William M. Daley, Jeff Immelt, Alan Simpson, Dave Cote, Jeb Bush, Robert Gates, Gen Stanley McChrystal, Jacob Lew, Jeremiah Norton, Gen Petraeus, John Brennen, Chuck Hegal, Michael Taylor.
amandabeech
(9,893 posts)I can't imagine what the situation would have been like with the second and third tier appointments.
I'm an FDR Dem, and I thought that both Hilary and Obama would have been disastrous in the event of an economic meltdown. I wish that I wasn't right about Obama.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)It's too bad you don't see it.
DonCoquixote
(13,954 posts)Part of me does not want a leader that will trash people they way the GOP trashed us. However, this is the second term, and frankly, iot is time for the LOSERS to eat their peas, and I do not mean the left. Part of me hated that idea that we could not come together as a nation, but 2010 ruined that, so frankly, if it become a gloried civil war every four years where the Union has to beat the Confederacy into submission again and again and again till we Latinos breed the Dixie Dumbasses into minority status, so be it. Some people are cheering at that, I weep.
samsingh
(18,402 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts) Number23
(24,544 posts)But I'm sure that's the intent. I cannot be the only one sick of this utterly boring, COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE foolishness where the politically impotent get whipped up into lathers after having somehow managed to convince themselves that they -- and only they -- have all of the answers. The "if you ain't whining and going out of your way to criticize President Obama's supporters, you're not paying attention" crowd.
Props to Summer Hathaway for breaking through the (not even remotely subtle) BS and laying bare what was already plain to everyone.
Cha
(318,713 posts)the OP got his big shit stirring thread.. bringing out all the haters and those who HAVE THE PRESIDENT'S BACK.
Number23
(24,544 posts)Despite the numerous protestations of those who act as though the majority of us here who support the president are the ones with the problem.
I would wager that it's the ones who have pretended to have his back while taking EVERY opportunity to shit on the man (as Summer so devastatingly pointed out upthread) that are the ones really worthy of our disdain and contempt. Not the president's supporters that represent every hue, shade, economic bracket etc. -- you know the folks "liberals" always scream that they are supposed to care about.
The "we -- and only we -- possess all wisdom and knowledge which is why everyone ignores the hell out of us and we have to scream so loud" crowd. Damn, I'm sick of the whining.
Number23
(24,544 posts)president and/or his supporters, got a post hidden and won't be able to continue to wallow in the muck that he's created.
Too bad this thread can't be locked and thrown in the DU garbage bin where it belongs now.
Cha
(318,713 posts)by it.
JReed
(149 posts)politics was about the people, about the greater good. Silly me it seems that icons trump social and economic justice.
Maybe the bottom line is whether or not we all seek the same depth of changes in our society. There is no doubt in my mind that the number one beneficiary of all political decisions, be they foreign policy or domestic, are large industries/the extremely wealthy - that is, the general protection of the status quo, and the continuation of a capital-before-people mentality, the right of the US to impose its will on nations for the benefit of its corporations. If anyone has any evidence contrary to that please prove it.
The years slip by. Conditions grow worse and worse, The danger grows and grows. The ruling class gets stronger and stronger. Polite "can't we all get along children and play nice?" is bringing no positive returns and there is nothing to lose by speaking the truth as harshly as needs be to get the message across.
Don't wait around for any politician to have your back, they don't.
Comrade_McKenzie
(2,526 posts)Lydia Leftcoast
(48,223 posts)He no longer has to avoid scaring "moderate" voters, and he no longer needs the big money donations.
He no longer needs to indulge in his bad habit of premature, preemptive compromising.
Mimosa
(9,131 posts)Sorry. That was Version 2008.
quinnox
(20,600 posts)like protection of the environment, making the rich pay their fair share, (the recent deal that raised taxes on 400,000 + is a start, but doesn't go near far enough) cutting the insane defense spending and put the billions saved towards social programs, stop the billions being spent on insanity like Afghanistan, etc etc.
I'm hoping Obama's second term is a lot better than his first, which was disappointing and mediocre. Failing that, hopefully he won't give in too much to the republicans and give away the farm in the second term. I am hoping the democrats nominate a fire breathing liberal next time in 2016, for once it would be nice to see a real liberal who is PROUD of endorsing and talking about liberal policies.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)True dat.
BEFORE the election it was ALL about the "progressive muscle"
Obama was just itching to unleash on the nation, once re-elected to
a second term, about how once re-elected he'd supposedly be free
to let his progressive freak flag fly a bit more.
Hell, Obama won't even tell my US Senator (Wyden-OR) what
qualifies a US citizen to get put onto the CIA Drone / Special Ops
"kill list" to be summarily executed without arrest, trial, due process,
and as near as anyone can tell, no opportunity to even surrender and
stand trial. ...and it's all secret: this power is from the pit of Hell.
Democrats need to unite in support of Obama to stand up to the
powerful interests that have apparently captured him, and are holding
hostage in the WH.
And now he's appointing BRENNAN to head up the CIA? This is NOT
what I signed up for in supporting Obama's re-election; rather it is
what I thought I was voting against: oppressive Constitutionally
questionable abuse of authority against our own citizens, following
secret guidelines unknown to the public, to kill members of that
same public, more or less at-will.
What's the difference between this kind of "security state policy", and
how the The Mob operates?
Kingwithnothrone
(51 posts)Apparently not accepting mediocrity and conformity are political impotency."You need to learn your place,"haters and whiners",if you know what's good for you".Lurkers watch that crap, and never sign up or post because they can smell the stench of that game a mile away.Most people want nothing to do with it.A small group of people set out to throw the chum in the water and try to provoke the "unwanted",in the hope that they will lose it and provide an excuse for banning anyone who speaks out against the Presidents policies(tell me that isn't happening on the multiple Barack Obama is the greatest ever threads)Nothing said in this thread is plain to "everyone" but the real haters who want to destroy anyone who interupts their Barack Obama is a God fantasy.This is not Barack Obama Underground as far as i can tell.I see nothing in the tos that demands lock-step obedience to the President's policies now or in the future.
People want to pick a side and win elections like it's a fantasy football contest because there is no risk in that and it keeps their political comfort zone intact.Fine,but they shouldn't expect lock-step obedience to their political views or opinions.They are doing exactly what the political and corporate elites want them to do.They shouldn't expect everyone to follow that sad path.Stirring up mobs of attack dogs to echo lock-step talking points,is a sure sign that something was said that struck a few chords of truth,however foul to the delicate ears of those who accept the status quo as a given in the name of hope and change.You're never gonna get rid of all the "crazy leftists",because they are the only ones making sense to a lot of people including those without a voice at the table(whatever fucking table that is).It's not personal,why do people insist on making it so.So much do some people identify with the politician as hero that they actually take the criticisms of the President as wounds to themselves.
In years gone by when I lurked here,DU was once a place where some serious discussions about social conditions in this country took place.Some of the most prolific posters(including real leftists and social democrats) who could carry a thread for multiple days were either banned or left through the years because of these lock-step attitudes from a small group who are still playing the same game now as they always have.Now everything to the left of Barack Obama or mainstream Democrats is considered childlike,utopian,fantasy and loony,stupidity and ignorance.I also fail to see how this OP pollutes this website.The insults in this thread towards anyone who disagrees with the President's policies is pathetic.
Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)sendero
(28,552 posts).... said. I'm not interested in being a bushBot of the left. When that becomes a requirement for being here I will not be.
I do not dislike Obama, I think he is a good person in a difficult position. His speeches and press conferences are almost always spot on - he says almost exactly what I believe.
But what he does is somewhat different than what he says IMHO. Just like Bush would come out and spew a bunch of crap then go back to the White House and do more or less the opposite, Obama spews a bunch of dreams and then goes back and serves up chopped liver acting like it is the best he can do.
If all the Democratic party can do is slow the decline a bit, what is the point? That is all Obama has done IMHO.
JTFrog
(14,274 posts)Perfect description of the OP.
BlueCaliDem
(15,438 posts)didn't come out to vote in 2010 resulting in a nationwide SWEEP by the GOP and gerrymandered U.S. House.
JAbuchan08
(3,046 posts)It's their own damn fault.
scheming daemons
(25,487 posts)From a Manny wannabe.
He's had your malcontented back all along.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Demo_Chris
(6,234 posts)bowens43
(16,064 posts)Having his back makes no sense when is back is to us and he's moving to the right.....(not that he is on every issue)
great white snark
(2,646 posts)I'm sure there are other, more appropriate ways to boost your self esteem.
Bobbie Jo
(14,344 posts)Talk about a cheerleading fan club.
Number23
(24,544 posts)First Black President, Nobel Peace Prize winner, beloved and respected figure around the world vs. perpetually malcontent poster on relatively obscure web site whose posts have more typos than ideas.
If I had to choose between which one of those two to "cheer" for, wouldn't be any damn choice at all.
lunatica
(53,410 posts)And I expect we do.
He isn't just President of DU you know. He's President of the United States. The only President who did nothing more than what his party wanted was George W Bush with his rubberstamp Congress. That didn't go so well for the country. This President is having to fix that disaster since day one. Second term or not he's still having to fix it, with the real handicap of the GOP still being the rubberstamp Congress, only this time it's for the teabagger branch of their party.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)JTFrog
(14,274 posts)
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)But I sure do.
I'm worried about his life, his families' lives, and anybody connected with, particularly, the guns issue. Also the debt ceiling, medicare, medicaid, social security, Afghanistan, and how few (2 or 3?) Republicans will support hm in preserving the things we all want and need.
I'm trying to stay away from doctors to help keep Medicare more solvant. I am trying to watch "his" back and he cares about me and us, I'm sure, but his plate is loaded. The same is true of VP Biden and his family.
There are so many crazy people out there.
Watch your own back for a while. That would help all of us get thru this.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)...same fucking tune, different day.
HangOnKids
(4,291 posts)
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Cha
(318,713 posts)plethoro
(594 posts)dddddd
another_liberal
(8,821 posts)However, he has, "had our back," all along. At least he has done a better job of it than either McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan ever even intended to do.
"Learn all you can about the candidates, and then vote for the one who is likely to cause you the least harm."
Zorra
(27,670 posts)
~ 
To the DU stake with you, WillyT!
bush was a king with darth as his evil, malevolent jester. We finally do have a president after 20 years of rethuglican disaster administrations. 8 rethug administration years because of theft and corruption in the highest circles of our democracy. Yeah to the stake with him. period.
judesedit
(4,589 posts)Obama to have to go against their desire NOT to pay the bills they ran up, so they can try to impeach him after that. You better believe he still needs your support. If you're not aware of all of the bills he's gotten past these losers. Go to PCTC* Blog for 211 of Obama's accomplishments. That's just one place you can find the list. Click on the link "Updated & expanded 211 accomplishments..." There are also alot of other topics you may be interested in.
Dawgs
(14,755 posts)How about the Republican he put up for Secretary of State? Did they make him do that?
Lydia Leftcoast
(48,223 posts)To me, that says it all.
heaven05
(18,124 posts)Last edited Tue Jan 15, 2013, 10:36 PM - Edit history (3)
intent is obvious. After Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush jr. and the Darth Cheney cabal et al:, Obama is truly someone who is trying to do good things for citizens of this country. See 50 things he has done further down in op's comments. You and your Obama bashing type are one of the reasons that a new years resolution of mine was to NOT allow you bashers, quislings and unrealistically immature people to raise my blood pressure. Think what you want. Spew vitriol. Whine, have a tantrum and pound your fist into the floor if it makes you feel better. He's a good POTUS who has made some missteps, I think, but has learned and is playing the game well now. Not perfectly as you would as POTUS, I'm sure but playing well. Considering that the rethugs and tea partiers have been the major obstruction to his administration of our country, go tell it, shout it out on a mountain. All you quislings shout your disappointment to the high heavens all you want. He's my choice and I've got his back on this forum against all the whiners and quislings and out in society as well. Go Obama! Go! 
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)your problem is? I don't know. Do you?
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)heaven05
(18,124 posts)will never be a good enough POTUS to satisfy the quislings and naysayers on this site. I repeat, he is better than any rethug thief, actor or ex-cia chief we've had in the last 30 years and I dare say Clinton also. Have fun in life searching for perfection. Sisyphus, ever heard of him. Somewhat the task you have ahead of you. But, you're entitled.
grahamhgreen
(15,741 posts)
pam4water
(2,916 posts)
warrprayer
(4,734 posts)anyone who thinks there is anything any one in the 99% can do to "hold Obamas feet to the fire" is living in a pleasant delusion. The only thing that has pulled our elected sycophants off their square was the Occupy movement, and we saw how the full weight of the security state came down on it. Enjoy your Soma....
kstewart33
(6,552 posts)
PennsylvaniaMatt
(966 posts)He had our back when he got a stimulus package through Congress as the United States was sliding into a second Great Depression, saving or creating millions of jobs.
He had our back when he bailed out the auto industry - saving a million auto jobs.
He had our back when he fought for and achieved something that Democratic presidents have dreamed of - health care reform.
He had our back in his first term, and he will have our back in his second term.
John2
(2,730 posts)this President to accomplish some things and we need to keep involved instead of not backing him. Once the Election was over, President Obama has a lot if people in his ear telling him not to carry out the things we elected him for. He has people with money which is Wall Street, Republicans, conservative Democrats and the media trying to act like the Republicans and the people in those Red Districts issues matter more than the people that elected him. That was the problem in the first term. They did not accept the election and kept engaged. We have to stay engaged to back this President instead of piling on.
I've already noticed a difference how President Obama engages those groups trying to get him off course and deter him from what we elected him for. The first thing you heard them say is the President should compromise and he has no mandate. You keep hearing this drumbeat about cutting social programs but none of that during the actual Election. They want Obama to implement Mitt Romney's Policies because that is who some of those groups were actually pulling for in the Election. Obama is the one we elected and we should back him and keep reminding him what we elected him for. It doesn't matter who he puts in any position, as long as they carry out the Policies we elected him for. So far, so good. Once he gets off course we need to let him know it. I don't expect him to fall into the trap of destroying Social Security, Medicare or Medicaid. I also expect him to end the War in Afghanistan and do Immigration Reform just like he promised to do. He don't have to compromise with the Republicans as long as he has our support and let our representatives know it too. Two can play at the Republicans game.
babylonsister
(172,740 posts)Tell us how he's letting us down now, please!
Cha
(318,713 posts)
OldDem2012
(3,526 posts)...When have you EVER had the President's back?
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)I believe I saw it mentioned that you've been locked out of the thread but, a quick look shows that you put up a good and decent discussion.
Good on ya.
woo me with science
(32,139 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)
ProSense
(116,464 posts)do you mind kicking this thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022194242
Much appreciated in advance.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)and Democrats have every right in the world to question and suspect the President's motives and judgment for doing so.
The fact is, a person has to have a serious lack of good judgment, ethics, and morals in order to identify as a republican and to voluntarily become a member of the republican party. If we consider the massive harm that republicans have done, and continue to do, to people, our country, and the world, it is naturally very, very worrisome to a large number of Democrats that Obama chose a republican for this important post.
A republican is not fit for high office because of the simple fact that they exhibit such inexcusable poor judgment that they willingly choose to be a republican. Fatal flaw. End of story.
Did the President not see, and understand, what Bush years did to us and our country? We progressives certainly got it, and we damn sure don't want any more of it.
This Democratic President who we just elected for a second term, who does not have to worry about re-election, is displaying awful and suspect judgment in choosing right wingers for high level posts in government, when these choices are absolutely not dictated by necessity. The President certainly does not need to kowtow to republicans and other RWers and their lunatic desires.
Personally I'm really pissed off about this, as are many other Democrats, and generally we don't give a rat's ass about the opinions of those who are so starry eyed in love with the President that they believe he can do no wrong.
It appears to me that if Obama appointed Rupert Murdoch, Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Wiener, and Pat Robertson as FCC Commissioners, some DUers would be singing the praises of the President's infallible wisdom and brilliance by being so bipartisan in his choices.
It's perfectly OK to question the President. It's healthy. It is not healthy to never question him, and to blindly defend him even when he is clearly wrong.
But of course, that can never happen, because he is so good, wise, and wonderful that he can never be wrong! Catch 22!
Sycophants, nobility/authority worshipers, and cults of personality are threats to any and every democracy.
Yes, President Obama has done some awesome things, and it is right that he be commended for doing them.
But nominating republicans and Wall St. Banksters to high level cabinet posts are not among these awesome things, and some of us see this as a form of betrayal to our party and our belief systems. Some of us actually wonder exactly what the President's relationship is to Wall St. and wealthy private interests, and worry that he may be primarily serving the 1% and not the American people. Yes, of course, he's far superior to Romney. But in reality, that doesn't take much, and certainly does not place the President beyond justifiable reproach.
Since some of us do not worship the ground he walks on, we are going to continue to criticize and pressure the POTUS when he fucks up, and does not really explain his actions satisfactorily to us.
The POTUS is supposed to be our servant, not our king, or our deity.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Sycophants, nobility/authority worshipers, and cults of personality are threats to any and every democracy. "
So are people who don't deal in facts, value demagoguery and hyperbole.
Did you mean Secretary of Defense?
The Neocons vs. Chuck Hagel
http://robertreich.org/post/40610140843
Zorra
(27,670 posts)don't like Hagel, he's still a republican, just maybe not quite as bad as the neocons. The fact that neocons don't like him doesn't make him any better of a choice for Secretary of Defense.
False equivalency.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)It's perfectly OK to question the President. It's healthy. It is not healthy to never question him, and to blindly defend him even when he is clearly wrong.
But of course, that can never happen, because he is so good, wise, and wonderful that he can never be wrong! Catch 22!
Sycophants, nobility/authority worshipers, and cults of personality are threats to any and every democracy.
Yes, President Obama has done some awesome things, and it is right that he be commended for doing them.
...nonsensical bullshit. I mean, have your opinion of the President, but try to do it without the self-righteous condescension of allowing others to agree that he has "has done some awesome things."
Zorra
(27,670 posts)is what is actually making you nauseous.
There was no condescension involved here, and it is a certifiable fact that I have rarely or never hesitated to commend the President here on DU when he has done something awesome.
In contrast, unlike some, I am not so stone cold in love with the President that I will neglect to criticize him when he does something like appoint one of the people that Democrats have been struggling to keep out of office all of their lives.
"Consider the possibility that someone having the audacity to question the President is what is actually making you nauseous...In contrast, unlike some, I am not so stone cold in love with the President"
...everyone should be like you, mirror:
