Well, fuck me. I thought I was on a DEMOCRATIC forum.

[graham4anything]

131. Most of my thread was referring to others, not yours.

IMHO we are never going to get a President as good as Obama.
We cannot get 100% which some demand, and that we can never get all.

and you are correct in that not many are good republicans (and Ihave not seen one tea party or libertarian I would consider good either). But there are a few like Charlie Crist and Angus King(independent), and a bunch others who's support makes it bipartisian, and people in America do want to see that.(Like during Hurricane Sandy, President Obama coming to NJ and meeting Chris Christie, you saw Christie immediately drop his normal hate fed money to beg for more money, and his ratings climbed because of it).

Take health care, people mumble this or that, we don't have enough, and for 50 years, after LBJ got the major changes in so many things, nothing was furthered on health care, someone on each side decided not to do it, or stop what was going to happen (as in 1993 after Bill took office.)

Sen. Ted Kennedy, whom I loved put health care reform as his #1 issue, starting with trying to get health care for all. He personally knew he could not start out wanting a single payer system, or a system like in France, where you work, pay your taxes, but when you get sick,
you go to doctor/hospital and get better, when you leave hospital ZERO bills it is all paid from when you are working and well(or also paid if you don't work), you don't lose your insurance from not paying as there is no insurance at all in reality.
And it is humane and it works(don't believe the lies they tell about France, the health care works.)

What I refer to as "uber liberals" are the ones that whine Obama did not get us single payer now when they snapped their fingers. It was impossible to get better now.

But Obama got us 10% forward, instead of "100% of nothing".
And it is not even fully in place and won't be til 2014.
Personally, my self-employed family group premium did NOT go up this year, first time in about 20 years since not having a work company paid health insurance that it did not go up 15%

So that is what I refer to as "uber liberals".
(I have nothing against socialists, communists, anybody and don't mean uber liberal to refer to socialist or communists.)

As for most holier than thous I was referring-they are not purists. They themselves have an agenda too.(theirs).

What has happened in the past is that those were direct causes to loses by democrats in 1968, 1980, 2000 etc. and division could lead to a republican(most likely Jeb Bush) to get into the white house like W did in 2000 due to Nader and theft.

and i want the strongest candidate to win (and not just talk about this good issue but be strong and win) in 2016 and do so quickly and without a divisive fight. Let the republicans fight it out. We sure won't move forward with the republican candidate.


And there is already an undertone here on DU for 2016 presidential, between Obama's Secretary of State Hillary running again, and Eliz. Warren. Me personally wants Hillary because she will win and is multi-issues, whereas Warren is one issue at have never been vetted nationally.(whereas Hillary's dirt is well known and discarded now).

Hillary IMHO would have won in 2008, except for one thing-she did not have mine, or any of Obama's voters,which were needed to win. In 2016 Hillary has my vote and I am sure most others, especially when he backs her in 2016 itself.

And all of a sudden, there are new code words I don't like.
They say they want a "fresh" face when not wanting Hillary. They say Hillary is too old, and other things nobody says about a male candidate. (Not to mention they want Warren, but don't realize she is just about the same age as Hillary)

So they have their angle as I have been referring to it lately, since watching the Bing Crosby movie "White Christmas" last week, where his character says everybody has an angle, and certainly in politics, they do.


As for Lincoln, see it with your sons, I saw it with my family, it is something to see.
I do feel that Lincoln is President Obama with a direct line between
Lincoln-FDR-Dr.King-LBJ-Jimmy Carter-Obama.

As for what you refereed to (I don't much like to talk about that but I feel that no longer will happen because of what happened when LBJ took office. I feel (if the official story is not true and it was political) that whoever did it, did not imagine that all the good things LBJ did would happen because of the political capital afforded to him by what happened to JFK.
I am not convinced it would have been politically possible for JFK himself to do what LBJ did
even if they wanted to.

And I love as said Teddy, but wish 1980 primary was not so devisive that the democrats never truly united and recovered. Wish Teddy had run in 1976, 1984, 1988,etc.

And I myself voted twice for Rev. Jackson for President and wish in 1988 he had been picked as VP with Dukakis, or even 1992 with Clinton. (I like Al Gore the liberal, but back in the 1980s, Al was much more rightwing and he was not my choice in 1988. Jesse Jackson was.

And I like to debate/discuss issues, and never move to censor anyone's opinion, long as they don't attempt to silence mine.