General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Why the arguments of Obama's defenders leave many cold. [View all]hfojvt
(37,573 posts)you defend Obama by claiming he was powerless to end the Bush tax cuts.
Yet it's quite obvious they could have been ended if he had simply done nothing.
Instead of doing nothing, Obama worked to throw a big pile of money at the top 5%.
You illustrate it here. You are in denial about how Obama extended those tax cuts, about how he offered Social Security for cuts, practically begged Republicans to join him and that it only didn't happen because Republicans would not accept $100 billion in tax increases. Obama embraced the Catfood Commission, embraced the gang of six, has called for Republican-type "reforms" of the income tax. Hasn't happened yet, but he is working on it.
You are in denial about what Obama is doing. You demonstrate that. It's not Obama's fault that the microwave got pawned. The Senate made him do it. I guess the Senate also made him create the Catfood Commission too. And the Senate made him embrace their odious proposals rather than reject them.
The United States is supposed to be a Government "of the people, by the people, and for the people". One of the things making it so, is the Democratic Party, which is a party that fights for the "common person" as Kennedy said http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/166
To watch our party betray those ideals, to sit idly by, complacent about what is going on, or, worse yet, to actively assist it, certainly seems "morally bankrupt and contempible" to those who are prepared to give their last full measure of devotion to stop such a slide into oligarchy.