Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Don't care what Rahm thinks. :) But IMHO, Trump will run Ivanka for president [View all]Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)275. Yes, but to believe that after letting the tax cuts expire, the Repukes were suddenly going to go
along with extending unemployment benefits is a bit naive, no? There were also Blue Dog Democrats who didn't want to extend UEB either. Which goes back to my main point that if we want a more progressive Congress, we need to at least defeat a few of these Blue Dogs and replace them with progressives. Sitting out elections doesn't help our cause at all. That's how Russ Feingold was defeated.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
327 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Don't care what Rahm thinks. :) But IMHO, Trump will run Ivanka for president [View all]
servermsh
Feb 2021
OP
+1 What you describe is something we saw conservatives do for years under GWB.
DRoseDARs
Dec 2011
#166
If a tree falls in the forest and no one sees it....yada yada yada, signifying nothing.
ooglymoogly
Dec 2011
#243
So my one little vote counts but my tiny little abstention does not?
freedom fighter jh
Dec 2011
#274
You faith in corrupt elections is touching. The system is broken and can not be fixed by working
Vincardog
Dec 2011
#248
It's not your fault, but it is your responsibillity to understand who you're voting for.
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#187
You can criticize him, just as I have done. But I think that people were expecting far too much, and
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#256
By all Means. In fact, give up on the Democrats altogether. Ron Paul, third party, that makes sense.
Capn Sunshine
Dec 2011
#153
Ron Paul is NO liberal, my friend. Indeed, he is a bigot through and through. Talk about
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#258
right, because there's not a dimes worth of difference between Al Gore and George Bush
greenman3610
Dec 2011
#186
Are you suggesting that he didn't extend the Bush tax cuts or that they are good for the country?
ThomWV
Dec 2011
#100
The cost of extending unemployment was way too high. He should have reject the "deal" and turned
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#143
Sure. Had he done exactly that, people would be screaming about why he made a deal that EXCLUDED
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#188
The compromise was good for millions of unemployed granted, but the consequences probably will be
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#272
What are you willing to "compromise" for them this year? Don't even pretend the need is any less
TheKentuckian
Dec 2011
#304
Actually, the Democrats DID have a stand alone unemployment extension bill. Indeed, they put at leas
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#195
If I remember correctly those votes occurred before the vote on extending the Bush
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#249
Yes, but to believe that after letting the tax cuts expire, the Repukes were suddenly going to go
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#275
Actually, the problem wasn't a "weak-willed president." The problem was that there were Blue Dog
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#276
The part where you leave out the context of the 2010 election results. The parts of the deal that
emulatorloo
Dec 2011
#131
Exactly. The behavior lends credence to the claim that liberals are elitists. Really, it makes us no
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#190
That is nonsense. If they all expired, a family of 4 making 20k/year would lose a 3k/year tax credit
BzaDem
Dec 2011
#108
"it (extending Bush tax cuts) would stop any chance of recovery the country stood"
Martin Eden
Dec 2011
#320
I have always voted Dem, but I can't see in good conscience how I can vote for Obama when he does
spooked911
Dec 2011
#32
It's funny that when it comes to Obama, it seems to be disappointment after disappointment, and
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#192
Haha. Obama has just launched his "WAR ON RELIGION" and he murdered Santa so that gays can serve in
emulatorloo
Dec 2011
#61
So the snark is to encourage people to vote for the greater of two evils? n/t
Sheepshank
Dec 2011
#164
They had better build a lot more prison then. I do think you are correct! btw. And can we please
SammyWinstonJack
Dec 2011
#152
Entire national security state -- MIC -- has to be dismantled -- including the
defendandprotect
Dec 2011
#80
I agree one shouldnt be able to "make up stuff", so show us where the administration says
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#273
+1 however the constitution is clear and can be misconstrued only by a crooks and slick lawyers;
ooglymoogly
Dec 2011
#223
Thanks for the post. It is clear that Obama wants the language strenghten to permit the indefinate
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#148
His threatened veto is because the bill limits his power to fight terrorism. Show me where it says
rhett o rick
Dec 2011
#162
What I understood from the clip is that the Obama administration requested the language
JDPriestly
Dec 2011
#142
It's clear that the administration only objects to this bill because they THINK it restricts
spooked911
Dec 2011
#181
Still pushing that blatantly dishonest spin? Easy to do WHEN YOU SELECTIVELY BOLD...
Zhade
Dec 2011
#99
You got that right. It will soon become even more apparent who is working overtime
Number23
Dec 2011
#269
"Off-Topic" is only germane to the Original Post of the thread, not posts within the thread...nt
SidDithers
Dec 2011
#54
Why? The same mentality as those supporting this bill, eh? Send them to Gitmo, ask questions later..
sadge goddess
Dec 2011
#115
that is disturbing and I could think of more. But the thought of President Gingrich would convince
Douglas Carpenter
Dec 2011
#17
but there is no choice - there is not going to be a true liberal as a viable candidate in 2012
Douglas Carpenter
Dec 2011
#96
if we are going to make Nazi comparisons - then those who didn't unite around the strongest candidat
Douglas Carpenter
Dec 2011
#118
I won't make that comparison but as for it defying reason, not so fast there...
sadge goddess
Dec 2011
#120
and the election of Newt Gingrich would be an enormous step in that direction
Douglas Carpenter
Dec 2011
#130
I felt that way in 1980 and voted for Barry Commoner of the Citizens Party rather than Jimmy Carter
Douglas Carpenter
Dec 2011
#134
I don't know what we are now allowed to say here so I am very wary of asking you more info
sadge goddess
Dec 2011
#136
Exactly! I made this mistake twice, voting for Nader in 1996 and 2000. It didn't matter that I live
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#201
I used to take your position up until about two days ago. Then, as it
coalition_unwilling
Dec 2011
#28
Maybe but it misses the offered point that the President like other before him may be
TheKentuckian
Dec 2011
#280
So, after the inevitable "compromise" will the govenment have the power to indefinitely detain?
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#50
Well said. The real issue is whether our government can exert tyrannical power of it's people.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#63
Well I'm not ready to turn my card in and will leave you with this link.
unapatriciated
Dec 2011
#240
It is not terrorism that is "cockamamie bullshit," it is the erosion of constitutional protections
indepat
Dec 2011
#290
It is *precisely* in the act of voting that I exercise my responsibility as a citizen,
Demit
Dec 2011
#300
Sorry, but Im pretty sure this has to do with NDAA 1031 not election suppression. n/t
teddy51
Dec 2011
#84
It doesn't matter. Presidential elections are not decided by who votes for whom.
Beam Me Up
Dec 2011
#85
Glenn Greenwald is a Constitutional Lawyer and he read it.... Said it was "more of the same" as
KoKo
Dec 2011
#125
Do you have something on this bill that proves that it isn't as bad as it appears? I would like to
teddy51
Dec 2011
#88
Why not? They voted for war in Iraq - Patriot Act - Homeland Security!
defendandprotect
Dec 2011
#91
Thats true, but I sure hope they are smarter than voting on a bill with the ability
teddy51
Dec 2011
#93
I ran into to the same wall in 2008 when he said he'd escalate the lost war in Afghanistan.
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#111
Are you for real? The president has kept a long list of promises. Your disdain for him will
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#202
Why are you afraid to suport a fair trial using centuries old constitutional safeguards?
scentopine
Dec 2011
#196
Obama thinks he has this one in the bag, so he'll continue to pander to his republican base...
scentopine
Dec 2011
#194
Really? You've been able to see what's going on in his mind? That's mighty arrogant
Liberal_Stalwart71
Dec 2011
#203
I woke up late...is this another one of those "cut off your nose to spite your face" threads?
Walk away
Dec 2011
#200
Obama is scuttling constitutional safeguards that separate us from 3rd world despot oligarchy
scentopine
Dec 2011
#283
I really wish you would have given more information about this clip so that we could easily find
Bolo Boffin
Dec 2011
#219
If a Rethug becomes our next president as a result of the left splitting its vote ...
Martin Eden
Dec 2011
#246
Perhaps Obama should seek the votes of the left instead of pandering to the "middle".
Tierra_y_Libertad
Dec 2011
#257
What... you think seeing what almost happened in France, and what is happening in Canada
redqueen
Dec 2011
#292