I agree with Bachmann.

[justgamma]

She made an appearance in a nearby town. She says she'll stick to her guns. "And that's what they want to see-somebody with a backbone in the WhiteHouse." Someone who means what they say.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

1. So you'll go with the person whose position you disagree with because they are less wishy washy?

Is that what you are saying?

[gateley]

3. That's not my interpretation of the OP - who never indicated

s/he was "going with" Bachmann. Just that people want a POTUS who has backbone. A complaint many have lodged against Obama.

But, I don't really think you were unsure about what the OP was saying, were you?

[hlthe2b]

5. I don't know about the other poster, but admittedly, I wasn't sure

:shrug: Though I certainly would prefer to give benefit of the doubt and not conclude a DUer was actually supporting Bachman.....?

[justgamma]

10. Oh, h*ll no, Sorry,

I just meant that if President Obama says he'll veto Boner's bill. He'd better get a backbone and do it. The trouble is that a lot of times, he'll say something and then backs down. I just want him to stick to his word.

[rurallib]

17. how did you get that out of the OP?

[Creideiki]

19. Do you only want happy sunshiney news items?

Someone who's been here since 2004 isn't likely to be a Freeper-troll.

Isn't likely, because we know a bunch of the anti-gay trolls were rightwing hacks, but being anti-gay is a special status. Besides, as they keep reminding us, Obama is anti-gay sort of, so when they post that stuff it flies under the radar.

The long and short is quit thinking that anyone that shows that Obama's in trouble (and he is) wants the Democrats to fail. Most of us just want Democrats.

[trumad]

2. forgot your sarcasim thingy

[Bryn]

4. It is easy to say anything until you get elected

:shrug:

[gateley]

6. True of just about anything a candidate says - I've often thought

once they get in the door reality comes crashing down and they think "was I nuts?"

To them, probably to a much lesser extent than us, it always seems simpler from the outside looking in.

[killbotfactory]

7. I, too, prefer cheap talk to meaningful and/or responsible action.

[ProSense]

8. Wait

"I agree with Bachmann. She made an appearance in a nearby town. She says she'll stick to her guns. "And that's what they want to see-somebody with a backbone in the WhiteHouse." Someone who means what they say.

...you agree with her that "she'll stick to her guns" and that she represents "someone who means what they say"?

A lot of people attribute "backbone" to Bush. Do you think Americans miss Bush and want to see is somebody like Bush in the WH?

Do Republicans actual "means what they say"?

Any Republican 2012 because we need "somebody with a backbone in the WhiteHouse."

Is that the gist of what she was saying? You agree with that?

[Fearless]

11. Bush was influential yes. He had backbone. He didn't care if no one agreed...

with him. He didn't care how unpopular he was. We need that from Democrats. Or we will continue to be weak and cave to the Republicans at every turn.

[ProSense]

14. "He didn't care if no one agreed..."

"We need that from Democrats."

Well, if the sentiments being expressed are right, you got one.

[justgamma]

12. No, pukes lie, but what I see on here is this part.

"And that's what they want to see-somebody with a backbone in the WhiteHouse." Someone who means what they say.

[Drale]

9. Well if thats the case Michele should drop out of the race right now

she is a coward through and through.

[RichGirl]

13. Oh...I'm so impressed....what crap!

Anyone can stick to their guns, have a backbone, etc....WHEN THEY AREN'T PRESIDENT. WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE AN IMPOSSIBLE JOB!

It's not so easy when you have the job and have to deal with people who are just plain insane.

I'm so sick of people suggesting that others could and would do so much better than Obama. You don't know what anyone will do until they get elected. In fact...THEY don't know either.

[EC]

15. Sometimes I think Obama IS showing a great deal of

back bone...he's been beat up badly every single day since he took office...he's taken it and is still standing. That's back bone. He doesn't whine, scream or act like a petulant child, he walks tall.


Who's to say what will happen in the next term? Maybe we'll have the majority back in both houses and maybe then he'll get more revenue and a good jobs/infrastructure bill. I'm not losing faith just because of a road block, one after another. (kinda like it used to be traveling through Gary, Ind. with all the railroad tracks) Anyway, I think he does have backbone...he's standing a lot taller than the repubs in my eyes.

[Creideiki]

20. True. He really honestly and truly wants to gut SS, Medicare and Medicaid

And some of the mean Democrats won't let him.

Where's the eyeroll thingy when you need it?

[bornskeptic]

24. No, he really and truly wants to fix Social Security, Medicare,nd Medicaid,

something which everyone who actually cares about those programs should agree with him on. Those who demand that we not touch Medicare or Social Security until the actually collapse are far greater threats to our social safety net.

[JustAmused]

28. LOL

Uh huh *eye roll*

The 30 year repub talking point strikes again

[Skip Intro]

16. Something to be said for consistency and reliability, for sure.

Not that I'd ever support Bachmann, but the quality of standing firm, meaning what you say, and fighting for what you say you will fight for are wonderful qualities in anyone, especially a leader or would-be leader.

[Douglas Carpenter]

18. as Howard Dean once put it, " people will back strong and wrong over weak and right"

Unfortunately, I cannot see any case whatsoever that any of the other 2008 "mainstream" Democratic Party contenders would be doing very much different. Today's New Democrats whether Obama, Clinton or whoever are relying on the same financial backers and seeking out the same essential constituency of yesterday's traditional Republicans - relying on the assumption that the New Deal and Great Society Democrats and progressive Democrats will have no other choice than to back them - because the only other viable alternative that is actually capable of gaining power is still far worse.

[ProSense]

21. Dean also said

...As you may remember, at the time I said that "You have the power" to change things, not me. Any of us by ourselves can only complain, but by taking action together we can make a difference.

This is a time of unwarranted pessimism and some loss of perspective among progressives. When I speak to LGBT groups, I remind them that when George Bush took office in 2001, there was one state in the country (Vermont) with marriage equality. When Bush left office in 2009, after eight of the most conservative years under any president, I think there were nine states with marriage equality. That is a testament to the power of the American LGBT community and their supporters who believe strongly in social justice. We are making progress and we make progress everyday. We have to have a long-term perspective. Over the long-term, we will outwork the forces of regression and hate in this country. 44 years ago, when I started college, many of you know that I had two African-American roommates, both of whom had gone to segregated schools in the south. All three of us are amazed today to be living in a time when we have an African-American president. Progress is being made every day; we often can't see it. We are making progress every day on climate change and small amounts add up to big amounts over decades. We are making significant progress on women's rights, although the forces of hate and misogyny on the right are deeply threatened by this and we need to keep fighting. It's important never to be satisfied, but it's also important not to paralyze ourselves with fear that we might fail.

link

Dean supports the Libya mission because lives are being saved, charter schools and Medicaid block granting (something Obama doesn't support).

Is Dean one of "today's New Democrats”?

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. yes he probably is

In 2004 he was the only leading contender to openly oppose the War against Iraq which labelled him by the mainstream media of the time as left-wing. But his record and his actual positions reveal that he is certainly not left wing or even a New Deal or Great Society Democrat - much less a progressive Democrat - but essentially an an old Rockefeller Republican who by current standards appears left-wing in today's American body politic.

[ProSense]

23. Old

"In 2004 he was the only leading contender to openly oppose the War against Iraq which labelled him by the mainstream media of the time as left-wing."

...myths die hard!

Video: Dean reacts to capture news

Speaking to reporters Sunday, Dean said, "This is a great day of pride in the American military, a great day for the Iraqis and a great day for the American people and, frankly, a great day for the administration. I think President Bush deserves a day of celebration. We have our policy differences, but we won't be discussing those today. I think he deserves a day to celebrate as well."

link

[Douglas Carpenter]

25. well that's true..but nonetheless he did oppose the U.S. invading Iraq in the first place

but his opposition had more to do with strategy than a point of principle - the same way many military and intelligence leaders saw the invasion as ill advised. A George McGovern he is not. He actually supported increasing military spending at the time as well as a more confrontational approach to Iran. But I suspect many of those on the left projected on him their own hopes and dreams that finally a true progressive might be emerging - just as many did the same with Clinton and Obama in 2008.

[frazzled]

26. Actually, it was Bill Clinton who coined that phrase: in reference to national security

It was a totally different context, and the meaning was something you probably wouldn't like at all.

Yet, Democrats marshaling opposition to Bush's plan might do well to consider the words of the former president, who is their smartest political strategist.

After the 2002 election, Clinton had an explanation for those who did not understand why Bush and the Republicans had picked up congressional seats. The GOP victories that year, in which national security was a big issue, were the exception to the historical record of the president's party usually losing seats in mid-term elections.

"When people are insecure, they'd rather have somebody who is strong and wrong than someone who's weak and right," Clinton said.

Simply put, Clinton was suggesting that just because voters think a Republican president has messed up this war, doesn't necessarily mean that they will vote for the other party to make sure that it doesn't happen again.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/01/strong_and_wrong_vs_weak_and_r.html

[Fire1]

27. That's easier said than done, especially when you have a

political party with an expanding tent. It's like herding cats.

[otohara]

29. LOL

this is a joke right?