President Obama can't win around here can he?

[NNN0LHI]

If he supports OWS he gets motherfucked for attempting to co-opt the movement.

If he doesn't say anything he gets motherfucked for not supporting them.

Going to have to make up your minds on this one.

Can't be both ways.

Which is it?

Don

[ellisonz]

1. Just a minute...

:popcorn:

[woo me with science]

2. You shall know them by their ACTIONS. nt

[Cronus Protagonist]

6. werd

[banned from Kos]

3. Elizabeth Warren refuses to sign a support letter for Occupy Harvard

but some people are beyond criticism.

(she is great though - can't deny that)

[MADem]

7. -1. She has said she supports OWS, and they should obey the law.

:eyes:

[meow2u3]

13. Occupiers ARE obeying the law--the Constitution!

It's just that the authorites are making up new "laws" as they go along, and it's damn near impossible to obey an arbitrary, vague set of laws decreed by dictators.

[MADem]

23. And the Constitution allows states and municipalities to do their thing, too.

Check your Bill of Rights, there.

"Authorities" aren't "making up" laws--they are passed by representatives of the citizens in the communities where the laws are in place--state legislatures, city councils, etc.

These legislators and council members are not "authorities" -- they are elected representatives, servants of the people in the communities they serve.

[LooseWilly]

171. And all those shiny laws are interpreted however the locals feel like...

and the pepper sprayed, spleen jabbed, skull fractured masses are left to finance representation if they have a problem with it.

You can pretend that the interpretations aren't a de facto "making up laws as they go" if you want, but that's just another flavor of spin, like the Republican argument that a flat tax is "fair"... if one is allowed to set up one's arguments and those arguments aren't allowed to be questioned... then both assertions, i.e that "Authorities" aren't "making up" laws and that "flat taxes are fair" are valid.

We all know that both assertions are bullshit though, don't we? That both are spin to try to convince those that are metaphorically shit upon to smile during the process? Yes?

[treestar]

111. That statement will take some real supporting

At first glance, it appears false.

[frazzled]

33. But her buddies on Wall Street prevent her from fully supporting

doncha know. And she does have buddies. She hired more Wall Street bankers to staff the offices of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau than Obama even knows. But I don't see the old cronyism argument being raised against her. I'm just saying this to remind people of how hypocritical and weak their arguments are, not to bash Elizabeth Warren, whom I support and like. The point is: lay off the stupid attacks against the president if you can't be consistent.

As the new federal consumer watchdog agency takes shape, Wall Street might see a few familiar faces on its roster.

Elizabeth Warren, the Harvard University law professor who is setting up the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, announced her latest string of hires on Thursday, including former managing directors at Deutsche Bank and Morgan Stanley.

Congress created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to protect consumers from abuses in the lending industry. Now the bureau is turning to former members of the industry to help it police banks, credit card companies and mortgage lenders.

“Building a team to develop smarter financial regulations means hiring top-notch leaders with a wide range of experiences,” Ms. Warren said in a statement.

The bureau’s hires announced Thursday include Rajeev Date, the former Deutsche Bank managing director. Mr. Date, who also worked at Capital One Financial as a senior vice president, will be the bureau’s associate director for research, markets and regulations.

“Raj Date and his team bring a wealth of experience in the financial services industry, government, nonprofits, community banking and academia,” Ms. Warren said.

Ms. Warren also hired Elizabeth Vale, a Morgan Stanley managing director who was vice president and portfolio manager at Philadelphia National Bank. Her industry experience will come in handy — she will serve as a liaison to community banks and credit unions.

Ms. Warren’s hires also include a former financial industry lawyer, a former senior employee at the mortgage-finance giant Freddie Mac and Corey Stone, who once was the chairman of Start Community Bank in New Haven, Conn.

http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/02/17/consumer-watchdog-hires-former-bankers/

Guess what: Wall Street has Occupied the CFPB!

[banned from Kos]

36. great post - will be ignored by the Obama "buddy of Wall St" conspiracy crowd

who can't name a single buddy of his on Wall St.

[girl gone mad]

61. Fail, as always.

Jamie Dimon is a Democrat and worked in Obama's adopted hometown of Chicago. After Obama took office and JPMorgan Chase repaid its bailout money more quickly than most, he became influential in the White House,<22> although Dimon has often publicly disagreed with some of Obama's policies.<23> Dimon was one of three CEOs found by the Associated Press—along with Lloyd Blankfein and Vikram Pandit—to have had liberal access to United States Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner in the seven months after the financial crisis in fall 2008.

No.. nothing to see here. :eyes:

[banned from Kos]

71. wrong again - Dimon got frosty after Obama signed Dodd-Frank

and of course the others have access to Treasury. They were repaying a collective $70 billion or so. Its not like mailing a check for your power bill. Geithner was the collection agent.

None are Obama buddies although Dimon is a longtime Democrat. Dimon has been visited by Romney as of late.

[girl gone mad]

84. Here's another one..

It is hard to overstate the link between Obama and Corzine. Corzine was Obama’s top Wall Street fundraiser, most recently offering his home to host a $35,800-a-head affair that banked the president half a million dollars for his re-election bid. According to various media outlets, he was also at the head of efforts by the president to coddle many Wall Street executives that had taken offense to his harsh rhetoric against Wall Street “fat cats” from early 2010. The relationship was as old as it was strong. Back in 2008, then-Senator Barack Obama had referred to Corzine as “our Wall Street guy.”

And it wasn’t just because of the money. Corzine was esteemed by Obama as someone who did not “tell people what they want to hear instead of what they need to hear,” as the president himself put it during a speech in support of Corzine’s 2009 bid for another gubernatorial term. Corzine had dinner at the White House many times, and was considered a front-runner to replace Timothy Geithner as Treasury Secretary after 2012 (That possibility was so obviously latent that a clause in MF Global’s bonds up to August promised to reward investors with higher interest payments if Corzine left the firm for any government job.)

Now Corzine is persona non grata in the West Wing, under scrutiny by the FBI.

Banks weren't paying anything back. And why would the heads of TBTF banks need to call Geithner about repayments? Did they keep forgetting where to send the checks?

No. They were telling Geithner how to structure the billions in additional bailouts to help them get out of TARP as quickly as possible since they were angry about the few strings Congress added after the public flipped out at Paulson's initial proposal.

Clearly the White House wants to publicly distance itself from Wall Street, but Dimon still must have significant clout or Daley would have been fired long ago.

[banned from Kos]

98. OK - I'll give you Corzine. After all he just held a fundraiser for the President

not that Corzine can professionally benefit since he is finished forever as a Wall Streeter.

[MADem]

142. There are times when one has to hold one's nose, too.

It doesn't mean that the trajectory of the goals is shifted.

And you're quite right--Corzine's days on WS are over.

[treestar]

112. Not to mention that merely having worked on Wall St

does not make a person the root of all evil. If the business is being regulated, it helps to know about the business.

[SomethingFishy]

160. Are you serious?

Jesus no wonder we are totally fucked.

Here's 3 names to start with

Timothy Geithner

Larry Summers

Gene Sperling

If you actually want to be an informed voter you could look up the rest of Obama's past and present Economic advisors. You will find that some of them came directly from Wall Street and many left his cabinet to go to Wall Street and earn the fruits of their "hard work" in the Obama administration.

But to sit there and claim that there is a conspiracy theory about Obama and Wall Street is ludicrous to anyone who has been paying any attention at all.

[Number23]

60. Really great post as usual

Wall Street has Occupied the CFPB!

Oh noezzzzz!!! :scared:
:rofl:

[ZombieHorde]

158. Nice argument. You should make that into an OP. nt

[Response]

78. Why do the students occupy in Harvard Yard

when they could occupy Cambridge Common: some 50 yards away?

One place is safe and sound where you now can't get into the yard without a Harvard ID, and the other less so but more visible.

While I strongly support the students right to 'Occupy' where they believe that it will do the most good I find it shameful of Harvard to disappear it behind guarded gate

[MADem]

144. Because their dorm rooms are steps away. They can go inside to poop, pee and shower,

and sleep in a soft, warm bed if it gets too cold.

It's not real. It's symbolic. It's a lot of energy spent for not much effect, overall.

[Response]

169. That was kind of what I was getting at.

[treestar]

110. I though she started the whole thing!

:rofl:

[Cronus Protagonist]

4. False dichotomy

He can call on our nation to support free speech, restraint by police, and so on without doing either of these things.

He could also address the underlying problems... for one single example out of a possible thousand or more... he could fire the top peeps at the SEC and put in some real ball busters - that would be a good start.

But why would he do that, when his buddies in Wall Street already told him who they wanted and he complied?

[banned from Kos]

8. really - that shit is so tiring

Bet you can't name a single "buddy" of his on Wall St (which is in New York City).

[Cronus Protagonist]

10. Ignore the message and lampoon the periphery

Nice work, but I'm not eating from your dirty spoon.

[Name removed]

Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Gamow]

27. We can all name the Wall Street-ers on his staff.

[banned from Kos]

38. there are none - they are staffers.

I asked for a "buddy on Wall St".

[bluestate10]

49. Given that the President's staff is his cabinet.

Name one that is a Wall Streeter? Don't say Geithner, you would be wrong. He was head of the NY FED, very much part of government. But go ahead, name one cabinet member that was employed as a bigwig on Wall Street.

[Response]

79. Is this a test? Like Bush never knew Ken Lay?

[Prometheus Bound]

168. This table lists the top donors to Barack Obama in the 2008 election cycle.

University of California $1,648,685
Goldman Sachs $1,013,091
Harvard University $878,164
Microsoft Corp $852,167
Google Inc $814,540
JPMorgan Chase & Co $808,799
Citigroup Inc $736,771
Time Warner $624,618
Sidley Austin LLP $600,298
Stanford University $595,716
National Amusements Inc $563,798
WilmerHale LLP $550,668
Columbia University $547,852
Skadden, Arps et al $543,539
UBS AG $532,674
IBM Corp $532,372
General Electric $529,855
US Government $513,308
Morgan Stanley $512,232
Latham & Watkins $503,295
http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cid=N00009638

[emulatorloo]

179. You do realize that INDIVIDUAL donations are tracked by their employer names, don't you?

If I were to donate to Obama, I am required to list my employer. Say I worked at the Univerity of California.

At Open Secrets, my donation would get grouped under University of California. But it is my money, not theirs.

If you dig a little deeper, Open Secrets will sort out which donations are individual vs which is corporate money.

There are liberal democrats working at all of those places.

[treestar]

113. -1, our President should not have to call on us to support

free speech! We as a nation should be able to do that all by ourselves. Police restraint of what? Police are supposed to enforce the law. IMO you may be implying people should be able to do whatever they want, law or not.

As for who is appointed to the SEC, I'll tai the choices of the President as confirmed by Congress over some DREAM team invented by the professional left any time.

[MADem]

5. It's unfortunate. Some people just have an overarching need to be AGAINST something or someone.

They aren't happy unless they are railing, fighting, complaining and criticizing.

The difference between life during a Bush presidency and life during an Obama presidency is like night and day.

Anyone who thought the poor guy was going to go in with a checklist and kick ass doesn't understand how government works and how much compromise is needed to push the ship of state in the general direction one wants it to go.

He does have some wiggle room in his final term to do some asskicking, as he's not running for reelection, and Biden should not be his heir apparent, either--he's just too old with too much medical history. He may feel an urgency to get some stuff done then, but it's a balancing act--move too fast, or too slow, and you alienate people, particularly in the first term.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. Obama passed three of his four jobs bills last month, and all we hear is whining

about the one that didn't pass!

[MADem]

24. Indeed. The guy can't win no matter what he does. nt

[Number23]

46. That poster snarkily meant to say "passed three out of four TRADE bills" but

his keyboard must be as sick of his foolishness as the rest of us.

[MannyGoldstein]

53. Obama claimed that the three Obama/Bush "free" trade bills will create US jobs

Don't you believe Obama and Bush?

[Number23]

57. I most certainly do believe President Obama

And I believe that the three trade bills are only one part of the president's overall jobs plan. So they can hardly be construed as "three job bills" the way you not-even-close-to-cleverly tried to refer to them in your previous post.

[MannyGoldstein]

68. He specifically called them out as jobs bills in the "pass this bill!' speech

I don't understand why you disagree that they're jobs bills?

[Response]

80. Will they have the same robust job building characteristics as

NAFTA and CAFTA?

[MannyGoldstein]

85. Absolutely. nt

[bvar22]

154. Lets see what Obama said about NAFTA in 2008.

Roll the Tape!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0&NR=1


That clip is fascinating.
Watch the body language as both Obama & Hillary Lie their asses off.



You will know them by their WORKS.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[treestar]

117. Perhaps not

The effect of free trade agreements is not so simple as some people would like it to be. Most of us should admit we have a lot to learn before we can really judge that.

NAFTA started in the 90s during a good economy. One thing I don't accept is the overall idea it is responsible for job loss in the 2000s. Many posters expect us to believe that on faith, and they don't give underlying support for their huge assumption.

And trade agreements with specific countries may be a different thing altogether. Some posters seem to be against them just because they are trade agreements. They take a simplistic "trade agreements are bad" approach.

[MannyGoldstein]

134. How do you feel about almost-free-trade with China?

How's that worked out for us?

[treestar]

136. I really don't know

It would take a lot more reading on my part to judge that very well.

We do have to have trade with other countries. I get that much. The agreements likely contribute some regulation.

I don't believe we can be self sustaining in the 21st century. We can't have it be one way either. Other countries understandably won't import our goods if we block theirs.

The China/India jobs thing seems to have less to do with trade than with cost of labor. A real poser, since we get the good cheaper, and it's hard to get people to pay more for the same goods in the name of buying them from their fellow Americans.

So reducing this question to simplistic slogans is not the way to go.

There have been arguments made for the Chile agreement, etc. You're totally assuming that just because it's a trade agreement, jobs will move from the US to Chile. I doubt it's that simple.

[MannyGoldstein]

151. Paul Krugman says...

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/03/more-on-china-and-jobs/

[Response]

170. Most of us should admit that NAFTA has been a failure

for American workers. I don't put all the blame there. Heavy reliance on China and other countries for cheep unregulated labor has destabilized the American blue-collar workforce. For example, net manufacturing employment has declined by 3,654,000 from 1994 to 2007.

[treestar]

116. rofl!

That keyboard is rebelling! :rofl:

[Kahuna]

19. A lot of people act like Obama is their daddy, and has control

over everything in their lives.

[MADem]

25. That' true. The whole "Every Little Sparrow" thing.

Like he's Jesus, or a King!

I've lived under a King--they can't always get stuff done, either....but they can say "Off with his head!"

[Kahuna]

89. LOL! Christmas is coming. It's time for the dears to start making out their lists..

to Santa Obama. :rofl:

[treestar]

118. They've forgotten that King Obama might decide

it is their head that has to go!

[treestar]

119. Or a puppet

that they were meant to control! They expect to have that power as keyboard warriors in a nation of over 300 million - how did they get so special?

[bluestate10]

52. But, But, But. What about FDR with an exhaustively democratic Congress.

He, he, he got bills passed. Why can't Obama do the same thing with republican crazies in the crazies controlled House attacking his every move? Forget that FDR did NOTHING about some of the most corrosive social ills in society during his time, that's that's irrelevant. But, but, why can't Obama be like FDR? With :sarcasm:

[treestar]

121. Or LBJ?

Obama should threatening tower over the shorter Republicans and let them know who is boss! (similar :sarcasm:)

[MADem]

141. +1. nt

[treestar]

115. So true. That is a great post. Why can't these people

turn their negativity on Boehner and McConnell? If they really have any effect with their negativity, that would at least be helpful to the causes they themselves claim to support?

[MADem]

146. +1. nt

[TreasonousBastard]

9. He never wins around here.. if he does something...

it's either the wrong thing or he didn't do enough.

If he does nothing, he should have done something.

[bluestate10]

56. There are people on DU that admit that Obama is doing a good job.

I would like to have seen him take the fight to the House more and isolate them earlier than he has, but better now than waiting until 2012.

I notice that some of the most chronic Obama haters were the loudest criers when the paltry change in DU funding was announced. To me the funding crying and the crying that took place when DU held a drive to fund an anti-hunger organization tells me everything I needed to know about the character of some. If I am in a knife fight, I want someone with backbone and commitment protecting my back. There is a literal knife fight going on against republicans, some that have a hansy-pansy view of the world and think that every political action must drip of progressive righteousness and perfection had better wake the hell up before the progressive society they claim to want won't even be a fucking dream.

[treestar]

123. Amen, anything he DID say about OWS and the police

would then be parsed and twisted to show he really does support a police state or some such nonsense.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

178. Because, often when he does something (insert bush tax cuts)

It was the wrong thing. If he does nothing (inset sitting on his ass while "death panel" and other lies remained out there, unresponsive to) he should have done something. Even he admitted that much.

THAT is why we complain.

[MannyGoldstein]

11. Who accused Obama of co-opting OWS?

Wouldn't he have to support them first? Did I miss something?

[gateley]

12. Several of us do support him, even when we oppose him

at times. Others, though, I have to agree -- it's like they're channeling Anne Coulter or something -- every thing the man does or doesn't do is wrong.

Even when DADT was repealed, some were critical that it hadn't happened soon enough. And hey, what about Gitmo? :eyes: It gets discouraging.

[JDPriestly]

43. I support President Obama on those rare occasions when he does somethin

right. Unfortunately, he really doesn't have a good track record.

He picks the wrong people to hang out with -- Geithner, Summers, Bernanke, Holder, etc. Really bad crowd he runs with.

[gateley]

114. Totally agree with you on that count -

but I was thinking about the people who regardless, jump on him without seeing if, in any given instance, he actually has done something RIGHT and GOOD (which he has, frequently). They ARE just like Republicans in that the man can do no right, period. It seems as though they expend all their energy on being outraged by Obama.

[JDPriestly]

164. They are just frustrated by the ineptitude of the administration in a numbe

of things. I think the horrible economic policies of the President's closest advisers and his failure to advocate strongly for needed policies like raising the cap on the payroll taxes for Social Security and Medicare (he is asking for a vacation from those taxes but also asking for cuts to Social Security and Medicare -- makes utterly no sense at all), strong job development policies, also the President's requesting more trade agreements when we are already sinking under the weight of the cheap products made by low-wage people in third world countries and imported to our shores are causing people to be very, very frustrated with Obama.

Obama has done some good things, but unfortunately, his mistakes are really huge and really important.

[ellisonz]

166. Says the dude with the John Edwards avatar...

Thank God that dude went down in flames ;-)

P.S. No Democrat would be doing any better with the amount of obstructionism President Obama is dealing with both from the Republicans and a few Dems. What's he supposed to do, whine them into cooperation?

[JDPriestly]

172. He could have had a majority in Congress had he enforced the law

against the powerful and rich and obtained a stimulus package that was big enough to get the country moving again.

In addition, he could have brought in a public option -- even just a small one -- and won a majority in congress.

He has the Congress he earned.

[Spazito]

15. Agree...

If he DOES speak out, and he has on any number of major issues, the response of some is 'Pretty speech' or 'He is good....at speeches.' Another response, all too often, is 'Why didn't he say this or this or this instead.'

[Amonester]

16. Several critics still do support him.

Critisizing the president is a democratic value though.

Besides, since when asking for answers or proposing actions is automatically being against him?

[quinnox]

17. I'd love to see any statement supporting OWS by Obama

As already noted, it doesn't exist. Funny how he can make supportive statements about protesters in Egypt but not here in the USA.

[Tx4obama]

32. Yes, it does exist.

SNIP

Obama said the most important thing he can do as president is express solidarity with the protesters and redouble his commitment to achieving what he described as a more egalitarian society.

SNIP

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x2317203#2317729

[quinnox]

40. ok, but that was a month ago

I want to see Obama make a statement supportive of the protesters rights live in front of tv cameras today, in a press conference, or tomorrow or in the immediate future.

[Tx4obama]

47. Well, you said: 'any statement'. I provided 'one' :)

No fair moving the goal posts now.

[Number23]

50. JINX!!!

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

And I was gonna say Great Minds Think Alike but you don't have to be a great mind to see all of the confused crazy that some folks toss around like confetti around here.

[Number23]

48. HA! So you want to see a statement of support for OWS from Obama, when someone shows you one

your IMMEDIATE response is "well, that was a month ago."

LORD HAVE MERCY!! You just have to laugh to keep from screaming at some of these folks around here.

[treestar]

127. Had the statement been made yesterday

It would not have been strong enough or would have been twistable into support of a police state. :rofl:

[Kahuna]

90. I want to see the protestors make a statement in support of the president.

You first.

[Union Scribe]

99. Lol

Your priorities and ideas of the relationship between democratic Democratic leaders and the people are so fucking backwards I doubt anyone can right your ship.

[Kahuna]

106. LOL, my eye. The president could have used the help of the occupiers..

last year at the voting booths. Imagine the progress that could have been made if only the same people who are grousing now had showed up to vote. And still they are saying that they will sit out the next election. But you want his help??? Are you freaking kidding me?

[treestar]

128. Yours are

In what fairyland can one individual serve 300 million individuals or more and do what they each want?

[Union Scribe]

173. Ah, yes, I forgot that we all work for him.

When I see posters like you, I can only wonder if you have these disasterously warped views before Obama or if the whole leader uber alles thing came with him.

[treestar]

124. Why?

What real difference is that going to make?

[msongs]

18. in the absence of leadership on his part there are many options on our part nt

[jaxx]

58. What are those options?

A detailed list is needed to give that comment any credibility.

[ClassWarrior]

20. Yes, because we have a hive mentality and thus can "make up our minds."

:eyes:

You've been around long enough to know better than that. And to have a thicker skin than that. ("Motherfucked?" Really? Do words have no potency anymore?)

NGU.

[Kahuna]

21. As I read this thread, I see that the people who revile the president on

a daily basis, in the ugliest of terms, NOW want his support. :crazy:

[Number23]

51. DAMN good point

:thumbsup:

[bluestate10]

59. Stunning, isn't it? nt

[jaxx]

62. Kinda ass backwards isn't it?

When he speaks up again he'll be trying to politicize it. We know the dialog, as you said we see it daily.

[Union Scribe]

95. His job is to support the people.

All this whining about people wanting him to do that is obnoxious. Obama is not your little brother. He doesn't need your chest-puffing on his behalf.

[Kahuna]

100. He's not my little brother. That is true. He's also not your daddy. nt

[Union Scribe]

102. Happily no, my Dad always kept his word. And where have I heard that BS before?

Seems to me there's a whole group of people who smear the left by saying they want the government to be their daddy. Now, why would someone here be making that argument, too? Odd.

[Kahuna]

105. My daddy taught me to take responsibility for my own actions. nt

[ClassWarrior]

108. Radical RW memes just trip off the lips of some people, don't they?

NGU.

[Union Scribe]

174. Yep, and did you see the response?

Just more RW sloganeering. Individual responsibility! Bootstraps! Yarglebargleyar!

[treestar]

129. There is a difference between wanting the government

to be your daddy and wanting the President to do it.

The President does enforce the laws that keep the "welfare state" that the right considers paternalistic running.

[treestar]

126. Absolutely wrong

His job is to be the Executive described in Article II of the Constitution Which starts out "We the People." We do not elect politicians to "support" us! We elect them to represent us, make the laws, carry out the laws and run the government! The FEDERAL government, not the state and local ones!

[ellisonz]

167. Introducing the 10th Amendment (Yes, I know it's been awhile)

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

[Union Scribe]

175. What a hopelessly stupid attempt at diverting responsibility.

For your next brilliant post, why don't you control F the Constitution and tell us what else Obama doesn't have to do. It's very simple: either you believe that he is employed to support us, or that it is somehow our job to support him. You, very clearly, have chosen the latter as have most of you who hold Obama as some quasi-religious figure. It all ties together in a horrible joke on the rest of us.

[bluestate10]

149. Teafucks are people. So are the religious right zanies.

So, are you saying that Obama must come out with a statement that supports their fucked up agendas? The OWS people would be far wiser, given the technological capabilities of many of them, to form powerful networks using modern communications. Those networks can then become effective at changing the country into the nation that they think is a fair nation. Giving the rightwing images that they can use as talking points ISN'T being either effective or smart.

[Barack_America]

132. Um, I think they've always wanted his support.

His lack of support for liberal policies is why he's reviled here. No?

:shrug:

[Scuba]

22. Yes, his support (or lack of) for OWS is the only factor I'm considering.

sarcasm thingy.

[otohara]

26. Denounce the violence

That's what I want

[phiddle]

28. The point for me is not that he support OWS or not;

I'd actually rather that he, a (nominal) leader keep a distance from the leaderless movement.
But, what I REALLY would want to hear from him, and expect not to goes something like this:

"My Justice Department is watching events very closely, and we will do our utmost to assure that the civil rights of the demonstrators, the press, and other persons are respected by all parties, public and private. Furthermore, any encroachment on citizens' civil rights by public officials will be subject to especially strict treatment by the Federal justice system".

Like I say, given his craven corporatizing and his awful record on rule of law I expect that he won't do this. But, hey, I can dream, can't I?

[woo me with science]

30. "...to assure that the civil rights of those demonstrating are respected by all parties..."

Thank you. This is not about Obama and whether or not he "can win around here."

It is about Americans and our very Constitution.

[jaxx]

64. I get a kick out of people trying to write the script for PBO.

Rather craven, dontcha think?

[phiddle]

73. Nature abhors a vacuum! (Or a vacuous "leader")

[treestar]

131. I know, at least get the job of speechwriter at the wH

Oh wait, that would take realistic effort.

[Edweird]

138. Uh, his speeches sound like what people want to hear - it's his policies that are the problem.

[Gamow]

29. I'd rather have the massive egos that run this country be over criticized

...than blindly followed.
Like bush was blindly followed.

[Stinky The Clown]

31. When did this become about him?

[JVS]

34. If he had been doing his job as far as busting heads on wall street....

then a lot of the anger that drove OWS to form wouldn't have been there and OWS wouldn't have happened.

[Ken Burch]

35. Did you actually just use "motherfucked" as a verb?

:eyes:

[quinnox]

37. I thought that was strange as well

I have never heard this expression used in that way before.

[JVS]

39. Is OP trying to label critics as motherfuckers?

[Ken Burch]

76. For the record, my mother and I are just friends.

n/t.

[JohnnyLib2]

45. Linguistics for our times.

:shrug:

[Major Hogwash]

54. Are you that naive?? You've never heard that term used that way before??

What, were you raised in a convent??

[Ken Burch]

75. I'm a man and I'm Protestant.

Both of which would have made that possibility rather remote.

[Evergreen Emerald]

92. hahah--that is what I was thinking as well! n/t

[JDPriestly]

41. Obama should address the issues that OWS has raised, one by one.

And Obama should more actively support unions and working people. Also, we need a jobs bill that does not include a vacation on payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare and other social programs.

We need a job program that consists of more than tax cuts.

And we need less privatization of the public sector.

Right now, the so-called private sector of our economy is "growing" by cannibalizing jobs and work that have been traditionally done at less taxpayer expense by the public employees and the government.

Giving capitalists money to build schools to replace public schools is simply stupid.

So is giving or loaning capitalists money to provide supplies for our military. The military should control its own supply lines.

You get my gist.

Obama needs to address the problems that OWS is raising -- real job development, the disparity in wealth, corporate irresponsibility, corporate dominance of our politics, student loans, debt forgiveness, foreclosures, everything.

And the last thing we need Obama to do is to negotiate to open more bases overseas. What an utter waste of money and time.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Number23]

44. Yeah, this whole "he supports protests in Egypt and not here" meme is beyond idiotic

That lame argument would be embarrassingly stupid even if the president HADN'T publicly supported OWS. Which he did.

[MisterP]

55. if he wants to be trusted he has to show himself worthy of that trust

[jaxx]

67. Fail.

That's an old worn out ideology.

[Amonester]

77. Yeah. It's so worn out the repukes don't use honesty, fairness, trust too.

Romney and Perry lie about Pres Obama's 'lazy' quote
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x818240

O'donnell debunks them

Yeah, it's such an old worn out ideology...
Who cares.

[SidDithers]

63. And don't forget the Police violence...

Obama either ordered it, or didn't stop it, or something. Regardless, it's his fault.

Good post. :thumbsup:

Sid

[girl gone mad]

65. Kids are getting beat down, grannies and pregnant women getting pepper sprayed..

property destroyed, rights denied..

and we're supposed to feel sorry for Barack Obama?

:wtf:

[quinnox]

66. you said it girl gone mad

As always, you are right on the mark.

[Union Scribe]

96. Perfectly stated. nt

[SammyWinstonJack]

101. Well said! nt

[treestar]

130. Hate to inform you, but things like that happen every day

In every city and town.

And no one said "feel sorry for" the President. Straw man.

We are trying to get you to mature your view of the US government. The school you went to failed to provide basic information.

[MADem]

145. Who remembers CIVICS as a subject in school?

I swear, I don't think they teach it any more. Or American History.


It sure seems that way.

[Number23]

162. "The school you went to failed to provide basic information."

DAYUUM! :rofl: :rofl:

[EFerrari]

69. Come on, Don. Do you seriously believe if Obama supported OWS

that kids n the street would be getting their skull bashed and losing their spleens from police batons.

Motherfuckin' please.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Number23]

72. LOL!

It's a cry for help, I'm afraid. I would love for someone to convince me otherwise, so I could just feel like they are idiots again.

:thumbsup:

[otohara]

74. Wow

Your superior horns are showing

[Edweird]

81. People are pissed and Obama has no one but himself to blame for it. He ran on 'change'

but has, for the most part, been just as RW (if not more) than his predecessor.

[piratefish08]

82. i disagree but will kick this thread for creative use of the word 'motherfucked'

i tip my hat to you sir.

[nadinbrzezinski]

83. Order the Dept of Justice to STAND DOWN

and be presidential about it.

No he did not give the damn orders, those came from WELL BELLOW his pay grade... but he can and should sign the Executive Order.

[piratefish08]

87. he can't. if he did that he would be accused of trying to co-opt the movement.

that's the logic in the OP.




(thanks for your constant OWS updates Nadin - it's nice having your eyes out there every day)

[Kahuna]

91. What he'd really be accused of is supporting anarchy. nt

[Union Scribe]

97. That was a revealing post. nt

[piratefish08]

103. OWS is anarchy?

[Kahuna]

104. I see posts on DU on a daily basis suggesting that OWS should

take an anarchist approach. Define anarchism, kahuna. Okay, I will. Blocking bridges, subways and ports can be viewed that way. Stockpiling rocks and projectiles anticipating a confrontation with authority can be seen that way. Refusing to obey the orders of law enforcement can be seen that way. Dancing on the American flag can be seen that way. Breaking the windows of storefronts can definately be seen that way.

The point is, OWS is unpredictable at this point. I grew up in the 60s, I know how this thing will play out in the eyes of the media and the American public. Americans don't like to see protestors fighting with police in the streets. I will concede that the protestors are not actually fighting with the police. That is not the point. That's how it looks to the casual eye that just glances at the tv screen or the pictures on the front page of the newspapers. They didn't like it in the 60s and they won't like it now. This is why support and the American public good will is falling. Americans may support your message, but they won't approve of your methods or what they perceive are your methods.

If the president were to say something at this point, you wouldn't like it. I'm sure that his message would be, he understands the frustrations of the movement (he's said that before). OWS has a right to assemble, but that they should respect and obey the law. What else would you expect a president to say?

[nadinbrzezinski]

155. Stock piling rocks and projectiles

Is like the WMD claim in Iraq. Blocking public transport and bridges is direct civil disobedience.

[treestar]

135. LOL!

What would you say if Bush did a thing like that?

Ever heard of states and state governments and the question of federalism?

What about the governors of the states? Are they chopped liver?

Or the mayors of the cities or towns?

It is not a top down matter in the US. The states/federal government are part of the separation of powers.

And just because we may like what these people are demonstrating against - it does not mean they can disregard duly enacted laws. It would be absolutely wrong for any executive, be it mayor, governor, or President, to suspend the laws because they agree with the politics the demonstrators support. They'd have to or could do the same for the Tea Party.

[nadinbrzezinski]

139. What pray tell me does this you posted have to do with the price

of tea in china. YOU THINK the FBI is not involved? Are you THAT NAIVE?

Where do you want me to start with THAT history? Perhaps the Palmer Raids... would be a good place

[treestar]

140. The FBI gets called in on some state matters

And there are rules and regulations for that. There's no proof that's happened here or that it is wrong in any way if it did. Invoking the Palmer raids does not make it so.

Face it, there's no drama here equal to the sixties, let alone the Palmer raids.

No big revolution is happening.

[nadinbrzezinski]

148. You actually believe the FBI is not infiltrating

And gathering intelligence because a democrat is in the WH.

Wow! Here is news to you, they are, and it's been SOP for a few oh decades. It's independent of the president in the WH.

This is not fairy dust or pixies, it is a well trodden history.

Nor did POTUS order this, just like bush didn't...it is triggered att a much lower level than POTUS or even the Cabinet.

If you do not understand this...well then.

[treestar]

152. They may have done it in the 60s but there is no

evidence they are doing it now. Not because a Dem is in the WH, but because there is no organization and long term staying power anything near like there was in the 60s.

Sometimes it can be "naive" to believe the conspiratorial thing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

153. Ok then it's my team

Under the USA patriot act they not only have the the authority but responsibility. Did you have any issues believing they did infiltrate the grannies for peace during the Bush years? I mean reported in F911. If you believe this is not happening it is just that, a belief.

I guess it's easy to acknowledge it under bush...and as I said, he didn't sign those orders either.

It's not conspiracy or paranoia to believe that my personal FBI file is growing either. It's reality. I am not naive.

[_ed_]

86. Maybe OWS is bigger than one politician

Maybe everything doesn't revolve around Obama.

[piratefish08]

88. maybe he shouldn't say shit like this to the world, unless he intends to back it up with action here

"So I want to be very clear in calling upon the Egyptian authorities to refrain from any violence against peaceful protestors. The people of Egypt have rights that are universal. That includes the right to peaceful assembly and association, the right to free speech, and the ability to determine their own destiny. These are human rights. And the United States will stand up for them everywhere."

President Barack Obama - Jan 28, 2011

[Union Scribe]

93. Stop whining.

"poor, poor Obama" is not a sympathetic or appealing argument.

[bigwillq]

94. Awww.

Life is very tough for Mr. President.
Maybe he needs a cookie.
:rofl:


And maybe you do too.

[TwilightGardener]

107. He should do whatever the daily whim is, which probably contradicts

yesterday's daily whim, and tomorrow's. Essentially, Obama will always have done the wrong thing--because the default position here is to complain about him, and bitch and carp endlessly.

[TheKentuckian]

120. He always does the wrong thing because his default position is to prop up the status quo

appease or even assimilate Republican ideology, great deference and unearned respect for "stakeholders", unwillingness to disrupt profits, a willful "two nations" sense of justice and accountability,tremendous belief in globalization and "free trade", is apparently blind to the scope and causes of our problems, and is always more cognizant of politics than conditions in the real world.

Hell, it can be simple said that he is blind to and refuses to conceptualize much less address structural issues. Symptoms he can plausibly react to but if the problem is fundamental then it isn't a problem.

[treestar]

133. Yep! He should attend to the issue of the day as chosen

by the media!

Oh wait, if he did that, he'd be a tool of the M$M!

Really, it gets hilarious. Whatever DU is obsessed with, the POTUS is supposed to be obsessed with at the same moment.

He really has nothing else to do. Like now he's in Australia, attending to our relationship with that country. He should ignore that completely and think about nothing but OWS. Then another day he should make a statement about Jerry Sandusky. Not worry about whatever it is he is working on. DU says that's the story today! Get in line Mr. President!

[treestar]

109. Whatever he does is wrong to some people

The President has fairly good political judgment - maybe brilliant political judgment, so if he did whatever the person is demanding or said what they were demanding he say, it would probably be a disaster, and that's why the DUer saying it isn't dog catcher, let alone President.

[loyalsister]

176. I would very much like to see many critics run for office

and get elected so they can find out how easy it is not to implement an agenda. I think actual involvement at a professional level is very limited. It's very easy to know what to do when you don't actually have to do it.

[Zorra]

122. He'd win real big by denouncing police violence against protesters.

Like he did for protesters that are not his sworn responsibility to protect as COC.


That's clearly not an attempt to co-opt the movement.

I'd be thrilled and jumping for joy.

"And this brings me to the final area where we are leading -- our support for the fundamental rights of every human being. Every nation will chart its own course. Yet it is also true that certain rights are universal; among them, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and the freedom of citizens to choose their own leaders. These are not American rights, or Australian rights, or Western rights. These are human rights."

President Barack Obama - Nov 17, 2011

[whatchamacallit]

125. I'd have a lot more respect for the president

if he was guided by something other than political calculus.

[tavalon]

137. He has lost any opportunity to lead and this is a leaderless revolution

He can quietly ride on our coattails and he will.

[Rex]

143. Of course he can, I think some wish he would lose all the time.

And then some can never see any wrong in Obama. I would never trust both groups, too much bias.

[Name removed]

147. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LWolf]

150. He can win whenever he decides to fight to uphold

traditional democratic and Democratic principles.

Abandoning neo-liberalism would be a good start.

[bvar22]

156. It is a bed of his own making.

Obama's Army, Jan. 21, 2009

"Oh, What could have been."

If President Obama had used his Popular Mandate for "CHANGE",
and marched at the front of his army,
we wouldn't have an OWS today.
There would be no need for one.

Now, his army is marching without him.
Really, really sad.
He coulda been a contender.




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
Solidarity99!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[ZombieHorde]

157. Well, different people are going to have different opinions. So people on the "same side" of an

issue will contradict each other.

[AntiFascist]

159. That's the whole problem...

Obama is way too concerned about what people think of him. Right-wing media outlets are always going to react to anything he says or does. So, he should just keep his head buried in the sand?

[War Horse]

161. Obama is Clinton II, basically

There's not much more to it than that (although Bill seemed to have more of a backbone, politically speaking). When some people on here compare him to W, I just cringe. It's just so damned intellectually dishonest.

He's no more of a Con/R than he is a Liberal.

It is what it is. He's decided to sit on the fence.

[fostercareinjustice]

163. OWS will gain steam and evolve and Obama will be able to embrace it.

They're the outgrowth of the frustrations of the majority. Things will eventually progress to the point where politicians will be able to openly embrace them.

[Deep13]

165. Well, he could TRY supporting it and see what happens.

How about Federal marshals to protect the protesters against police violence? Also, not encouraging cities to bulldoze encampments would be a step in the right direction.

[Kolesar]

177. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours ...eom