Obama is less progressive than his rivals on matters of domestic policy...

[Postman]

Paul Krugman.

http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/01/14/6358/

"on Sunday Mr. Obama came out with a real stimulus plan. As was the case with his health care plan, which fell short of universal coverage, his stimulus proposal is similar to those of the other Democratic candidates, but tilted to the right."

[rurallib]

1. Much less progressive. Been arguing that for pert near a year now

And the answer I would get in the Obama office was 'he was against the war'.

[Postman]

2. Except he voted for funding it before he was against it.

here we go again.

The only candidate who is squeaky clean on the war is Kucinich.

[skipos]

3. Thanks. I didn't see this the first 253 times it was posted. nt

[ihavenobias]

4. Yes, thanks, because apparently I missed those first 253 times n/t

[skipos]

6. Pssst. Use the search function. nt

[durrrty libby]

7. People need to see policy and you want it hidden. I wonder why?

[skipos]

9. Yes, I am so scared. That is why I keep kicking your dumb thread.

Look asshole, I am just trying to tell you this has been posted a million times and if you used the search function you would know that. If you get off on seeing "durrrty libby" to the left of something that has been posted by quicker and more informed duers, more power to you. Post polls from 2007, post the "Obama is a muslim" email, I don't give a shit. Sometimes DUers point out when something is a dupe, and the op deletes it. I guess you are a real DU rebel.

Have a good day, and fuck off.

[durrrty libby]

10. um..It's not my thread, but do enjoy your meltdown. I know I am

:dunce: :dunce: :dunce:

[Bishop Rook]

5. Because Paul Krugman has shown to be perfectly reliable

He totally doesn't have a dog in this fight... :eyes:

Obama didn't propose alternative energy funding in this economic stimulus plan because he already proposed it in his energy policy plan.

And yes, proposing $50 billion for poor and middle class tax cuts, pension relief, and support for homeowners facing foreclosure... that is totally what a right-winger would propose. I'm sure.

I swear to god, every time I hear Krugman speak or read something he's written, he loses more and more of my respect.

[avaistheone1]

14. Obama is not for SINGLE- PAYER universal health care coverage.

After Hillary, Obama is the number 2 recipient of health care lobbyist dollars. Obama is also on the record as supporting coal, and the nuclear industry. Surprise. Surprise. He has taken a boat load of money from those lobbyists too. None of these policies are progressive in the least.

[Bishop Rook]

15. Obama is INDEED for single-payer coverage

And he's said numerous times that his health plan is meant as an incremental step in that direction. All three of the top-tier candidates' plans use the existing medical insurance system for coverage, Kucinich is the only one calling for universal single-payer care immediately, so I hope he has your vote.

Obama was elected by the people of his state to represent their interests, and Illinois is a coal state. You might as well say an Iowa politician ought to be against ethanol subsidies. However, Obama has been quite consistent in supporting coal (clean coal, coal gasification, etc.) only where it can be shown to lower greenhouse gas emissions as compared to the alternative. I disagree, I don't think we should spend one red cent expanding coal use in this country, but oh well.

And there's nothing wrong with supporting nuclear power. It's a sensible part of the solution to greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change.

Obama has not taken any money from lobbying groups or PACs for his election, and it's a lie to say he has. He has taken money from individuals who are employed by lobbying agencies and individuals who are employed by coal and nuclear owning utility companies, all within the campaign finance personal contribution limits. So have all the candidates. But Obama and Edwards both refuse to take money from lobbies and PACs, and both have gotten a great deal of their money from small donors--people who give under $200. Neither is a corporatist.

[OHdem10]

8. Look at his Campaign strategy for winning--

I have heard this explained about 3 times.Developed with the Elites who
back him.

Create a Coalition more affluent more eduated and the African American
Community and this youth movement he is creating. To accomplish this
he has to have every black vote. Wonder why theree is such a fight
over race?????

The middle class and poor left out and Working class left out

The coalition is similar to the GOPs . No surprise he is playing
catch trying to come out with programs. They had not planned
on having to have any.

[LordJFT]

11. here's a nice rebuttal to some of the crap krugman has written about obama

http://www.newsweek.com/id/80882

Krugman is a smart economist but he is biased because he can't get past his dislike of Obama's nonpartisan message. Here are a few issues where Obama is more progressive than Hillary.

1. IWR- I don't know why some people scoff at whenever we Obamanians point this out. 650,000 Iraqi civilians and 4,000 Americans died because of this war. Shouldn't it be considered an important issue?
2. Kyl-Lieberman
3. Levin
4. flag-burning-Hillary co-sponsored unconstitutional legislation banning it
5. DOMA-Obama supports repealing all of it, Hillary doesn't
6. outsourcing/nafta
7. social security-Obama supports lifting the cap, whereas Hillary thinks the superich should only be taxed on 97,500 of their income
8. death penalty-Hillary's been a strong supporter of it whereas Obama supports it in rare cases

[FrenchieCat]

12. Well, I disagree.....

see.... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x4054504

[hfojvt]

13. Krugman is not accurate about that

"For example, the Obama plan appears to contain none of the alternative energy initiatives that are in both the Edwards and Clinton proposals, and emphasizes across-the-board tax cuts over both aid to the hardest-hit families and help for state and local governments."

"Barack Obama's Plan to Stimulate the Economy and Protect American Families Would:

* Provide an immediate $250 tax cut for workers and their families.
* Provide an immediate, temporary $250 bonus to seniors in their Social Security checks.
* Provide an additional $250 tax cut to workers and an additional $250 to seniors if the economy continues to worsen
* Provide relief to homeowners hit by the housing crisis.
* Provide aid to states hardest-hit by the housing crisis to avoid a slash in services.
* Extend and expand Unemployment Insurance.

Barack Obama's economic stimulus plan will inject $75 billion of stimulus into the economy by getting money in the form of tax cuts and direct spending directly to the people who need it most. Obama's proposal will immediately provide stimulus using means that do not require lengthy governmental or administrative delays. The plan also reserves an additional $45 billion of stimulus that can be injected into the economy quickly in the future if the economy continues to deteriorate."

http://www.barackobama.com/2008/01/13/barack_obama_announces_plan_to.php

So a) the tax cuts are not across the board and b) his plan does include aid to those hardest hit and to states.

Krugman did clue me in to the fact that, once again, Clinton seemed to copy Edwards. So she has learned how to play a progressive on TV, just say "I agree" to whatever Edwards says. What happens when she's the candidate or the President and he's no longer there to copy from? Is she gonna make him Secretary of HHS?

Given Clinton's record and campaign (large donors anyone) I still do not believe she is to the left of Obama.