For the 'sensible' people, here’s the deal.

[snake in the grass]

With all the straw men being offered of late, enough to meet our energy requirements for the rest of the year if one were to ignite them, I thought I’d get out my lighter and do my part for king and country.

Now, put your seat belts on, because here we go.

While I didn’t share the level of euphoria some felt after Obama won in 2008, I was very happy that Bible Barbie was sent home to Wasilla, instead of D.C. That was a good thing. Obama was in my eyes a political neophyte with a preacher’s cadence, but anything would have been better than McFailin’; I would have voted for Ronald McDonald and I'm a Burger King man! I still believe that. The problem, however, lies in the fact that we are still on the road to a corporate state and the change that we got was only a change in the speed with which we are approaching it. In case it hasn’t occurred to you, that isn’t real change.

We all sat back and laughed as the GOP began to implode after the election. I took real pleasure in it for all the negative reasons. I hate conservatives passionately. There’s nothing, not one thing positive they have ever done for the people and I don’t mean just in the history of the U.S. I mean not ever in the history of our species.

Let’s leave party names behind us for a moment and just look at the line that divides us basically into two groups; those with empathy and compassion, who try to make things better for all and those without, who don’t – I prefer the terms ‘progressives’ and ‘regressives’ respectively. That’s the divide in a nutshell. The problem the so-called ‘radical’ left has with the Obama administration is that it is sometimes hard to distinguish the president’s policies from those of the other side. Oh, he talks a fine talk, for sure, but he doesn’t walk the walk.

I lived in Germany for 23 years and was shocked upon my return to see just how ignorant a large part of the population here is. And not just ignorant. Critical thinking skills have gone out the door, replaced by obedience to authority. The one thing regressives like to do is to point out the failings of the public school system and use that as a reason to cut its funding. This worsens the situation, which gives them further ‘justification’ for further cuts. Many of these primates publicly declare their desire to do away with the Department of Education altogether and they get support from the useful idiots who vote them into office. Robbed of an opportunity for a decent education, the children are the first victims of this cynicism, but our country as a whole suffers due to this celebration of ignorance. Thomas Jefferson believed an educated public was necessary for the survival of the republic, yet I see President Obama following in the footsteps of the regressives in that he attacks teachers’ unions and pushes the charter school fable. No, he doesn’t do it directly. He sings the praises of a good education in front of every microphone, but his actions speak a different story.

Women’s issues are another area the Democrats traditionally claimed for themselves. The ‘issues’ being for the most part the right of women to determine for themselves what happens to their bodies, without having some old fuckhead waving his finger at them, and the right to sit at the adult table, instead of being sent to the kids. It is beyond me how this is even being discussed in this day and age, but our patriarchal structures are still far too strong to afford women the simple and self-evident recognition that they are actual human beings. To not allow public funding of abortion for low income women is a vile slap in the face of all women, even those who say they would never get one. One never knows. Around 31% of the abortions performed yearly in the U.S. are done on Catholic women, second only to Protestants. See what I mean?

Homophobia is another gift the patriarchal system has given us. What could be worse for a ‘real’ man than to be like a woman? I know that’s not what male homosexuality is, but it’s how it’s viewed by many in our society. The hypocrisy gets even better, when you consider how many ‘real’ men enjoy watching girl-on-girl action, then rant about the 'fucking queers', but that ties in to women’s issues again. Sex between two women isn’t really sex, you see. Either they just haven’t been fucked properly by a ‘real’ man, or as that luminary Elisabeth Hasselbeck recently claimed, because they are too old and ugly to get a man, so out of loneliness they go for another woman - shame on you, Barbara Walters, for giving that backwards stool sample a forum to spout such utter poison! And like with women, if LGBTQ-individuals aren’t finally given the full rights that every other citizen enjoys, there will be no peace. Obama could have at least suspended the DADT practice of discharging LGBTQ-members of the armed forces pending review. He could have done that with the stroke of his executive pen, but he didn’t. I was saddened to recently see that Lt. Dan Choi was discharged, an officer whom I, as a very heterosexual former http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/11-Bravo#Infantry_Branch_.28IN.29">11 Bravo, would have followed without question. His discharge and the discharges of the men and women like him shows the bitter failure of President Obama’s stance on civil rights as far as the ‘radical’ left sees it. Meanwhile, moral waivers are being given to criminals, because the war machine needs more meat, while important translators, for example, are sent home because they dare love someone of the same gender. Bravo, Mr. President! I feel safer already!

Speaking of civil rights, what does our constitutional scholar of a president think on the matter? It’s so hard to tell, because, once again his words don’t match his actions. Rendition? Still happening. Torture? Still happening (you are naïve to believe that the Twister game they are playing with the goat herders in the Bagram Black Site is the Hasbro version). Warrantless wiretapping and the further narrowing of the definition of freedom? They’re being expanded and continued. Now he has given himself the right to kill U.S. citizens without a trial, just for being suspected of nefarious activities. If you were to repeat this list without attributing it to Obama, I’d swear I was listening to Dick Cheney's Christmas wish list; certainly not a Democrat.

Oh, and how could I forget the wars; the ones that are killing or maiming our soldiers, sucking our treasury dry, and creating more enemies on a daily basis, while there isn’t enough money to help people here at home? I know Obama isn’t an idiot like Dim Son was, but he evidently wasn’t paying attention in history class when Afghanistan was discussed. It’s not called the ‘Graveyard of Empires’ for nothing and we will get our asses pinched just like Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, the British Empire, and the Soviet Union. Rest assured, there is nothing for us to win there, but that pipeline will be a great thing for the oil multi-nationals. The cost is only an unimaginable sum of money and, more importantly, the lives of fellow citizens, people who are your neighbors or relatives.

The fellating of big business is really one of the most disgusting displays of cowardice Obama has given us. Whether it’s dealing with Wall Street, BP, or the health insurance industry, I’ve yet to see him take off his kneepads. Tim Geitner leads the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau for the time being. Obama might as well put the fox in charge of the henhouse. BP is calling the shots in the Gulf of Mexico, while openly showing the administration the finger. Wall Street is coming for your Social Security and I have no faith that he won’t fold here either. The biggest dud, though, was the so-called health care reform; a giveaway to a parasitic industry, that profits from your death (let that one dissolve on your tongue a little, then savour it). Here President Obama could have really made a difference and joined the rest of the civilized world, considering nearly 70% of the population stood behind him on a public option, but he folded before he even reached the table. I’d love to play him in a game of poker. I really would. Where was the fight, except for his weak admission that he’d “like to see” a public option in the final bill, knowing full well that Baucus would deliver no such thing? We are told by 'sensible' members of the party that he achieved what was possible, but how will we ever know, when he didn’t fight? I’d have more respect for him if he would have fought and failed, than his buckling to financial interests over the lives of many who voted for him on this issue alone. I’m one of the 47 million without the possibility of getting affordable health insurance, so I, like them, have to sweat it out and hope nothing serious happens until the reform kicks in. Nothing is more enjoyable in life than living in fear. Thanks for nothing, Mr. President.

His crowning achievement, though, was the decision to stop investigating the war criminals living under us. This defies everything progressive, not to mention everything just, and is unforgiveable. That’s right. Unfuckingforgiveable - if you really give a damn. I don’t even think I have to say why, and if you fail to see that, you should have your moral compass checked out because something is definitely amiss. Covering for war criminals makes him complicit, makes him guilty. If you're getting red-faced now, that's just your conscience speaking to you. You should give it a listen.

I think we can all agree that if Dick Cheney were to go public with the announcement that the Bush Administration was one of the most successful implementations of progressive policies in the history of the U.S., we would all laugh at him. Am I right? So how does continuing the same catastrophic policies as the Bush Administration make Obama the new hope of the progressive movement?

It doesn’t - plain and simple.

And this is our beef with him. Not because we are dreamers, GOP operatives, or racists. The (D) is not enough. There has to be substance. Parties have come and gone throughout our history, so there is no reason to believe it will be otherwise now. We truly do live in interesting times, because the paradigm shift is coming, whether the 'sensible' under us want to believe it or not. The GOP imploded after 30 years of flirting with insanity and many of the moderate regressives have migrated to the Democratic Party to escape the taint. We saw the reverse when the Civil Rights Act passed in 1964, as many racist Dixiecrats switched to the GOP, because they just couldn’t stand the fact the ‘those people’ were finally recognized as human beings. Sadly our party is becoming the new haven for disillusioned Republicans, all at the cost of the very policies that defined us for a half a century. Policies that brought us from the dregs of the Great Depression to the moon in less than 40 years. Policies that enabled a middle class to develop and thrive. Policies that have been whittled away since Reagan started the whole supply-side stupidity. You know what trickledown economics really are? In reality they're table scrap economics. I don’t know about you, but I want my fair share of the pie and not what some asshole deems I deserve. That’s what makes us progressives and Obama's failures here, his squandering of a historic opportunity is what pisses us off.

For those who thrash anyone who has a legitimate complaint about Obama, I have only this to say: you can whine all you want, soil yourselves in fear at Palin 2012, and point your finger at us to blame, but we didn’t move. We are still here. If the leaders of the Democratic Party feel they don’t need us and our 'fucking retarded' ideas, fine. The vacuum developing on the Left needs to be filled and it will be, as nature abhors a vacuum. Bill Clinton said that during the primaries we fall in love, but during the election we fall in line. I say if our love continues to go unrequited, there is no reason to remain in that line.

No reason at all.

Think about it and a nice weekend to all.

[stray cat]

1. The people who care the most will decide the election - for better or worse

[havocmom]

2. Wish I could believe that

but frankly, the people in power just hire pols to put on theater for the masses. They choose. We hope for change that isn't coming. Power is not given up.

[pezDispenser]

94. who are the 'people in power'

Thats a real loaded phrase that should be qualified.

Do you believe the voters are the people in power?
Do you believe a small group of rich people are the people in power?
Do you believe Michael Steele & Tim Kaine are the people in power?

Also, what keeps these people in power? Is it purely money? If so, how much do you need? Apparently Ted Haggard, as much as an audience he commanded, didn't have enough. Does Bill Gates? Is money not enough, does someone also need to control a limited resource?

Or should we all take comfort in hiding from the 'people in power' boogeyman?

[havocmom]

191. The generational very elite VERY WEALTHY who have been running things for decades

The pols are just their paid middle management. Steele and Kaine? :rofl: they are just an act in the burlesque that obscenely keeps people diverted from the power that is screwing the people of the world, not just this country.

Country? A quaint notion with no basis in reality anymore. Corporate entities rule the globe. Watching various agencies and high ranking employees in the US government do BP's bidding has made that perfectly clear to all but the most stubborn of willfully ignorant.

[femrap]

232. +1

Maybe we need to rerun the movie, 'Zeigeist' for them.

Nice educational film for weekend viewing.

[sabrina 1]

12. That would be the leadership of the Democratic Party

It's in their hands. And it isn't just us telling them, it's Nancy Pelosi, and far too many of the House Dems who are beginning to wonder if they should have fallen in line for, as they are now admitting, 'unpopular bills' which they knew would get them in trouble in November. Especially since, as they twice told the WH, this WH doesn't seem to care whether they win or lose.

Yes, that is coming from Dems in Congress, NOT from DUers or as Obama's friend, Alan Simpson likes to say, 'the lesser people'. That would be us I suppose.

Putting Republicans in positions of power after their whole platform was rejected by the American people, was not the change people voted for. If we wanted Republicans, we'd vote for them. I'd like an explanation as to why when the people vote for Democrats, they get Republicans like Gates, Simpson, Peterson and Lindsey Graham, fundie pastors etc in a Democratic Administration.

[defendandprotect]

135. K&R -- Agree -- essentially Obama resurrected the GOP from the dead --

Putting Republicans in positions of power after their whole platform was rejected by the American people, was not the change people voted for. If we wanted Republicans, we'd vote for them. I'd like an explanation as to why when the people vote for Democrats, they get Republicans like Gates, Simpson, Peterson and Lindsey Graham, fundie pastors etc in a Democratic Administration.

Or --

as Speaker Nancy Pelosi put it in an effort to try to let the public in on what's really

going on . . .

"Obama was for a lot of things when he was campaigning that he is no longer for -- "



Another sizzling analysis --




:)

[OrwellwasRight]

255. When Americans vote for Democrats . . .

But get Republicans, it is no wonder that:

-people say politicians lie

-people say there is no difference between the parties

-people give up trying and tune out from politics altogether

-no one trusts the government

-there is a huge rift between those that see what is happening and those who want to believe that it is all going well

[dmallind]

275. Which of course explains why liberal Democrats are Obama's strongest supporters how? NT

[OrwellwasRight]

289. Did I miss a sarcasm tag?

I'm not sure what you mean or how what you assert disproves my post. I'm happy to listen.

[dmallind]

291. Well I assumed you meant that it's Obama and his admin who are Republicans

and I assume you would prefer them to be further left.

If I'm wrong who are the Republicans the American people got when they voted for Democrats? Since Obama is the only national candidate it sounds like you mean him.

Which would imply that you are kindly speaking for the American people, who would otherwise lack a voice, and yet somehow unaware that Obama's strongest approval is on the left of his party not the right, which says that if there is any buyer's remorse among those who wanted Democrats it is not on the left but on the right of the Democratic spectrum.

So help me out again - where was I wrong? Did you not mean Obama or were you speaking for some other section of the American people who either didn't vote for Democrats or are by far the most satisfied with what they got?

[OrwellwasRight]

297. You were wrong about what my point was.

My point had nothing to do with disputing the polls that claim that we lefties love everything Obama does. I'm not sure who is doing those polls, or how they are identifying people as liberals. But apparently they exist. Great. I haven't seem them, but I have no interest in arguing with them. And I don't believe I was arguing with them.

I think what is happening in this country is a much more interesting discussion than debating about which polling firm's results confirm whose beliefs.

If you would have read my post, you would have read that I proposed that when people vote for one thing but get another, then they will distrust government (and people do distrust government), they will say there is no difference between the parties (people say that too), and etc. That was my point. That our civil society is degrading. That our political system isn't working that well. And I'd be happy to discuss that.

[dmallind]

299. No I don;t think so. I think I disagree with it

You point was, surely, that people wanted more left leaning policies from Obama than they got, no?

My rebuttal, is how does that square with surveys that show the more left a Democrat's self identification is, the more likely they are to approve of Obama?

Either we are facing the single best co-ordinated and most secret conspiracy ever to skew poll results, or the left likes Obama more than you are saying.

[OrwellwasRight]

302. This is pretty pointless

I never said "everyone" or "all people who voted for Obama."

All you have to do is read DU for about 15 minutes to figure out there are plenty of people who think they voted for one thing, and are now seeing another.

Again, I am not disputing your polls (thanks for the straw man argument though). Your polls do not show that "all" liberals agree. And repeating to us about how you are the majority doesn't change the fact that there is plenty of disappointment out there, that the Dems will lose about 25 seats in the House in November, that Guantanamo is still open, and that the DOJ is still wiretapping us without warrants because the Democratic House and Senate renewed the USA PATRIOT Act at Obama's request.

Remember, in this country, a "measly" 1 % of the population is still more than 3 million people. So a disappointed minority can make a huge difference.

My post was about lamenting the results of what has happened to the country when there are so many people who are so clearly disappointed--despite the fact that some people are perfectly satisfied.

So you think Obama's perfect? Great. Super. But you might want to be aware that many other Democrats--millions of other Democrats in fact--who don't. And denying a phenomenon doesn't make it go away, nor will it help the Party to adequately prepare to deal with it. But if it makes you feel better that Gallup is on your side, terrific. But if that is your only point, I just don't think there is anything interesting left for us to talk about.

[Angry Dragon]

332. I do not see any liberal support for Obama

[havocmom]

3. Bravo, sir!

You have laid it out plainly and accurately. Well done. Now, duck because garbage will be thrown your way or there will be no response here in hopes this sinks into the memory hole.

[snake in the grass]

6. Unlike Obama...

...I welcome their hatred.

Thanks!

[havocmom]

68. my ol pappy used to say 'never trust someone everyone else likes'

While he will never achieve universal acclaim, the fact that Obama tries to look like he is all things to all people makes the case that he can't be trusted.

[snake in the grass]

314. Your ol pappy was very wise.

It's a good rule to follow.

[mmonk]

4. As the first recommend, I'll speak now.

Thanks for saying what you did and well done.

[snake in the grass]

7. Thanks for reading it.

I know it's a lot, but I couldn't shorten it.

[mmonk]

18. I'm glad you didn't .

[Nay]

140. I can't add a thing to this. It lays out my feelings perfectly. Thanks for

this, snake.

[freebrew]

214. There was lots to say.

You said what many of us are and have been thinking and I am impressed you could lay it out in the few paragraphs you did.

Watching those in power steal from us for at least 10 years, watching our education system fall since Nixon was elected.
These are scary times, especially for those of us on the edge of bankruptcy, lost jobs, lost pensions.

I wonder if they think we'll all just die before we can mount a good revolution or even protest?
It's very difficult to travel these days without $$$, but maybe a 40 million citizen march is what we need.(lotsaluck)

Still contemplating whether to vote come November, I have voted every election since McGovern, my first vote.
But maybe not this year, Skelton? I could vote for a Repug and get more empathy.

[junkyardbob]

282. Thank you!

Not one wasted word! I need to be this succinct and on top when I'm with the enemy (family and "friends") Only clarity of thought and expression such as this will convince other minded people to come around to the critical thinking crowd. Thanks again.

[MichiganVote]

5. K&R

[monmouth]

8. What a wonderful read....whew, I need a cig....n/t

[snake in the grass]

9. I know the feeling.

Get it every time I read MadFloridian or McCamy Taylor.

[BrklynLiberal]

235. LOL. That is also how I felt when I finished it....

[junkyardbob]

283. I quit!

I quit cigs years ago but a sip of cognac right now would be perfect! Skoal!

[Cleita]

10. K&R

[Sebastian Doyle]

11. K&R for the truth.

Best post I've seen here all week! :kick: :bounce: :woohoo:

[sabrina 1]

13. K&R for stating the facts ...

I don't know about anyone else, but I think they are pretty sensible.

[Tailormyst]

14. Bravo- I wish I could give you a standing ovation.

[snake in the grass]

16. You just did.

Thank you.

But more importantly, we need to hammer this message without relent. The politicians should fear the people and not the other way around.

[MissDeeds]

15. Excellent post

I'm sure the unrec squad will be out in force, but they can't negate the truth of your message. Well done, Snake.

K&R:thumbsup:

[treestar]

17. Would it be sensible to take the time to read this long piece?

Well, someone has to be sensible.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

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

[snake in the grass]

32. I didn't expect so much from him, to be honest.

I didn't expect him to be so feckless, though; especially after his ruthlessness in the primaries. My only hope (if you could call it that) was that he, as a constitutional scholar, would wash the blood off of our doorstep by investigating the war criminals of the previous administration. Instead, he covers for them.

Unbelievable and unforgivable.

[Foo Fighter]

75. Neither did I.

Which is why I didn't vote for him.

However, while I knew enough to not any illusions about his presidency, I have to admit that it's been far worse than I thought it would be. I take absolutely no comfort in knowing that I was right to not vote for him as I would MUCH rather have preferred to been proven wrong. Unfortunately, that just hasn't happened. And I sincerely wish it had.

[Control-Z]

312. So you voted for

McCain/Palin?

[Foo Fighter]

333. Uh, no. Not even close.

There were other people on the ballot, ya know.

Why is it that people to the left of Obama are always accused of being right-wingers? It just makes no sense to me.

[Dr.Phool]

103. Me too. I had tears on inauguration day,

Our long national nightmare was over. I told people it was a new beginning. Even with Rick Warren polluting the inaugural stage.

Brother, was I ever wrong.

But, I saw it earlier. I was just trying to believe. I gave him the benefit of my doubt.

It didn't work out so good, did it?

[NC_Nurse]

20. Yep. The Dems are just proving Bill Hicks correct in his assessment of the

Two parties. Two puppets held up by the same guy behind the curtain.

I, sadly, had high hopes for this new admin, but I am feeling pretty discouraged at this point. I'll probably vote, but not with much enthusiasm and I expect nothing will change as a result.

I'm going to figure out a new way to be active, and it sure isn't going to be by giving my money or time to the party.

[snake in the grass]

21. I've wrestled with this issue for some time now.

When the Green Party arrived on the scene in Germany in the 1970s, they were laughed at for being stinky, peacenik hippies. By 1983 they had achieved over 5% of the vote, putting them into Germany's lower house of parliament. Now they are a force to be reckoned with, in spite of the efforts of the established Social Democrats (rough equivalent of our Democratic Party) to marginalize them.

We have to start somewhere. My vote is no longer a tactical piece on the board. I will vote my conscience from now on.

[LooseWilly]

342. Never let them take your vote for granted.

Or the party will piss all over you... and the only way to not be taken for granted as delivered... well, like you said progressives have to start somewhere... ;)

(A thought recently occurred to me- the argument that a green can't win an election is a lot like the argument that a black man can't win an election... insightful conventional wisdom- until it isn't.)

[eilen]

26. When do you think they brokered the deal?

I think it was during that whole bank crisis before the election. The House voted the bailout down. The administration reached out to the Democrats and the Dems pushed it through. Complicity.

[snake in the grass]

29. Oh, they know which side their toast is buttered on.

For sure!

We won't see anything really change until we have public campaign financing, paper ballots with accountability, and a repeal of the perverted interpretation of the 14th Amendment, because corporations are not fucking people.

...or, when critical mass is reached and the people grab their pitchforks and rocket launchers.

[bvar22]

317. The "DEAL" was brokered sometime before 2004,

while Obama was still in the State Senate in Illinois.
"They" got him that speaker position at the 2004 Democratic Convention, and groomed him for the 2008 run.
Thats WHY a 1st Term Rookie Senator was able to show up in Iowa with $100Million dollars and an Up & Running National Political Machine.

[AnArmyVeteran]

66. Not a dime more!

I worked a goddamned year and donated many times to Obama's campaign. I was one of his delegates. But I've been feeling used for over a year and I won't give another dime from my pockets and not another moment of my time. Why should I work my ass off if he's going to just use us and then sell is out to the highest corporate bidder? Ralph Nader had the two major parties pegged perfectly and that's why they were so terrified of him that they conspired to keep him out of the debates in 2000. Nader knew the only way to get real representation was to stop the corrupting flow of corporate money to both the republicans and democrats. Ralph Nader would have NEVER sold out the people to corporations.

[Over Caffeinated]

22. Wow....when did it become regressive to point out that our educational system is failing?

You claim that you posses critical thinking skills, but it doesn't show. The US spends a considerable amount on education. It varies across states, from $5,257 (Utah) to $14,119 (New York) per student. The results vary across states. Iowa leads in SAT scores.

The same can be said when comparing across countries. The US spends considerable more per student than many other industrialized countries. Your hypothesis that throwing more money at the situation, just doesn't fly.

Then again, I am one of those "regressive" who think that there are underlying factors eroding our educational system than just lack of funding. We can give each kid a $200 calculator, but if they don't know the fundamentals, then what good is it?

As for the rest of your post, I largely agree.

[snake in the grass]

23. I'd like to refer you to...

...MadFloridian's journal. There you will find what you seek.

I'll say this much, though: getting rid of the Department of Education, as many 'regressives' want, is not the answer.

[ChiciB1]

199. Hear, Hear... And I've Thanked "madfloridian" Many Times For Her

HARD WORK and constant research that she combines with wonderful, insightful posts!! From one Floridian to another, she's right on TOP! Way ahead of me, but I KNOW how I feel and am NOT AFRAID to say so!!

Thank YOU again! I worked too hard to elect so many to have gotten such a "smack down" from these people! Let me rephrase that, my PERCEIVED "smack down" because I know many Rah Rah's are going to get the LONG knives out on this one!!

[snake in the grass]

315. madfloridian is a treasure.

If I were to move back to Florida, it would be under the condition that she's my neighbor.

[JDPriestly]

99. There is nothing wrong with criticizing education or health care or

foreign policy or anything else.

But there is something very wrong with privatizing public education, with handing public money to individuals and companies to use to educate our children. Public education is a central part of our democracy. Charter schools are undemocratic. They are a trojan horse in our democracy.

There isn't any really reliable research that shows that charter schools being established with the speed and ferocity that they are being put in place and imposed on communities through bribes and pay-offs of public money will actually change anything, much less improve it.

The charter school thing stinks to me. I smell the nasty blood of corruption. I'm an old lady and when people try so hard to sell you something like charter schools without letting you really see how the product works first, you are being "took."

People claim there is something wrong with our schools because the scores of our kids don't compare favorably with kids in other countries. First, many countries do not encourage all children to go to their equivalent of our high school, so the comparisons are of maybe 40% of the population of some other country and 100% or 90% of the population of our country. You can't compare test results in that way.

Second, most of the countries in which the scores are claimed to be higher than in our country, have public schools that are strictly regulated. And in a number of those countries, the teacher is the boss in the classroom. In elementary schools in some of those countries, the first grade teacher stays with a class for four years. The children feel secure even when the teacher may not be the best or most inspired. Our children are tossed about with a different classroom and teacher every year. There are so many things we could do to improve our schools. None of them require paying charter schools to educate our children.

[tomp]

163. call me radical but i'm for the elimination of private schools. nt

[Daphne08]

165. You are right about the testing in other countries

We test everyone. Most countries don't... which negates the entire argument.

[Frisbee]

184. I suspect that once we have charter schools you will...

see grades overall improve dramatically. Assuming of course that the schools are given bonuses based on average grades. Yup, expect a whole generation of straight "A" students. Never mind that many of them will be unable to read or write at a high school level or do basic mathematics. But they'll have those diplomas showing what little geniuses they are, and the stockholders of the "Haliburtons of Education"© will become even wealthier.

[ChiciB1]

201. Meanwhile "Public Education" Takes A Hit & A Very Good Teacher Friend Of

mine has told me all about HER experience with CHARTER SCHOOLS! She wasn't complimenting in any way!!

America is NUMBER 37 in the WORLD when it comes to education! It SURELY needs fixed, but I can't wrap my head around this CHARTER crap, and I KNOW Obama is really FOR THIS type of thing and IS pushing THIS on us!!!

Arne Duncan hasn't won me over, in fact I'm highly offended!

[peace frog]

142. Switch to decaf, why doncha

Never mind, the pizza has been delivered. :evilgrin:

[sulphurdunn]

211. Nationally, the cost for each public school student

works out to about $5 per hour. That cost covers all school operations: salaries, infrastructure, transportation, materials, records etc. The kids where I teach can use the $200 calculators just fine. Most of them can do things with computers I never knew was possible. Their critically thinking skills are no better or worse than when I was an adolescent in the 60s.

Cassandras have been wringing their hands over the obvious shortcomings of compulsory K-12 education since we started doing it. I have a book in my library somewhere, bemoaning the failure of public education, written in 1954 (the same year as Brown v. Board of Education). And, of course, no list of anti-public education tomes would be complete without "A Nation at Risk", the mother of our present school reform movement from which one could have inferred that American schools would never have produced the people necessary to launch the computer age or lead global breakthroughs in telecommunications technology and medical science.

The real issue that "education reform" has with public schools has never been so much with the curriculum and teachers as with integration and inclusiveness. The key to making public schools better is not privatization and the inevitable return to segregation by class and income that would cause. It is social justice.

[BrklynLiberal]

236. hmmm We spend more per capita on health care as well. Let's see where that has gotten us.

It is a combination of $ and what is done with that money that makes the difference....

When the only underlying motivation for everything is to maximize profit....there are important questions that need to be asked.

[Angry Dragon]

334. If you are correct then why is Obama backing duncan

with his hands held high with money and telling school districts if you do it our way this can all be yours'??

You talk of underlaying factors but do not list any.....just asking.

Where I live education is mostly financed by property taxes. The more prosperous communities have an advantage.

What duncan and Obama are doing to the education system in this country is a crime. Perhaps the education system is broke but why have test scores decide whether a district is failing or succeeding?? Race to the top is not the answer.

[BzaDem]

24. Unfortunately for you, the 'vacuum' you speak of doesn't actually exist where it matters.

Sure, there will be people like Nader who fill a 'vacuum.' It's just that the 'vacuum' doesn't ever have any actual power. Sure, there is a lot of complaining and yelling and screaming. But when it comes to actual power, all your 'vacuum' does is move Democrats to the right to make up for lost votes on the left. Like clockwork.

Eventually, these people recognize reality and fall in line (as Clinton said). It is never a matter of if. Just a matter of when. People can remain irrational for a short period of time, but in the end humans have evolved a survival instinct that forces them to be rational. The only real question is how long it takes for that instinct to kick in. After 2000, Nader lost 90% of his support in 2004. That tends to be what happens -- people who say "there is no difference between the two parties" find out in a quite vivid way how wrong they were, and they switch their votes in the election immediately following.

[snake in the grass]

27. Remember the Whigs or...

...the Know Nothing Party?

Where are they now?

The only difference I see between the parties is that one is willing to give us a few more scraps and is maybe not totally insane on some issues. When a certain percentage has nothing more to lose, we will see real change, maybe even ugly change, although I cannot say I'd regret it all too much to see Cheney led to the guillotine and I'm anti-death penalty! Both parties have subscribed to neoliberal economic policies, which have gutted us in under thirty years. It will not be sustainable for much longer.

Either we get back what FDR gave us or at some point people are going to take it back.

[BzaDem]

31. The problem for you is that very few people agree with you.

87% of liberal democrats approve of Obama's performance. That is higher than every single president since JFK.

So not only are people not clamoring to "take it back" -- they don't even agree that there is a problem! And this is more true now than any point in decades. This is why you have to go back over 150 years for an analogy that isn't even relevant.

[snake in the grass]

36. It is relevant in that I was illustrating that parties don't...

...exist forever when they've outlasted their usefulness or had none in the first place.

It was the Great Depression that enabled FDR to bring about the change that helped more people than it harmed. Now, instead of going after these forces with decisiveness, our fine representatives are going to bed with them. We'll have to watch and wait, but at some point the neoliberal policies and corporate fellating will bring us to critical mass.

Watch and wait. We live in interesting times.

[BzaDem]

38. Usually, people who claim they will have a "critical mass" have some sort of mass in the first place

As opposed to being at the lowest level in decades.

Don't get me wrong -- there would be no chance of a viable third party in our winner-take-all system even if said party had a non-negligible share of supporters. (See Perot, with his 19% support and 0 electoral votes.) It's just all the more striking that people are making all these claims about "critical mass" when their support is negligible and at the lowest point in decades.

[snake in the grass]

40. Yes, yes...

...I get it already. Everything is going to be just fine.

[BzaDem]

43. Whoever said anything about fine?

I am simply describing reality as it exists. I'm not saying that it's "fine," or that our two-party, winner-take-all system is a good thing. I'm describing reality, not judging it.

[snake in the grass]

44. I'll just say this...

...as long as people believe the system cannot be changed, it won't be. We have to start somewhere.

[dmallind]

277. Agitators cannot see nuance

If you prefer Obama over viable alternatives (and know who they are) you must love every single thing he has ever done. You must share his taste in music and ice cream and vegetables and believe he is never wrong.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

48. The DLCers in their arrogance need to remember

the Whigs, who vanished after they failed to deal with slavery, the greatest and most contentious issue of their day.

[BzaDem]

50. A party doesn't tend to vanish when its base supports it at the highest level in decades.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

52. Wonder how old your support figures are

If you'll look at today's NY Times, you'll see that Krugman is getting seriously disillusioned and that most of the online readers' comments agree with him.

The only people I know who wholeheartedly support Obama now are the ones who aren't paying any attention.

[BzaDem]

54. this week.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

62. Whom did they survey--the staff of the Progressive Policy Institute?

The K Street crowd?

The insurance company executives?

The military contractors?

Because I'm sure they're as delighted as can be.

[BzaDem]

76. Gallup.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

80. Oh, the outfit that told us that Reagan was the most popular president

since World War II, except that he wasn't really.

[BzaDem]

82. Do you have a link to the result and a methodological explanation for its errors?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

83. Since it happened in the 1980s, no

n/t

[BzaDem]

87. Usually, I am skeptical of people who attack the polling industry when they don't like the results.

Republicans similarly bashed the polling industry, right up until election night (when it turned out that the polls were correct).

[femrap]

242. I got called a couple

of weeks ago by that Quinpac&^$()*&$ (however you spell it). The polling started with my state...Governor, Senator, policies. It was long and in depth. Then it went to national.

Now I agree 100% with the OP, but I felt I had to say I approved of Obama or I would be counted as a Repugnant. I hemmed and hawed with the dude who was asking me the questions. Hell, on some of them, I told him I could write a book and a simple 'yes or no' was very difficult.

These polls suck. And they are worded in such a way that you end up saying 'yes' when you want to say 'maybe' or 'none of the above.'

Next time I vote, I want a place for 'None of the above!' I guess I'll just write that in.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

258. Yes, and there is such a thing as a push poll

It all depends on how the question is worded. Before taking poll results at face value, I want to see how they are worded.

[JDPriestly]

102. Obama's problem is that the spiritual leaders, the strongest believers

his biggest supporters, are disillusioned with him. He has not drawn us in. He has not listened to us. He has ignored us and disappointed us. The very people who knocked on doors and stood behind tables and got out the vote in the crucial final days now mean nothing to Obama.

He is getting horrible advice. He is not using his tremendous ability to communicate wisely. He is losing the 2012 election because he is losing the enthusiasm of his base.

He could turn this around, but he would have to fire some people -- especially on his economic team. He seems to be wising up to the Chamber of Commerce crowd, but his policies, his focus, doesn't reflect the fact that he is wising up.

[Bluenorthwest]

149. American political Parties have long lives, but the fact of the

matter in terms of popularity of anykind is that the ramp up is long, the drop off is sudden, and often times comes directly on the heels o the peak. That is how it works in general, with 'stuff' in the public square, and political Parties, and especaially politicians should bear that in mind always. The way to be the least popular is first to be the most popular.
In this case you have the unusal scenario in which the Party leadership stands against the equal rights of millions in the 'base' it claims to want and need. Tim Kaine says my family should have no rights as a family. Any Party in history taken a stance like that against their own? Of course not, only modern Tim could have such hubris.
Enjoy your fanstasy the Tim Kaine is doing a good job. Frittering it away, that is what they call it. Frittering.

[femrap]

238. Yes, we do.

And some nasty shit is about to hit the fan.

It could be an Israeli strike on Iran.
It could be a false flag of some sorts.
It could be we piss off China and they decide to place an embargo on us.
It could be a devastating Earthquake and resulting land mass shifts.
Hell, as I learned in Physical Science 101, it could be the Earth flips on its axis.
It could be the collapse of the US Dollar as the reserve currency.
It could be a Dow Jones of 2,000.
It could be a number of things....and then the butterfly's wing movements will have its effects.

The shit is gonna fly.

This time we'll damn well see some 'Change!'

[depakid]

42. LOL- you have no shame at all- it was 80%, then 85% now- just as I predicted- you bumped it up again

:rofl:

You have ZERO credibility- but you are useful to the extent that you represent one of those who never learn , and thus repeat the same mistakes you and your conservadem ilk caused in 1994 and 2000.

Seeing your sorry displays reminds all of us who do have the ability to learn what to look for.

[BzaDem]

46. Has it ever occured to you that polls fluctuate slightly each week? Or has that escaped you?

It was 87% last week. This week it is actually 89. To my knowledge, it has never been as low as 80 (and I have never claimed as such). You can go to Gallup (or any other poll) and see for yourself. (But you won't, because it is obvious evidence against your crackpot theories based on nothing more than a type of religion, and this makes it invalid to you by definition.)

The fact that you are arguing about WHICH high 80 percent level of support it is shows you that you have no case based on anything other than religion.

[depakid]

72. Whatever- you keep on piling up the bogus numbers and ignoring the real world

where your constituencies live.

As I said, it happened before- and it's happening again for the exact same reason. The fact that we're even talking about this pathetic bunch of Republicans taking back the house and making major gains in the Senate should tell you something, but of course, it doesn't and never will.

[dmallind]

279. Funnily - this poster UNDERSTATED the current results - 89% now,

Most of us can google "Gallup Obama approval" and find out for ourselves ya know....

[Mimosa]

65. Usually polls don't allow for nuances

Source and link, please?

That 87% figure sounds incredible.

Obama definitely had the mandate on health care reform. Even moderate and conservative people wanted to be freed from the clutches of the insurance profiteers. Instead we will be manacled to them. :(

[BzaDem]

77. Gallup.com.

Presidential approval center.

It's actually 89 this week. It was 87 last week. Look for approval among liberal democrats.

You think it's strange because message boards often are not representative of the total population of the party.

[JDPriestly]

104. Gallup's question: Do you approve of Obama?

Yes or no. Up or down. No nuances. No opportunity to qualify or explain your response. Those polls are worthless.

[BzaDem]

120. Approval is very highly correlated with who votes for him. n/t

[Occulus]

125. Again, utterly worthless

Him over Palin or some other repuke? Approve.

Him over a Democrat willing to implement a New "New Deal"?

Absolute disapprove, and it wouldn't take much.

In other words, worthless poll. I voted for Obama, but I truly hope we get offered a better choice next time.

[dmallind]

281. Really - you think the OP and similar say "yes"?

What other nuance do you need?

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

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

[BzaDem]

86. Truth hurts.

The fact that your friends don't like Obama says more about how you hang out with like-minded friends than it does about Obama.

Republicans were saying the same thing about polls before the 2008 election. They didn't believe any of them until election night, when it turned out that the final result was within three tenths of one percent of the RCP average.

[Dr.Phool]

88. I hang out with a lot of liberal politicians, and consultants.

And Democratic Party officials. And candidates.

Yeah, the truth hurts alright.

[Occulus]

126. Aaaaannnnd POOF

No response, despite the later responses to others.

Telling, that. Fucking telling.

[BzaDem]

129. Did I miss something that merrited a response? Nope.

I presented evidence that almost 90 percent of self identified liberal democrats support Obama. This level of support has been consistent throughout the Obama administration.

He presented anecdotal evidence regarding a few "politicians" that says more about the politicians (and who he hangs out with) than it does about Obama.

I usually respond to most posts, but I often let the responses that are so meaningless that they don't even claim to respond speak for themselves.

[JDPriestly]

96. I've taken some polls.

You aren't given the opportunity to comment. You are just asked whether you approve or not. I'm a Democrat. I don't approve in fact. But then the people on the other side, the Republicans, are worse so, given the choice to say I approve or I don't approve, I say I approve.

In a way it isn't true. But in another way, I approve less of the other guy. If the polls allowed me to give my real opinion, I would qualify my statement of approval and explain that I agree with some things Obama does but overall, I am very unhappy with him.

I will bet that a lot of people who respond to polls answer with mixed feelings as I do.

[BzaDem]

121. That's fine. Except the OP is talking about not voting for him.

So that's all I'm addressing my post at anyway.

[lib_wit_it]

220. I wonder how many, like me, respond that we approve simply to deny the RWers the claim that The Prez

has high disapprovals due to the crap the Baggers are bitching about. Until I get to say why I'm unhappy with Obama's performance, I'll continue to give him the thumbs up in response to polls.

I don't know if that's right, but I will not lend any support to the RW hatchet squad.

[dmallind]

276. It's 89% in latest poll BTW

Compared to under 70 for conservative Democrats and 76 or so for moderate ones.

Sound and fury about the gap on the left is not therefore fueled by a mass of DEMOCRATS on the left obviously.

[Angry Dragon]

336. As long as you put it out there

I will ask you what is the definition of a liberal??

I need a very concise answer.

[w4rma]

49. The Democratic Party has existed since the Democratic-Republican Party became the Democratic Party.

It isn't going anywhere and Obama, like every other President, will come and go. He is not the Democratic Party. I suggest you use his corruption and an opportunity to get rid of any and all blue dogs, while strongly PROTECTING progressive Democrats, this upcoming election. You'll have your Democratic Party back then.

[snake in the grass]

53. I'm in L.A.

Boxer gets my vote in any case. There's not much going on here in 2010. 2012 is a different story altogether. I only know one thing; I will vote my conscience.

[JDPriestly]

109. Boxer, Jerry Brown and my Democratic congressman.

I will vote for them, but I will bet you that a lot of people who voted for Democrats in 2008 just won't be interested enough to go to the polls. And, since the Democratic voters have lost more money, more jobs and more houses than the wealthier, more comfortable Republicans, many of whom who have actually increased their wealth since Obama became president, the Republicans may have, in the end, better campaign funding than the Democrats. This is especially true because corporations from Target (which gave to a Republican candidate for governor) and BP (which has done more to harm Obama than a million TV ads slamming Obama could do) have enjoyed increased profits in the last couple of years and are free to spend those profits to turn voters against Democrats.

The Democrats have supposedly been the majority, but they have not acted in the economic interests of their supporters. The banks were bailed out but homeowners were not.

The thought of a Republican majority in Congress is just horrible. But the fact is that we don't really have a Democratic majority now. We have a Democratic minority and a Republican minority and the Blue Dogs.

[Bluenorthwest]

154. Not much going on in CA? You lost me there, man.

CA will not survive a Whitman governorship. You must not send Carly to the Senate. You have State saving and State shaping propositions, more important than in most years.
This is a very important election in CA. Very.

[snake in the grass]

244. You're right.

I wrote in haste and totally forgot Jerry Brown. Of course he's getting my vote. I certainly hope the Californians don't fall for the "cut taxes and lower spending" myth, but one never knows.

[snake in the grass]

55. For sure the name will remain.

Don't get caught up with that. My point is that the Democratic Party is slowly transmuting into a haven to regressives. The Left doesn't have a home anymore. They can call themselves Democrats, that's fine, but they are about as much traditional Democrats as the current GOP politicians are Eisenhower Republicans, or even Nixon Republicans. Who wouldn't love to have a Nixon GOP instead of the greedy swine now?

[JDPriestly]

100. The Know Nothings did not disappear. They returned with Ross Perot

under a different name. They are a big part of the Teabaggers movement. They mostly became Republicans. They still are Republicans. They were simply absorbed.

[spoony]

64. And there it is, "fall in line." Not even trying to disguise it in other words anymore. nt

[Greyhound]

81. Yargle bargle blarrrgh!!!

:rofl:

[snake in the grass]

108. I'm sorry to everyone else, but...

...yours is the best comment of the day.

Really. I'm laughing as I type this.

Thanks!

[ejbr]

151. Unfortunately, for US.....n/t

[Greyhound]

188. Oh no, there is no 'us' for the sensible crowd.

Only them and the imagined people over whom they rule. The false superiority and arrogance, that has proved to be just as popular as the policies discussed in the OP, has convinced them that they are so strong they don't need anybody else. So now, we're all in the "against us" category.

[OrwellwasRight]

262. Let me see if I'm following you correctly . . .

If the Democratic Party is losing votes on the left because it is moving too far to the right, then it will just abandon those voters and move farther to the right?

And the only way to get the Party to move back to the left is to vote for right-wing Democrats?

Is that what your argument is?

[Red Knight]

294. The Dems move to the right is forcing the right further right

Into nutcase territory.

That's the pattern.

Where does that end, exactly?

We're marching back to the middle ages.

Sad.

[Mimosa]

345. ^ True. ^ n/t

[eilen]

25. Great Post!

Yes, it pisses me off too.

So we have to figure out what we are going to do about it. Elections give us very narrow options. I think first we have to regain control of the message. You are right, there are a lot of mentally lazy people out there. Even some that I know are intelligent are easily duped by the media. One friend I have was going on about Shirley Sherrod and her speech-- she had no idea of the real story. It is scary.

[myrna minx]

28. Thank you. K&R n/t

[williesgirl]

30. Bravo - you've said it all for me. Thanks. rec'd

[depakid]

33. "The vacuum developing on the Left needs to be filled and it will be, as nature abhors a vacuum"

Yep.

[RainDog]

34. we're still here. n/t

[Stinky The Clown]

35. The Snake gets a Standing O from this clown

[Atticus]

51. Thanks for that very well-considered post. I share your concerns and wonder if

my party will make any attempt to shorten the distance between us.

I fear that, this time, taking the base for granted will have devastating and long-lasting consequences.

We cannot continue to drift right and still call ourselves Democrats. The Republicans have moved rightward to become Teabaggers, so I guess some on our side of the aisle could just take over their old name.

I grew up in an era when Democrat and liberal were nearly synonymous. I will remain a liberal. I'd very much like to remain a Democrat.

[jgraz]

37. Perfect execution, stuck the dismount.

:applause:

[snake in the grass]

57. Just noticed on another post that Chuckles has a new bow tie.

How Tucker Carlson sensible!

[AsahinaKimi]

39. I thought

burning straw men would lead to more global warning? :shrug:

[snake in the grass]

41. And here I thought...

...it was all the hot air coming out of D.C.

[AsahinaKimi]

45. ROFLMAO! That too!

eom

[Steely_Dan]

47. Snake - Well Done

I wrote something quite similar the other day...However, yours is what I should have wrote. OUTSTANDING!

-PLA

[snake in the grass]

56. I'd love to read it.

Can you give me the link?

[WheelWalker]

233. Yo, Paige ! Good to see you around.

(fka The Village Idiot)

[Steely_Dan]

273. YO!

Been doing good...keeping the faith. How you?

[WheelWalker]

321. Blessings, friend.

[AnArmyVeteran]

58. That is honest, true and superb. Excellent article!

It's a shame because Obama could have delivered so much, but he is either timid or owned, and NOT by the people who elected him. We worked hard and dug deep into our pockets to put him in office, only to be betrayed. Sadly, candidate Obama has become corporate Obama. Ralph Nader said Bush "was a corporation masquerading as a human being". Every day Obama refuses to honor his promises to us he becomes more and more like the corporate shill Bush was. Say what you want about Ralph Nader, but he would have NEVER sold the people out to corporations, NEVER. Ralph Nader is a man of principle and he cannot be bought by anyone. It's sad how the two major parties conspired to prevent Nader from the 2000 debates. The corporate-owned major parties were terrified of the message Nader was bringing to the American people. And it's the same message progressives wanted Obama to deliver and then act on. But it's obvious Obama has no intention of fulfilling any truly progressive ideas or values. Nothing substantial will ever come from a major political party that are both owned by the same corporations. Unfortunately, both only respond to those with deep pockets and since 'we the lowly people' have just enough money to exist on, they couldn't care less about us.

[me b zola]

59. K&R

[bvar22]

60. Outstanding.

Vacuums will be filled.

[MannyGoldstein]

61. Might be the best thing I ever read on DU!

Incredible, thanks!

[mitchtv]

63. thank you for the best post in ages

I have been a Union man and liberal Dem for a long time, 40+ yrs, and I am disgusted with our current state of affairs. I've done my time on the picket line. Take one more "R". HHH found out the hard way.

[bertman]

67. It don't git no better than that! Well said, Snake. You nailed it. Rec

[Laelth]

69. k&r for the truth. (and, well said!) n/t

-Laelth

[Naturyl]

70. Powerful post, K&R

[NYC Liberal]

71. Your post boils down to: Obama and Dems do what I want, I'll vote for them

They don't, I wont.

I'm not trying to be snarky, that is how many people vote. So vote for people you think will do a better job. Not just people you agree with, but people who can actually put their plans into action.

Obama was in my eyes a political neophyte with a preacher’s cadence, but anything would have been better than McFailin’

And you don't put your money where your mouth is. That's the problem. Everyone says that after every election: "Oh I just voted for the lesser of two evils because I didn't want the REALLY evil guy to win!" Then you mock the very thing that you did yourself in 2008 at the end of your post: "you can whine all you want, soil yourselves in fear at Palin 2012."

I say if our love continues to go unrequited, there is no reason to remain in that line.

People say that every damn election. I remember it in 2000. I remember it in 2004. I remember it in 2008. When will they follow through? If it does come down to Obama vs Palin, will you truly refuse to "fall in line" and vote for another candidate or will you, in your words, "soil yourself in fear at Palin"?

[depakid]

73. Gee, I though that was what democracy was all about- silly me

Oh, that's right- it's about keeping other parties off of the ballot.

[NYC Liberal]

74. I am encouraging the OP to vote for the candidate they

feel is the best one. Don't see where you got the idea that I want to keep other parties off the ballot. Quite the opposite, as a matter of fact.

The OP said he voted for Obama in 2008 because he did not want McCain to win. He said that if it is not guaranteed that he will vote for him in 2012. He should not vote for Obama if he truly does not support him or think that he is the best person for the job.

[enlightenment]

185. You seem to be encourging the OP to state

for the DU record that he/she will not vote for Obama in 2012 . . . which, in this current incarnation of DU, is equivalent to asking for a pizza.

[Mimosa]

346. When the 'fear tactic' is all they can offer we're in trouble

No matter what dems do or don't stand for and no matter which legislation is or isn't enacted, the far right will always call dems 'commies'and 'socialists'. They always have! nothing new here. So why appease them? Appeasers gain nothing and waste a lot of time.

And those who are inclined 'right' will vote for the real thing instead of moderates.

In 1980 third party candidate John Anderson picked up a lot of votes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson

[snake in the grass]

92. I will do just that.

You're right. I'm guilty of exactly what I reproach, but I've learned my lesson. It won't happen again.

[spoony]

117. Because it's sensible to vote for people who DON'T do what you want!

Toodle-ooo!

[NYC Liberal]

122. I voted for Obama. I do not regret that vote

because I *do* support him and what he has accomplished thus far. So my vote for him in 2008 was the sensible choice.

If you don't like Obama or don't support him, then don't vote for him. It's a very simple concept, yet people still don't adhere to it. They mock people for voting for the "lesser of two evils" when they themselves do the same thing.

Did you vote for Obama in 2008? Were you voting mostly FOR him or mostly AGAINST McCain?

By the way, people do vote for candidates who they don't really support because they want the lesser of two evils. The OP did that in 2008.

[donco6]

172. So all the Dems have to do is get someone REALLY scary to run against them.

Positions? Platforms? Pfft. There's no need, because all you need to win an election today is a good shot of

PARANOIA!

And what's really sad is that today's Dems know it. They know they don't actually have to DO anything - in fact, they can move as far right as they want, as long as a nutjob like Palin is running, they've got the perfect cover.

Disgusting.

[NYC Liberal]

189. Problem is: How many people who make posts like yours

did the same damn thing? How many here who never really liked Obama (and I mean people who actually come out and say it) voted for him only because they were scared of McCain, and didn't vote for the candidate they felt was best for the job?

The real problem is people who go on and on about how voting the "lesser of two evils" is bad, two party system is bad, etc, and refuse to put their money where their mouth is and vote for someone else.

[donco6]

194. So, you're daring people to say they're voting Green or something?

Interesting tactic. Transparent, but interesting.

[NYC Liberal]

200. No. I am saying vote for who you think is the best candidate.

Obama. A Dem write-in. The Green Party candidate. Whoever. Of course there are DU rules about third party advocacy and supporting the Dem nominee. If you think I'm somehow trying to goad people into breaking rules, I'm not. Seriously. I'm simply saying we'd be better off if more people voted FOR a candidate and less people voted AGAINST one. (For Obama, not against McCain, ie.)

Now, I will tell you that Obama is the best candidate and the best person for the job right now. So I plan on voting for him again. I will try to persuade people to do so as well - not by fear mongering (although I happen to think preventing a right-winger from winning is a legitimate consideration) - but by explaining why I think he's the best person for the job.

As Skinner said not too long ago, the source of contention around here isn't really centered on differences in ideology, it's "pragmatism vs idealism" (I believe those were the terms he used). I bet 95%+ people here agree on 95%+ of the issues. That's the really sad part about all this crap.

[spoony]

264. And you're just as wrong as he was when he said that.

As has been explained many, many times.

[NYC Liberal]

293. What, exactly, am I wrong about? I made several points in my post.

Please enlighten me.

-Vote for who you think is the best candidate?
-We'd be better off if more people voted FOR a candidate and less people voted AGAINST one?
-As Skinner said not too long ago, the source of contention around here isn't really centered on differences in ideology, it's "pragmatism vs idealism"?

[spoony]

329. The last, as was indicated by my reference to the only person

mentioned in your post as having said anything. Besides attempting to legitimise the "you critics don't live in the real world" meme, Skinner was wrong in that there is a massive difference in ideology. I'm in another thread with a "liberal" who literally supports more wars. There are people here arguing for workhouses for the poor. There are people here who have belittled the pursuit of equality for gay people. There are others who are fine with assassinating US citizens without trials and FISA. Need I really go on?

[NYC Liberal]

355. OK, yes I do agree with you that there are differences

in ideology to be sure. I think you are exaggerating the number of posters here who hold those kinds of positions. Not that they aren't here or aren't vocal at times, but as I said: "I bet 95%+ people here agree on 95%+ of the issues." Whether it's equal rights for gay men and women, whether it's torture, whether it's women's rights...most people agree overall. Where you get contention and arguments around here is how to achieve what we as liberals want to accomplish. For example, I would say MOST people here see health care as a right, but of course there is disagreement over the way to ensure that everyone has access to HC.

But like you said, there are definitely people here who have a "massive difference in ideology" from the vast majority of posters here.

[LWolf]

369. All those people who voted for a 3rd party

aren't going to come out and say it on DU, since that would skirting dangerously close to a violation.

That doesn't mean they didn't put their money where their mouth is. It just means they aren't going to tell you about it at DU.

[on point]

78. I would add something, but you said it all. I agree 100%. Dems get a clue!!

[Greyhound]

79. Righteous rant. K&R

[Dr.Phool]

84. Goddamn that's good!!!

It encapsulates a lot of what I've been saying.

I was ecstatic when "we" took back Congress in 2006. I knew the wars were finally going to end. But, the first shot we had at ending it, we voted to keep funding it. "Sensible" people said we just didn't have the votes to stop it. Parliamentary procedure says that if you don't want to fund it, you don't bring it to the floor for a vote. It's done. Nope, we' still there. The weasel words are being used. "We will withdraw combat troops". What about all of the permanent military bases we built in Iraq? The ones Bush built to appease BinLaden. The ones we moved out of Saudi Arabia into Iraq. Oh, those aren't "combat troops". They're occupation forces, or whatever you want to call them.

I resigned from my DEC over that one.

Next, we went along with renewing the Patriot Act, gave the Telecoms immunity for knowingly violating the law. And this is all pre 2008 election.

I got out of the Democratic Party over those two. I'm now "No Party Affiliation". I voted for Obama, just because I feared "Bible Barbie" and McNutt. Even though I had serious reservations about him. Especially when he started picking his economic advisors. I didn't see any "there" there back then. I even posted this back in April 2008. http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Dr.Phool/1

Now I see much more clearly. We've got a clearly dysfunctional, failed state. An obsolete Senate. Maybe we really do need a non-violent revolution.

As I told people back during the St. Ronnie Regime, "Watch what these people are doing. Not what they're saying". We're still on the same path.

Good night and good luck.

[bbgrunt]

89. the hardest thing to overcome is the general perception that

BO is inherently a "decent man"--just look how he treats his wife and children.....the way he can move people with his speeches. He is so convincing in this that people who fell in love with him don't want to ascribe devious motives to him. In 2004, the same thing happened with Bush. Those who thought he was a decent man couldn't be budged in their opinion.

With Obama they convince themselves that he just needs more time. When he supported Lieberman, flipped on FISA, convinced the senate to vote for the bailoout and threw Dean down the sewer and filled his cabinet with DLC, people either ignored it or thought it was some kind of chess with a cabinet of rivals to echo Lincoln. They won't be budged in their opinion either.

When he actually was allowed to win, his serious speech at Grant Park was very scary--while people celebrated, it seemed as if he had a big frown on his face. That frown and downbeat speech was my only inkling of inherent decency. He knew what he was going to have to do--either by natural inclination or by grievous threats that we know nothing about but can only suspect.

He couldn't have been elected if he hadn't made his peace with tptb. It is grand kabuki theater and people don't want the play to end.

anyway, great post snake. I applaud your fortitude for fighting the good fight.

[sendero]

368. He is just like George Bush..

... in that his rhetoric has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with what he actually does.

I find his speeches inspiring, his actions lacking at best.

[madfloridian]

90. ......

:thumbsup:

[area51]

91. Great OP.

:thumbsup: :toast:

[bluestateboomer]

93. Another Kick & Rec

:fistbump: :fistbump:

[SaveOurDemocracy]

95. Great OP, snake! K&R n/t

[theaocp]

97. Unbelievably well-written

and expresses every small iota of frustration I feel. Thank you.

[KakistocracyHater]

98. Love this

I think it's a good response to the "you better vote for the 'Dems'" crap.

The other night on TCM I watched a film, 1954ish, with June Allyson "Executive Suite". It was the perfect counterargument to today's business 'philosophy'. The wannabe CEO was focused exclusively on dividends, but the other guy, the guy that won wanted more. In their focus on 'the bottom line' the company started making crappy tables that easily broke-sound familiar? Barbara Stanwyck was also in it, as the widow of the CEO. Anyway, the winner wanted far more for the company, wanted products that the workers could be proud to make, wanted to be held in high esteem by their customers, & wanted to be a part of making America great.

A short doc between films was America's Response to Sputnik-how DIFFERENT to today's attitude & feelings towards education & teachers; it was in fact the OPPOSITE OF TODAY. That is the direction we must turn towards now, before it's too late. W's 'new normal' & Obama well on his way to legitimizing it should be a warning siren to us all.

[snake in the grass]

101. I just put the movie on my Netflix list.

Thanks for the tip.

Isn't is amazing how stupid is the new chic?

[KakistocracyHater]

116. amazing, disheartening, disappointing too

the Right had this planned for decades, they failed in the 50s & 60s & regained power for a bit in the 70s-then Reagan. I noticed while watching reruns of Three's Company, Busom Buddies, even Wonder Woman, how much those shows reflected & embraced what the Dems were all about, & how even society was embracing true Lefty values-then Reagan came in. Suddenly stay at home Mom stories started popping up, just like when W stole into office, feminists were evil, angry, man-hating crazies, gays are unnatural, greed is good, deficits don't matter.

Then under Clinton, a minor revival of 70s-style acceptance again, until W tried to undo the entire 20th Century.

The old movies have our messages, what we want-not everything but quite a lot.
"Mr. Deed's Goes to Town" 1936, with Gary Cooper; an awesome response to the greedy Banksters, then & now.

"The Testament of Dr. Mabuse" 1933, directed by Frtiz Lang was played when W was in, it was shockingly modern, how the bad guys would go about.....their use of words, like many of the old films it shows Human frailty & strength. I swear whoever is scheduling TCM is passively commenting on today's America.

"The Best Years of Our Lives" 1946 with Myrna Loy-see if yu can get thru that film without breaking down in tears because of the vast enormous difference between how that war & how that society handled it vs our wars. They played it right after we passed America's 4 years in WW2.

[DeSwiss]

105. K&R

:) And copy and pasted everywhere I go!!!!

[canetoad]

107. Unrec and unfortunate kick

For a pile of ill-researched, emotive bullshit.

[DeSwiss]

110. Speaking of bullshit....

[snake in the grass]

111. It must of hurt to kick it.

Thanks that you overcame the impulse not to.

Thank you very much.

[defendandprotect]

138. Is there any denial in that ....

"emotive bs" you're offering?

[inna]

207. good thing you're in extreme minority

:puke:

[Angry Dragon]

340. That is okay

you are going to have your own problems

Your government just had a coup and you did not even get to vote..........

[laughingliberal]

106. Huge K&R. Thank you for the work you put into this. nt

[Hawkowl]

112. Bravo!

Well said!

[slay]

113. WE are still here indeed

great post - i can't really improve on what you said or how so i'll settle for a K&R. (wish someone would make copies and pass it around to all elected Dems). :thumbsup:

[upi402]

114. k/r Obama the constitutional scholar needs to look at the Supreme Court

...with the new and improved Dept of Justice we gave him.

[ThomCat]

115. Excellent, righteous, and extremely well reasoned!

:applause:

[nofurylike]

118. it's a good thing some are sensible. it would be nice to indulge

in the glow of idealism, feeling all pure and superior, but things are far too critical now.

you keep glowing for those of us who are doing the unbelievable work of actually progressing. too much work to throw it all away out of the frustrated idealism that comes with the territory.


peace

[snake in the grass]

123. It's not idealism, in case you didn't notice...

...but we all do what we can. The worst we can do now is to believe we can't.

Peace be to you as well.

[tomp]

175. what "unbelievable work of actually progressing" are you speaking of? nt

[nofurylike]

225. i'm in massachusetts. that's hard work for activists. and the results

are very clear.

active-ism.
versus complain-ism.

[snake in the grass]

287. First you must have a complaint...

...before you can get active. If everything were hunky dory, we wouldn't be having this conversation, would we?

[nofurylike]

341. we all have legitimate complaints. for many, they motivate

activism.
for many, they are the end result.

:shrug:

[tomp]

339. i meant specifically. nt

[nofurylike]

343. one small example out of countless over decades. to get a sen

or rep to vote as we intended our representative to vote - as they are hired to do - we got out on street corners all over the district with postcards we'd had printed with the messages we'd drafted in meetings and debates, and stamps, using funds we'd raised by the single dollar, and collected signatures and mailed them, by the thousands, even tens and hundreds of thousands. and that would be on top of jobs, other activism, and other responsibilities. and that would happen every time a vital issue arose ....

it worked just about every time we were dedicated enough to do the very hard labor of that.

that is why we had been so fortunate with our congress-critters. until now, that is. now ...
well, we let e-voting in ...

help us ALL!!


peace

[donco6]

195. Yeah, those darn ideals keep getting in the way of real "progress" anyway. n/t

[nofurylike]

227. they do if they are an excuse for supporting repukes. nt

[donco6]

261. So ideals aren't important, as long as you're supporting Dems.

Because actually supporting ideals leads to Republican victories.

Got it.

[nofurylike]

263. supporting ideals to the exclusion of reals is to throw away the

reals, yes.
the problem is those who use anger at not reaching ideals, to threaten to support repukes in punishment for our not progressing fast enough for their likings.
have you done that?

if not, then no problem between us, true?


peace

[donco6]

267. Well I know I would never intentionally support a Republican for anything.

So I guess we're cool.

[nofurylike]

268. me too. absolutely. cool. kind. thank you, donco6. nt

[nofurylike]

222. "The (D) is not enough"? The (R) electroconvulses, lobotomizes,

rapes with impunity, murders with impunity, queers.

when you're expecting more than is possible at a given time, as is so now, and using a claim that you act out of caring about me and mine - queers - it is essential to make sure that your 'moral purity' is not going to directly result in my being murdered, or worse.

The (D) matters THAT much.

[snake in the grass]

245. We'll never know what is possible and...

...what isn't, if the attempt is never made. Case in point, health care. Nearly 70% of the population was for a public option. That's an overwhelming majority. President Obama could have used his bully pulpit with ease, but didn't. He didn't.

I most certainly don't want to put you and yours in danger and I would be the first to get physically violent in your defense. I'm so vocal in personal circles about GLBTQ-issues that many think I'm gay myself, when the truth is that I cannot sit by and watch as someone is discriminated against. At some point, we simply cannot allow "them" to take the last inch of our integrity and that's what is being asked of us, all of us.

[nofurylike]

260. the fact is, with (D) we progress, sometimes by the micron, but

we do progress. with (R), we see the very people we fight for in unspeakable danger.

you know, most of what you wrote was not in the tone of a threat to throw elections to the repukes. except that (D) reference. it matters more than words can express.

i am a radical. i have been an activist for forty years, working to exhaustion to EKE progress out of this preciously diverse society. we are at the most dangerous place we have ever been. it is our last chance, really. the planet will not survive another repuke dominance.

i will work as hard as i possibly can to keep repukes from having dominance.

but, to then have those i share this democratic support-center with outright threaten to sabotage my labors, is devastating.

it is one thing to criticize. it is another to sabotage. you had not suggested doing so, until the (D) reference. the fundamental ideological difference is LIFE or DEATH to far too many to treat it as a rhetorical distinction.

you know, we 'sensible' ones do criticize too. we do it in tireless efforts to move our sens and reps, and the president. we just do not do it in such a way that it energizes repukes.

(D) is EVERYTHING.

from (D), we can work on, as we always do. from (D), we can take responsibility to create the party it should be. from (D) we can breath long enough to maybe evolve this country into a form of Democracy that is truly representational.

thank you, by the way, for replying, and for your more than generous tone of discourse. it helps. and i apologize for presuming you would not be so considerate in discussing.


peace and solidarity

*edit tiny spelling tweak

[snake in the grass]

290. I think you may have misunderstood what I meant with the (D).

I look at some of our reps and I wonder why are they even in our party, and with that I don't mean President Obama primarily. I'm thinking more of people like Nelson, Liebermann (not a D anymore, but he should have been gone long ago), Stupak, Feinstein, you know whom I mean.

I think that Obama's real problem is his timidity, not his character. But the others? They are mendacious and malignant.

I think my reflex will still be to consider a (D), but I will be more open to alternatives, ones I won't express here because of the rules, and I'm fine with that.

The worst thing, the most irresponsible thing would be to not vote at all. As far as I'm concerned, people who don't vote have no room to complain.

[nofurylike]

337. they are in our party because we keep seeing that party as a

"them," instead of as "us" and making it into what it ought to be; and when it is not what it ought to be, by walking away instead of working to evolve it. or to evolve this democracy into multiparty representational government.

you write:
"I say if our love continues to go unrequited, there is no reason to remain in that line."

" ... I will be more open to alternatives, ones I won't express here because of the rules, and I'm fine with that."

there are at this stage of this democracy no alternatives that will not lead to more power for the oligarchy. we have to do the work it will take to create the form of Democracy that allows for representative governance. until then, (D) is everything, and what we must work from.

let me note that those on DU who've defined themselves as The Progressives - VERSUS the ... what are the names we are called? the 'sensible' people; apologists; cheerleaders; etc. - are not, in fact, the only actually progressive people here. you do not distance yourself from them when you delineate people as "progressive" and "regressive." which would i be considered?

you are also not including in your analysis any recognition that this administration is the most progressive this country is yet capable of electing; that it is the next step in our progress. no one more aggressively progressive could have been elected. anyone more aggressively progressive once elected would have been in the same danger we would be in.

nor do those DUers you number among the progressives, by not defining who you mean, reflect an understanding that showdowns with the oligarchy are extremely dangerous to masses of people. consider what would happen if big-huge business decided this place was so hostile to them that they decided to take all wealth and head for wherever, turning this into ONLY its plantation and trashbin? or worse worse far worse. they are that dangerous. no one here knows what leverage they are using behind the scenes. but we do know the ideals b.o. lived for a very long time before taking the front line....

we eke because the most vulnerable, not the more privileged, are punished if we do not do so.

people saying they will not get in that line next time if dems do not fall in line on lgbttsqci... and fast, are using me for power, but will not be there to save me from the next time the repukes come after me. and i have never recovered from the last time they did - the time it was the white male dominated socialist "far left" that threw me under that bus some here talk about.

you know, the patriarchal far left that sees lgbttsqci..... , and feminism, as bourgeois indulgences at best, albatrosses around their movement-necks at medium, and sociopaths needing re-education or worse at worst.

too much to say for now....
thank you for caring to discuss.


peace and solidarity

*edited error

[nofurylike]

269. ps - i hear your passion for equality. i know most here share that

with both of us.


peace and solidarity

[emsimon33]

119. Bravo

[Chulanowa]

124. And you also go out of your way to ignore any accomplishment

Or surreptitiously declare that it "doesn't count" for whatever reason. You claim that he "talks the talk" and ignore the walking that he does. or you say he needs to do more talking. There's simply no winning. You've decided to cast yourself in with the PUMAs and baggers, declare that no matter what, THAT ONE will never appeal to you, and are set to basically spent the next two decades punching yourself in the groin with a big fucking stupid smile on your face. All that ever exist for you are the flaws.

This is revealing. People such as yourself do not want an actual progressive in office. You want an idealized ur-Progressive, some flawless incarnation of every ideal you have, that can execute those ideals flawlessly. The hatred - and that is exactly what it is - that you and others display towards Obama would be displayed to any human being who managed to become president. Because there is no possible way for what you want to come to bear so long as heavily flawed wads of meat and connective tissue keep running the show.

For instance. You bring up the "Corporatist revolution." Look in the mirror, buddy. Maybe you are not personally responsible, but those who shared your mindset were. You see, folks like you figured Carter - ironically now some sort of progressive saint - was not "pure enough." You got out your little strips of litmus, and decided the blue wasn't deep enough. So you hauled ass to vote for Reagan. You did it again four years later, because frankly, you're all rather dumb and fall easy prey to Right-wing memes and propaganda.

Dislike the war in Afghanistan? Thanks again. Thanks to folks like yourself - very probably you yourself - deciding that Gore and Bush were "the same" many "liberals" sat home that November, or went to vote for Nader, who would elicit "real change" (Presumably by not being elected?) So thanks for that, guys. Once again, your little litmus strips decided that fucking over the entire country over your ideas of purity would be the best thing to do. You did the same thing to Kerry in 2004, when you went "Well, he's just not progressive enough!" You wring your hands about civil rights, but frankly if it had been in the hands of Progressives, we would have had Nixon in 1960 and again in 1964.

So, you tell me. When you sit at home, or vote Republican to "teach the dems a lesson" do you think they'll fix any of the problems you listed? Do you care? probably not. Because despite your claims, "not giving a fuck" is pretty much the prime indicator of a modern "progressive"

If we hand Afghanistan back to the Taliban, how many Afghans will die? Progressives don't care - in fact there was a whole thread full of you guys, declaring just how much of a fuck you did not give about that question. All that was important was scoring political points and being able to pat your own backs and claim to have been "right." Which is the same reason you supported the war all the way up to 12:00 PM EST on January 20, 2009. Because Bush was mishandling it and you wanted to snatch some political points.

How many people are without health insurance? Progressives don't give a fuck. They'll oppose any plan with all the savagery and ignorance of a pack of teabaggers, unless it's exactly what they want. Again, the egoism shows. it's not about what's best for people; It's about what makes you feel important and special.

I'm not someone who pretends things are perfect. But more importantly, I'm not someone who demands everything be perfect or I'll throw the country to the Republicans in a fit of pique. YOU ARE.

There's something to be said about being sensible. But there's no merit to being senseless.

[Name removed]

131. Deleted message

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

[Name removed]

186. Deleted message

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

[johnaries]

286. .

:applause: :yourock:

[Senator]

134. Which accomplishment is worth the "new normal" of torture?

Here's the "new normal" http://www.aclu.org/national-security/establishing-new-normal">to which I refer.

But really, which of these (imo, comparatively selfish and trivial) "accomplishments" is "worth it" to you?

And FWIW, your post reads far more like a "fit of pique" than the OP.

Oh, and feel free to take the question rhetorically.

---

[Name removed]

178. Deleted message

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

[SidDithers]

205. +1..

wish I could rec this post.

Sid

[inna]

208. what a pile of steaming bullshit.

disgusting.

[Bobbie Jo]

216. "Disgusting"

What exactly is "disgusting" about the post you reference? Please elaborate....

[inna]

303. see post 278

talking to you is not worth time

[Bobbie Jo]

354. LOL

Yeah...that's what I thought.

Carry on. :rofl:

[Chulanowa]

331. I am stung by your eloquent rebuttal

surely I shall now change my wayward course, give myself a tonsure, and retire to some remote greek island where I will eat only rye bread and wear a goathair cassock. Thank you, inna, thank you ever so much.

[Bobbie Jo]

217. Excellent post.

I couldn't agree more. Thank you for taking the time to express the frustration many of us are experiencing.

Nicely done! :applause:

[Dawgs]

249. +100 billion

You should post this as its own thread.

[azmouse]

256. Without a doubt, the best post on this thread.

Well said. :thumbsup:

[OrwellwasRight]

278. Interesting

There is no evidence that expanding the current health care system (which doesn't work and is the most expensive in the world) will make it work better.

There was never any evidence that a US invasion of Afghanistan could do what a Soviet invasion and Alexander the Great could not.

And for the biggest misstatement of your post, NOBODY here is threatening to vote for a Republican. First of all, they'd get tombstoned if they did, but more importantly, NO ONE has SAID that. And in particular, no one here has said anything about voting for Reagan (most people posting here probably weren't even of voting age or alive when that happened).

So let's get to the facts: you believe that the health care reform bill and bombing innocent Afghani families are "real progress." Those are reasonable and defensible beliefs. Why do you have to cloud them with insults and lies about those who disagree with you? I personally am insulted and affronted to be accused that I "hauled ass to vote for Reagan." That's disgusting. And it is a lie.

[Chulanowa]

335. You shouldn't use the word "facts" in that post, friend.

"There is no evidence that expanding the current health care system (which doesn't work and is the most expensive in the world) will make it work better."

No, there's not. I would love universal single-payer coverage. I would be all for massive health reform. it would be fucking amazing if it happened, and I would be behind it 100% every step of the way.

However, I know something that you apparently do not; radical change does not happen in our system. The way our government is set up is designed to be conservative (in the dictionary sense of the word, rather than the political spectrum sense.) it is very change-resistant, and the more radical the change, the easier it is to do away with through any large number of methods. Historiclly, every progressive achievement has been gradually built, because that is a necessity of the very way our system works. No, it's not fair. it's not right. It's shitty for the people caught on the wrong side at the wrong time. But that is, sadly, exactly the way it is. The only way to change this is to do away with the tripartate system and all its myriad checks against radical change. Which would be good for health care, but could just as easily be turned into something fucking psychotic if the wrong loony is in charge.

"There was never any evidence that a US invasion of Afghanistan could do what a Soviet invasion and Alexander the Great could not."

Actually, as I noted in another post, Alexander, Genghis Khan, and Timur were all successful at conquering and subjugating what is today Afghanistan. Alexander's empire fell apart shortly after, but this was due to his dying from poison / malaria / cholera. Pedantic point, I suppose, but goddamn, if you're going to reference history, fucking learn history first.

Second, unlike those three, unlike Britain or Russia, we did not invade Afghanistan with dreams of empire. Bush was a shit, but even he wasn't that much of a shit. We invaded to enact regime change, not to add Afghanistan as an American territory. It's actually a very crucial difference, and it's about damn tiome this ignorant talking point faced retirement.

And for the biggest misstatement of your post, NOBODY here is threatening to vote for a Republican. First of all, they'd get tombstoned if they did, but more importantly, NO ONE has SAID that. And in particular, no one here has said anything about voting for Reagan (most people posting here probably weren't even of voting age or alive when that happened).

What is said in this single particular thread is of no great consequence; I have seen a consistent trend from "Progressives," however, many of whom have said exactly this (and perhaps been tombstoned for it, sure.)

And I did point out that it was people of a like mind to the modern "progressive" that gave us Reagan. Please RTFP. Carter and Mondale weren't "pure enough" so let;'s go to the union-busting, tax-cutting dementia-addle maniac instead.

"So let's get to the facts: you believe that the health care reform bill and bombing innocent Afghani families are "real progress.""

Yes, the health care reform bill is progress. It is not ideal which is, of course, where you get hung up - it's not perfection in all forms, therefor you dismiss it. Doesn't work that way. It's a move in the right direction, and it will be the foundation for future progress (Remember what I said about how it won't happen all in one go?).

Second, I do not regard bombing innocent Afghan (not "Afghani," by the way) families to be "progress." In fact I am quite critical of how the war is being operated. I believe a change in tactics is needed, and needed fast. However, letting the Taliban move back in is not progressive, either. The difference is, we can change our tactics. we cannot expect the Taliban to change theirs.

Simply put, it's a measure of two evils. The Afghans suffer from our presence. The Afghans will suffer worse from Taliban rule. We are very capable of reducing civilian deaths, and it is in our interest to do so. it is in the Taliban's interest to do the opposite, and maximize civilian death, both numerically and in impact from the manner of death.

Nuance is difficult for binary thinkers. I understand this. But the facts are, we're already there and people who are worse than us show a good chance of taking over if we leave.

"Why do you have to cloud them with insults and lies about those who disagree with you? I personally am insulted and affronted to be accused that I "hauled ass to vote for Reagan." That's disgusting. And it is a lie."

Because after a year and a half of being "informed" that the President - and indeed, all democrats - are "worthless," that they are "just like bush" and that anyone who supports them to any degree is any number of things - I've been called the usual "cheerleader" and "Obamabot", among worse - my patience for "progressives" is pretty much nil. when I see "Progressives" cheering for Mexican roundups, or stating they don't give a fuck about how many Afghans die if we leave, so long as we leave, that little bit of patience gets more and more threadbare. Every time I have to step in and inform you guys of what really happened in history, or how our government actually works, I really lose that much more empathy for you.

You're insulted and affronted? Oh well. I frankly don't care too much; I have better things to worry about than whether I have abraded the ego of someone on the internet who thinks I'm all for bombing innocents.

[Mimosa]

347. ^ Not true, Chulanowa ^

You claim:

"And I did point out that it was people of a like mind to the modern "progressive" that gave us Reagan. Please RTFP. Carter and Mondale weren't "pure enough" so let;'s go to the union-busting, tax-cutting dementia-addle maniac instead."

Carter and mondale didn't get re-elected because the economy was bad, interest rates for home loans were about 18% and it looked like Iran's radicals were strongern than carter. I doubt the progressives here would have voted for Reagan then. But the 'sensible liberals' certainly would have.

[OrwellwasRight]

350. Oh, the old I'll respond to your post but I wasn't talking to you routine, eh?

If you don't care that I didn't vote for Reagan or that nobody here voted for Reagan or that nobody here threatened to vote for a Republican, then why are you posting HERE, telling us what we did and what we think? if you don't care to talk to me, don't respond to MY post. It is a fairly simple premise, even for one so clearly intellectually advanced as yourself. (BTW, I tend to find that those who resort to obscenities in their posts (e.g., "fucking learn history first") don't have the best arguments.)

Second, you have shown no basis for your premise that ANYONE in the Democratic party chose Reagan because "Carter and Mondale weren't "pure enough" so let;'s go to the union-busting, tax-cutting dementia-addle maniac instead." If you want to talk about "FACTS" let's have some basis for that one. So-called Reagan Democrats were largely working class white males who thought Carter wasn't manly enough in his efforts to rescue the US hostages in Iran. They are the group that is typically in play in elections -- not ideological, just good ol' boys, who may vote with their union if they belong to one --more used to -- or who may vote Republican if their racial fears are stirred up (being as smart as you are, you may have heard of Nixon's Southern Strategy?). But if you have some evidence that you would like to share instead of insults, feel free.

As for my not knowing any "fucking history" and being a "binary thinker"and "cheering at Mexican Roundup" (I'm not even sure what you mean on this one, am I a racist who supports immigration raids or do I like Mexican rodeos?): nice ad hominems, but no dice. You can't make yourself smarter by insulting others intelligence. Gosh, I learned that one in first grade. When will you?

Try learning some history yourself:

1) Doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result one definition of insanity. So keeping our same flawed healthcare system, with its perverse incentives to provide unneeded services, its profit motives, its oversupply of specialists, and its low reimbursement for Medicaid (none of which was "fixed" in the healthcare bill, btw), could be described as not only a lack of progress, but a dumb idea. Why expand what we all know DOES NOT WORK?

2) Thank you for explaining how our government works to me. I'm glad you think I don't know, and I am so pleased to have your wisdom. BTW, why don't YOU learn a little history? This country is perfectly capable of making large, even radical changes. Ever heard of the NEW DEAL? That was about as radical as you can get. In one fell swoop, we got Social Security, Unemployment Insurance, the right to organize a union LEGALLY without getting your head bashed in, the right to a minimum wage and overtime, the right to workplace safety standards, a WPA so that the government could give us a job when the private sector could not, and more! And that is just off the top of my head. I could go get one of my HISTORY BOOKS and list some more. But I guess my lazy, stupid, binary brain, which must be inferior to yours because it doesn't draw the same conclusions as you do from everything is about plum tuckered out. Why don't you check your history books? I'm sure you have a lot given how much more history you know than I do.

3) PLENTY of historians note that while Alexander the Great "conquered Afghanistan" he failed to "subdue its people." I don't see how agreeing with scholars who disagree with you means I don't know "fucking history." How about you try some of that "nuance" you're raving about and accusing me of not having? PS, Afghani is a perfectly acceptable word: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Afghani, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghani, http://www.indianfoodsco.com/Newsletter/Afghanistan/afghanistan.html, etc.

4) Hey, you are the one who said we are making progress under Obama, not I. And we have killed more people with Predator Drones in Afghanistan than the Bush Administration did (see this month's Harper's). So I think that gives me the right to ask if this is the kind of progress you mean. I don't consider it progress, and I will therefore criticize it instead of blindly following and making excuses for the President (didn't we all insult Republicans for doing the same (blindly following, making excuses) about Bush?). And if you want to say my criticism is the same as voting for a Republican, enjoy your self in "jumping to conclusions land." I won't be following you there.

But what do you care, you weren't talking to me anyway, but to the "Progressives" who called you a cheerleader. Well, I'm not this terrible person who called you a "cheerleader," (what an awful, terrible, name to call you by the way, I can see how you were moved to take your anger out on me).

P.S. I would prefer that, if you reply to me in the future, which I'm not really that keen on, by the way, since the first time was so thoroughly unpleasant, that you do address your comments to me and not these phantom people who go to Mexican rodeos or state that they "don't care how many Afghans die if we leave." Reminder: those aren't me. I never said those things.

Edited to fix two typos.

[Chulanowa]

356. Nope, the old "Read what I wrote before you try to respond to it" routine

1) Except it's not "doing the same thing and expecting different results." it's "Doing something differently and hoping it gets different results."

2) Fair point on the New Deal. Okay, so we got radical change under Roosevelt. Five years into the Great Depression, but it was radical change. And he had a congress that agreed to everything he proposed, which is hardly comparable to today's situation. But it was radical change. Got me there. :thumbsup:

[JNelson6563]

288. Oh snap! Bitches!

That's some righteous shit right there! :toast:

Julie

[Arkana]

301. If I could rec this post I would.

I've seen so many vanity posts by so-called "progressives" it makes me want to puke.

[Number23]

372. Damn. Is it too late for me to post how much I love you?

This post is nothing short of MAJESTIC.

No other DUer deserves this smiley more than you -- :yourock:

[Mac1949]

127. I agree with everything in the OP, but...

(and like mine, it's a big one) until there is someone viable (i.e. who can win) to fill that vacuum on the left, what are we to do? The last president I voted for was Kennedy. Since then, every election I have voted against the greater of two evils. I would love to have someone to vote for again. I actually had certain doubts about Obama from the git-go, but what choice realistically was there? A third party choice may be possible in the future, but for right now my efforts go toward pulling the dems more to the left.:shrug:

[snake in the grass]

132. The future is now.

There's one thing the upper 1% (the people who own everything) are afraid of more than anything else and that's that we finally wise up to their game of playing one group against another. As long as the power to invent the news is in their hands we don't really have much of a chance to get a progressive on the ballot, so I'd say hit them where it really hurts with a general strike. One week and it's done.

[hfojvt]

128. I gotta say that I don't get this deal

Other than that you feel really strongly about your positions, so much so that you demonize all the Sharks who disagree with us Jets. (rival gangs, doncha know? http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/122)

You think the Republican party has imploded and that the Democratic Party (and by extension DU) is being over-run with a bunch of former Republicans (even some who joined in 2004 after Republicans swept the Presidency and both houses of Congress in the 2004 elections).

And now you are looking forward to the death of the Democratic Party to be replaced by a totally awesome Green Party built by the woodchuck coalition. This will presumably happen after the Republican Party that you have buried, retakes the House and the Senate after blocking and watering down much of what Democrats tried to do in their two years of power.

And you seem to want two things. First, to be convince yourselves that you are absolutely right to not vote for Democrats in 2010 or 2012, and second you want to insist that it is not your fault when Republicans win in those years.

Basically, "The Democrat Party is not giving me what I want, so I am gonna let Republicans win, even though it's not my fault if they do."

[Vinca]

130. This is an amazing post. Item by item you distinguish fact from fiction.

I think you've nailed the bottom line problem, too. The Democratic Party is becoming the refuge of the rats jumping from the Republican ship. So where do we go? What do we do? Suddenly "liberal" is the new leper.

[snake in the grass]

137. Liberal has been the new leper for at least 30 years...

...if not more.

Well, there is armed revolution, which I hope never happens, as they don't normally pan out as planned. I say we need a general strike, but that concept is now so foreign to the people here, that it would take a time to get the ball rolling, but I think we do have to start somewhere.

Somewhere inside, though, I have the feeling it's too late. I think we will have to let the disease run its course before we can start to rebuild, because I doubt President Obama is going to wake up one morning and have an epiphany. I'm going to concentrate on my own little corner of the world for the time being; supporting progressive candidates and generally pissing people off.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

147. Liberals are also demonized as being responsible for everything bad

which is ironic since we've wielded no actual power and have been marginalized and ignored by even Dems for decades.

It's crazy that the crazy label Dems as liberal when they've done almost nothing to earn that label.

[w4rma]

164. Don't underestimate our power. Liberals are almost the only true threat the oligarchy has.

Liberals being demonized is nothing new at all. Liberals have been demonized throughout history! Example: Jesus was crucified for being perceived as a threat to the existing power structures.

The oligarchy will never be able to stop progressive ideal from spreading, but they will buy up everything and try to propagandize everyone they can.

[treestar]

219. This is politics. You have to make yourself relevant.

You have no inherent right for the Democrats to make you central and pay attention to you. You have to sell your ideas. Your post sounds entitled. We're pure and right and so if the Democratic Leadership does not march to our tune, we will be the victims who are "marginalized and ignored."

People who make some sense and at least try to persuade rather than demand to be obeyed tend to get their ideas forward.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

224. Our ideas have sold. MOST Americans are for single payer and/or public option

http://www.healthcare-now.org/another-poll-shows-majority-support-for-single-payer/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/20/new-poll-77-percent-suppo_n_264375.html

impeaching Bush for wiretapping
http://www.democrats.com/bush-impeachment-poll-2

ending off shore drilling
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/61133


None of that made any difference whatsoever to the Dem leadership. So not just Liberals but the MAJORITY of Americans are marginalized and ignored by the Dems. That's the truth.

But go ahead and marginalize me as a "purist" with unpopular fringe views. The people have already been persuaded, it's the leaders who don't go along. And I think we all know why. It starts with "M" and it rhymes with "honey".

[treestar]

292. If most Americans really are for single payer, they need to

make themselves heard, not just sit back and forget about it and then complain about being marginalized. If most of Connecticut wanted single payer, why did they vote Lieberman in? They must not care so much about it.

To make them care takes more than just complaining.

[snake in the grass]

295. You are reading way too much into what I wrote.

I never claimed to be pure. Laugh - I'm so far from that!

Let me just ask you this: at what point would it be enough for you? Where do you draw the line? What would have to happen before you pack your bags?

I understand the complicated situation with Afghanistan and if you look at earlier posts of mine, you'll see that I rarely addressed it. My point was the war crimes issue and always has been. Even there I remained silent for the most part, hoping (yes, hoping) that the investigations would lead to indictments. For the sake of national healing, I'd even go for something along the lines of a truth and reconciliation commission, like the one conducted in South Africa after the Apartheid regime finally crumbled. This sweeping of Bush/Cheney's crimes under the rug will come back to bite us in the ass. If it goes unaddressed they will only feel more emboldened, the next time around. Cheney and Rumsfeld were both in the Nixon Administration. Afterward, they hid in the slime for 25 years, waiting to strike again. And boy, did they do just that!

It is very myopic of President Obama to let this slide, both for our country and the world.

That's where I felt like puking. That's where I drew the line.

[OrwellwasRight]

353. Power is never willfully handed over to those who ask politely.

It has to be wrested from the hands of those who have it.

[femrap]

247. I've long thought that

the 'sensible' repugnants were finding refuge in the Dem party since the Fundies took over the entire grassroots of the repugnants.

[bvar22]

254. They are.

You can see them here.
Reagan Democrats :puke:...now called sensible Centrists.

OR (and this is a good one) "Pro-Growth Democrats"

[femrap]

265. I hadn't heard

of the 'pro-growth' ones. It's simply illogical to expect growth all the damn time. It doesn't make any sense.

I don't even know what 'pro-growth' means....more for the greedy?

[TheKentuckian]

300. That is close enough to the truth as for the distinction to be of little importance.

[annabanana]

133. While I am no where near ready to desert this guy, or the Party,

...there are many good reasons to continue to agitate.

[defendandprotect]

136. As Nixon used to code-speak: "Don't watch what I say... watch what I do . . . " --

We need to all help reinforce the anti-war movement --

We have some liberal/progressive Democrats in Congress, at leastd, trying to put

an end to this insanity of faked wars -- !!

Let's give them some help!!


Terrific post -- !!!

[defendandprotect]

139. K&R --

[Bryn]

141. You said it all!

Great Post! I just wanted to be included in this thread and give it a kick! :hi:

[rucky]

143. How is the OP being selfish?

For those boiling it down to "I'm not getting what I want, so..."

I'm not seeing how anything he wants is for personal benefit, at the expense of others. What he wants is just and fair and worth fighting for. It's sensible and it's achievable in other countries - in fact, it's the norm in many. Why do the simplest of demands become so complicated to the people less willing to request them. Do you not think we deserve equality & justice? How do you compromise on equality? Four is almost equal to five - equal enough, for now, at least. Yes, it's a long hard battle, but I don't see how it can be won by defending the things that could've been done but weren't (Lt. Choi)? Maybe you can excuse it for now - for the hope of winning a bigger battle at-hand, but that doesn't seem sensible to me.

The OP laid out a pretty simple and clear path we should be on. I'm not seeing a clear path from the critics. If I did, maybe I'd be more on-board - or at least more understanding - of those who defend or excuse the injustices we're seeing, or ridicule those who do.

Either way, it's pretty clear that wanting equality & justice is not a petty or selfish pursuit, so stop saying that it is.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

144. I agree with every single item in your OP

The upshot seems to be that A Democratic President and a Senate and House with Dem majorities consistently deliver the legislation I would have expected from Mitt Romney and a Republican House and Senate. While those policies may have been acceptable at one time in a booming economy with high employment, they are weak soup today. They also consistently support the corporate elites over the individual citizen.

The President does not appear to have the vision, the scope or the strength to deal with the realities of middle and lower class American life today with job loss, unemployment, foreclosure and lack of affordable healthcare. The reason the movies from the 20s, 30s and 40s seem so relevant is that they ARE relevant, we are essentially reliving those decades before FDR and the inception of the New Deal and we have managed to undo its tenets to such a great degree that we are right back at that point.

President Obama is apparently not up to the job. All you need to know is who he has surrounded himself with. His administration is a continuation of the Republican years, most horrifically in his war and national security policies. It is instructive to google "Obama continues Bush" or "Obama maintains Bush" and see the stuff that comes up. John Yoo himself, the architect of torture , writes that Obama has maintained and strengthened the construct of the Unitary Executive and has done nothing to dismantle that breach of the separation of powers. The sensible Obama advocates seem to lose sight of the fact that this structure will remain in place for further abuse under the next Republican President. This is the legacy of our "Constitutional Scholar".

The lack of will to investigate and prosecute the myriad of crimes, both international and domestic, by the lily-livered, let's all just look ahead Dems, is their greatest collaborative failure. Those issues were greater than men or parties - it was literally about waging illegal wars, ripping up the Constitution, due process, the separation of powers, the Rule of Law. A side benefit would have been the effective distruction of the Republican Party for decades. The Democrats proved that they are collectively "puny" when they were unable to answer the call of history and simply do their jobs, the one they swear they will do when they take the oath of office.

Moving along to the great centerpieces of legislation that supporters like to point to- what good is legislative reform if it only looks like legislative reform? We have passed a number of Potemkin Village-like laws concerning financial reform and healthcare reform. Once you get inside those bills, you discover that they actually are just facades of bills that leave the actual structure of governance to be determined later through regulatory bodies that are given almost no guidance within the bills themselves. Robert Reich wrote a great piece about this that I often refer to - how Obama always goes for the regulatory approach as opposed to the statutory approach. (I'll post a link to it at the bottom of this reply) As the regulations get put in place the content and structure gets corrupted by the input and lobbyists of the very entities that are supposed to be regulated, pretty much leaving us in the same place we were before the whole reform process started in the first place. I have come to believe this is consciously done. The goal is not real reform, but something that resembles reform to keep the rumbling multitudes quiet for a few more years. Ask yourself why Elizabeth Warren is not being immediately tapped to design and run the new Consumer Protection Division? The answer is obvious - she would do the job. That's not what they are looking for. And remember, it is our Democrats alone delievering these sham bills. I won't ramble on about healthcare here, God knows I've posted ad infinitum about it's basic horrific flaw - it remains unaffordable for millions who will continue to be on the outside looking in and it remains the most stupidly inefficient system in the world due to our need to "preserve private delivery" which desire came from the top. ( I am personally convinced that President Obama never had any personal committment to the public option at all which can be easily evidenced by his lackluster support for the concept the second he entered office)

Jumping to the chase here - where does that leave a completely disenchanted Democratic voter? I personally am fervently waited for the vacuum to be filled and I believe it will - I just don't know when. I am waiting for that person to appear to whom history is calling out for - a man or woman who has the strength to talk to the American people about the real hard truths and realities we are facing today - how our elections processes have been stolen by the Supreme Court and the electroninc voting industry, the real role of deficits in a Recession/Depression, the need for investigation and prosecution of those who violate the laws and liberties of American citizens, the preservation and enhancement (not the destruction and dismantlement) of our social safety nets, the class war that is being fought by the corporate elites against the average American worker, and the ongoing effort to pick the American pockets through privatization of any and every government function they can get their hands on.

It does not matter to me if this future candidate is a Democrat or not. I hope they are,but if they happen to be a Green or a new Labor Party candidate, they will get my vote. Until that person or party arises who reflects my values, my choices will continue to be voting for the lesser evil or potentially writing in candidates not on the ticket. I will have to evaluate each situation as it arises. Prior to this moment, I have ALWAYS voted straight ticket Democrat and I turn out in every single election, whether local or national, primary or main. I was the vote the Dems could actually take for granted. No more.

(I apologize for the length of this reply, but the OP was so great it just opens a groundswell when you read people who are on exactly the same wavelength.)

[snot]

212. We've had at least one such candidate -- Kucinich; and maybe Dean. Both destroyed by the media.

I don't mean to be hopeless about it; just saying, we have to take into account everything we're up against.

The interwebs seem to be our only real avenue to try to enlighten more voters, but the webs are fast being brought under total control, and even without that, we're still relatively marginalized there.

[Phoebe Loosinhouse]

215. And I was for both of those candidates. And they were destroyed by the media

I think either or both could run again. The next time we have a candidate like either of those, we just have to do an end run around the media and stick with them. I think we're getting better and better at recognizing the media removal of liberal candidates.

If I had 2008 to do over I would have stuck with Kucinich and written in his name when my primary came around when he was already gone.

[spoony]

266. The media yes, but with the help of the sort of "pragmatic"

centrists we're seeing on DU now.

[dmallind]

284. The media controls 98% of Dem primary votes?

News to me - pretty sure I just voted for the guy I wanted most (he didn't win either BTW) and suspect most others did the same - and that Kucinich wasn't it.

So other than mind control are you suggesting that Dem primary voters - well 98% of them anyway - are too stupid to vote for who they really want?


And then how do you suggest this same political spectrum will "rise up" and "fill the vacuum on the left" if they are that fucking clueless?

[LuckyTheDog]

145. Express all the "legitimate complaints" you like

Just make sure you head to the polls in November and vote for Democrats. Bring all your friends. Don't let yourself become a dupe and a tool of the Republicans.

[snake in the grass]

152. Actually, I despise those 'sarcasm' tags, but...

...you may want to consider one next time for some here who won't get your brand of humour. I especially like the "tool of the Republicans" one. It would make a great movie title (just don't know if it should be a porno or a horror flick) - too funny!

Thanks!

[LuckyTheDog]

272. Be smug and sarcastic if you like

Anybody who encourages folks to not vote for the Democrats in the fall is allowing himself/herself to be an unwitting ally of the Republican Party. We have a two-party system. For every vote the Democrats don't get, that's one less the Republicans need to get in order to win. That is a fact.

[snake in the grass]

298. I'm not encouraging anyone to do anything, except maybe...

...follow their conscience. If your conscience tells you to look elsewhere, how is that my fault? You are all your own people and certainly don't need me to tell you what to do.

Your post was funny, though, and I mean that in a nice way, though I know it wasn't your intent.

"Republican Tools", the sequel to "Who's Nailin Palin". Too funny!

[LuckyTheDog]

309. I am a proud partisan

I have a point of view and an agenda. I want the Democrats to win.

If your conscience tells you to look elsewhere, I am going to do my best to talk you out of that. That's where I am coming from. I am not ashamed of my partisanship. At this point, I think that's what's best for the country. It's not about blind obedience. It's a strategy.

[snake in the grass]

311. And I'm happy you and I can have this conversation...

...like two adults (my good-natured ribbing aside). Curiously enough, the usual throwers of "ignorance" grenades have yet to appear, but I'm not complaining.

For most of my adult life, especially since becoming politically aware, my vote has been strategic. Only in the primaries have I really voted for someone, because they appealed to me. I suspect many have done this and to a point it seemed to make sense. It just doesn't anymore for me. The strategy isn't working. We are still drifting off to the right. 'Liberal' continues to be a term of derision, whereby any progress made in the history of humanity was brought about by the liberal thought.

Even Democrats point their fingers at us like we are some sort of anachronism, yet all of them enjoy the very fruits bourne of liberal policies. We are marginalized with the stamp of being children having a tantrum. Why is that? Again, we all (including the regressives) enjoy the fruits of liberal labour. One would think our party would embrace that. You never hear a candidate speak on a platform of going to the left. It's always to the right. Always, in spite of the carnage regressive policies bring. I'm not asking for anything for myself, save affordable health care. I'm a white male heterosexual. I've never been the object of any discrimination, but I still see it all around me and it makes me want to puke.

I'll ask you what I asked another poster: at what point would it be enough for you? Where do you draw the line? What would have to happen before you pack your bags?

For me it was the decision to stop the investigations of the crimes against humanity by the Cheney Administration; a very unwise and myopic decision that will have consequences, mark my words. It may be another twenty years from now, but some of the same faces will pop up again to further rape and pillage. And it's not about revenge either. A truth and reconciliation commission like in South Africa after the collapse of the Apartheid regime would be a great start. President Obama has the reins. The buck stops with him, as it should for every president. He chose to do nothing and through his inaction he not only let down the progressives, but rather the world.

No justice, no peace. Ever.

[LuckyTheDog]

365. Hmmmm...

What would have to happen before I'd pack my bags? Put simply, I'd have to determine that another strategy would work better. This is not a game. The right wing is too dangerous. I don't want to play Russian roulette with the fate of America. I don't think folks like me can afford to indulge our disgust for the slow rate of change or the cowardly nature of some in the Democratic Party by voting third party or refusing to participate in the process.

[Mimosa]

348. When there is little difference between Rs and Ds what are you partisan about?

As Phoebe commented a lot of what Obama has done -especially when it came to the health care reform- has been what one would expect from Mitt Romney. Rhe differences aren't vast.

LuckyTheDog, when Democratic reps win and very little changes, what's there to feel good about?

[LuckyTheDog]

364. You are wrong

The right in this country has gone bonkers. I they had their way, 100 years of progress would be swept away. I am not sure Obama can be blamed for getting less from the Congress than he wanted regarding health care reform. Th headwinds were against him.

I am glad Obama went along with the progress he could get instead of holding out for something that never would have passed. Progress does not always come all at once. Had McCain won, I doubt we'd have had any reform at all. So, in this case, I think the election had a consequence that mattered. We made progress, even if was not as much as we would have liked.

[xchrom]

146. recommend

rambling thoughts.

i'm not sure we have a politician at this time who isn't going to tie us to the corporatocracy.
that would take a real movement.
the left can get excited about a war -- but we fall flat after that.

as far as his poll #s with liberals -- meh -- i'm gay and i don't tend trust the masses about much of anything.
and obama is governing the way i thought a politician would who played both sides on lgbtiq issues.
in other words -- not well.

thanks for a great read and summation of where we are all living.

[nradisic]

148. On the money...

Lack of real education and ignorance is destroying this nation....great post.

[Catherina]

150. Excellent post. Rec'd n/t

[ejbr]

153. k & r !! n/t

[ima_sinnic]

155. a big kick and major recommend! (nt)

[SidDithers]

156. tl:dr I'm a real liberal and you're not...nt

Sid

[LWolf]

169. No wonder.

That explains so much.

:rofl:

[bvar22]

187. Yeah.

Cause reading sucks, and we're PROUD of that!
Your OP doesn't appeal to the low information voters.

[county worker]

157. You posted a lot of words. No matter what you or anyone says the simple fact is this.

The repubs are worse. The only way they can get back in power is if we do not take part in the election process.

Anyone here who feels he/she has a legitimate reason for staying home this Nov and not taking part in the election process is helping the repubs gain power.

Everything you said will be so much wasted energy, sounds an fury spinning out into the universe, signifying nothing when we lose control of Congress or the presidency.

Of course you will be comforted in the belief that even though you did not take part in the process, you are justified because the issues you felt were most important were not addressed by the administration.

For that you deserve no respect or admiration.

[IndianaGreen]

160. We suck, but they suck more!

I am sure that will be the winning slogan in the Fall.

[LWolf]

170. And it doesn't use too many words.

I'm beginning to think that DU shouldn't be claiming the high ground over this one:

[LWolf]

171. Oops. Wrong spot. nt

[femrap]

251. ...

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

Shit, that's what our nation has come to, isn't it?

[bvar22]

190. Begging for crumbs, and THEN praising the MASTER...

when a crumb falls your way IS the reason we are in this situation.

[TheKentuckian]

158. Great OP! Some folks are so caught up in players and teams they ignore the damn game

Voting for the game is the back breaker and no team or player is going to fix that until they are at least willing to seriously address the very context they operate within.

The game is what is hopelessly bad and we are responsible for it if we promote and support it.

"Under New management" is often a very encouraging sign but when the product and ownership remain the same there is only so much improvement that can be made. The prices are still way too high, there is no selection, the building still seems ready to fall down, the company mission is the same.

It's great that the new folks do a better job keeping things in stock, seem to do better with staffing, and the customer service has definitely improved as far as friendly smiles and greeting you when you come in, responding to questions, and running the occasional special.

The problem is the store sucks and their isn't any intent of better quality, larger selection, lowering prices, or remodeling the building.

I think maybe some folks love the store and it's wares, otherwise it would seem conversations would go a whole lot differently.

[county worker]

159. That would make sense if it were true.

Anyone saying these last 18 months are the same as when Bush and the repubs held power is a fool. All of us may get the repubs back if we suffer those fools.

[TheKentuckian]

167. What is fundamentally different? The "reforms" leave all the same failed systems in place.

I have no idea what the Teabaggers are yelling about nor what the Boggers are dancing with Ewoks over.

Reagan's eighth term. Nothing transformative to see here. Same company under new management.

[5X]

197. As the op said, the repubs are still in power.

and a k&R

[Safetykitten]

161. You have written the best thing that summarizes what I feel.

[voteearlyvoteoften]

162. excellent nt

[RetroLounge]

166. K&R

:hi:

RL

[WillyT]

168. BRAVO, SnitG... BRAVO !!! - K & R !!!

:applause::applause::applause:

Most excellent piece!

:yourock:

:hi:

[havocmom]

173. good to see the un-reccers lost the battle to keep this off the Greatest Page

That should tell somebody something. ;)

Morning kick for good measure.

[treestar]

174. I made it down to the education paragraph

You admit the difference between Rs and Ds right there. The leftosphere allegation that Obama does not like the unions is not true. But even the worst interpretation of the Obama Administration's actions is nothing like what the Rs would do.

You admit the country is dumbed down after coming back from that brilliant nation of Germany, yet then fail to follow through and admit that means Rs are in fact dangerous - they can still win. Because the country is dumbed down.

[donco6]

176. And what a case in point. n/t

[madfloridian]

177. In education Obama is doing what Bush wanted to do.

[treestar]

221. Just plain silly

And the right wing would privatize it all.

[madfloridian]

243. It is the same agenda as Margaret Spellings had under Bush II

Arne is going to be the one to complete her plans for education.

I love your comment about the "right wing would privatize it all."

Which I assume to mean that you believe we are only going to privatize things a little bitty bit.

Education is going to suffer as too many Democrats go along to get along.

[Larry Ogg]

179. You've done an excellent job of pointing out things that were predictable

For many Obama's acquiescing to the Republican agenda is a disappointment, and they might mark it off as "...hindsight is 20/20..."

But not everyone was fooled, and during the Democratic primaries it was obvious that there would be a continuum of the Republican / criminal / conservative agenda should certain democratic candidates win, and the criminals from the previous unelected administration would not be prosecuted nor would their misdeeds be undone etc...

And that's why I wrote the following on 8/21/2007... http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x3463182#3465448">"119. I’m voting for Dennis, because anything less is a vote for the republicans and the republican agenda."

[LWolf]

180. Nailed it. Thank you. nt

[EmeraldCityGrl]

181. K&R... Just Outstanding !

[Individualist]

182. Excellent post, SIG! K&R

[corkhead]

183. Gread read. Too bad it doesn't fit in the comment space on President Obama's birthday card.

"just look at the line that divides us basically into two groups; those with empathy and compassion, who try to make things better for all and those without, who don’t" says it all.

I used to think the former out numbered the latter, but I am not so sure anymore.

[katandmoon]

192. Beautiful. K&R.

[Lorien]

193. Big K & R for an excellent summery of the situation. nt

[pleah]

196. K&R

[ChiciB1]

198. I COULDN'T "REC" THIS Or KICK Your OP Anymore! WOW! JUST PLAIN WOW!

I think I LOVE YOU!! I've read so MANY threads here like this, and so many covering the very same ground and have ALWAYS had my heart beat with PRIDE that so many of us are NOT JUST SHEEPLE!!

Not like Repukes who simply walk behind some, as you say Dim Son leader who is simply FULL OF SHIT, and moreover almost sheer ignorance and full of mean spiritedness for their fellow citizens! I too WILL NEVER call myself a CONSERVATIVE nor could I imagine even leaning close to their way of thinking! But I will say I have heard a "few" Repukes have something more Progressive to say than OH SO MANY of our Democrats in power right now! I don't recall their names, but two of them have been on Ed Schultz's Show recently. Now, they sounded more middle of the road, and both of them came from the HOR, so they are probably OBSCURE creatures because Repukes wouldn't want them making TOO much noise!

Still, as I said THEY were at least entertaining some ideas that I haven't even HEARD Democrats talking about! Oh wait, one of them was called Maldonado from CA... I don't think he's in the HOR, but in elected office in CA. My statement about them is minuscule anyway, just sayin'!

I SO agree with how you put so much information together in such a concise way, and you make me feel so much better about what I was just thinking about this VERY morning!

You see, here in Florida we are going to have a Primary very soon, and as a Democrat who will ONLY be able to vote in a Democratic Primary, I feel I only have a BAD choice as to who to vote for. Since I SINCERELY believe by all that I'm hearing and seeing in this state, neither MEEK nor GREENE will win over Charlie Crist! People here can debate this, but I LIVE here and I have Democratic friends who have ALREADY made up their minds that the WILL vote for Crist. At first it made me wonder, even though I myself would vote for ANYONE to keep RUBIO from winning! I was holding off because I wanted to see what MEEK was going to do, or how he was going to FIGHT BACK against GREENE! Well, as of today I have yet to receive ONE flyer from MEEK, while the Faux Democrat Greene who is said to be a BILLIONAIRE has flooded my mail box with his "creds" and is now in an all out campaign against MEEK with flyers about how VERY CORRUPT MEEK is! Still, I'm hearing NOTHING from MEEK!

I HAD decided I would vote for MEEK regardless, but coming back from a meeting this AM I said to myself "I'm NOT going to vote in this Primary!" I ALWAYS vote... ALWAYS, but mulling it over and since I really DON'T agree that MEEK is a good candidate, and Crist seems more like a fighter than MEEK is on any given day, and seems more moderate to boot, I'm thinking MEEK doesn't even NEED my vote!

CRIST is ahead of everyone now, and almost all my INDIE friends have said they are with him! The latest polls show GREENE ahead of MEEK even though FINALLY Rahm has decided that they will come down here and help MEEK! YEEEEE HAAAW! Like THIS is making me thrilled???

So given my choices in one VERY RED County, I have decided that I, as a Democrat can show our local Democratic Party, which is kind off the radar anyway, that I'm sitting it out! I KNOW I'm going to get attacked by many here, but I BELIEVE that neither MEEK nor GREENE DESERVE my vote! They done NOTHING to show me ANYTHING and barring one of them giving a big chunk of money (cause that's how the game is played) I won't vote for either! Of course now, if one of them is listening, bidding starts at $5,000.00 and may the best man win! That is said in jest, just so I won't get taken away to jail for soliciting my vote! I making that VERY CLEAR! My VOTE is now FOR SALE because I WANT something out of giving them my support!! Words are NO LONGER an option with me! I've HEARD enough and SEEN so little!!

I'm still a registered Democrat, but I want a DEMOCRAT who WILL work for "we the people" to represent me, and I'm just not seeing it! I DO realize that many other states DO have different choices where their vote just "might" make a difference, so go VOTE! But given the likes of the "Ben Nelson's" in the Party, and there are a whole lot more like him, the DEMOCRATS are doing a VERY good job of screwing too many people like me! Simply because they've put their finger in the wind, and checked their lists regarding JUST WHO is lining their pockets to get them re-elected and then VOTE against principles that I HAD believed Democrats stood for!

And it's NOT about a PONY, not about the SPEED or lack thereof that has made me feel this way. It's that the DIRECTION of how things HAVE & ARE going don't LOOK to be going down the correct path! Too many Democrats lack SPINE and too many of them ACTUALLY seem AFRAID of confronting issues head on and simply are letting the Repukes get their way even as Repukes do NOTHING but say NO!!

So thank you for your post, I'm HAPPY to Rec & KICK this for you and for those of us who have known what Democrats once were willing to do for the GOOD OF THEIR COUNTRY, and NOT the new Robber Barons of this country called America!

Gee, I see this has gotten lengthy, but you know what? I feel better right now even though I know I'm going to get attacked or maybe even TS'ed! And that's the way it is... for me!!

And now, I'm going to copy this post and print it out so that my other friends can see how SOME FINE PEOPLE REALLY FEEL!!

:dilemma: :eyes: :mad: :hurt: :banghead: :shrug: :nopity: :nuke: :wtf:

[snake in the grass]

327. Now that my blushing has passed...

...I can address your extremely kind and heartfelt post.

We are still on the road to a corporate state and I often ask myself if it's too late to change things peacefully. I'd love to see an awakening happen here like with the Orange Revolution in the Ukraine in 2004 or the Velvet Revolution in the former Czechoslovakia in 1989. The key here is to keep talking and to back down to no one. Tell it to as many people as you can. Spread the word relentlessly that we are being played against each other to our own detriment.

The top 1% of this country has everything to lose and, therefore, everything to fear. A general strike would take care of the problem efficiently. What are they going to do; arrest the remaining 99%? It's a shame that the concept of a general strike is now so foreign to our citizenry, but like so many other things, the fear is too great to cross the line, whereby it only takes a handful of us to do it to get the ball rolling.

Stay pissed off and stay vocal. To stay silent now is akin to acquiescence.

[ChiciB1]

349. Well, I MOST CERTAINLY Don't Intend To Back Down Or Shut Up!

Because I AM just that FED UP! I so glad you've gotten such great response here and such support!

I will keep this short as I see you are up to your ears in trying to reply to those who think you have spoken for so many of us here! And I too await some sort of REVOLUTION, but still fear it won't happen!

My cynicism has grown and continues to do so!

Thanks again!

KICK again!

[OmmmSweetOmmm]

202. Fantastic post! K&R and bookmarked! Thank you!

[Desertrose]

203. Couldn't have said it better. Excellent. K&R THX!

:thumbsup:

[mike_c]

204. one word response....

BRAVO! :applause:

[amborin]

206. K&R

[inna]

209. Bravo

:applause:

[The Wizard]

210. Roger that

and eleven Bravos to you for this post.

[uponit7771]

213. ...and then we got Reagan and you still complained, then we got Bush and you still complained...

..there's no winning here

[femrap]

218. Best. Post. Ever.

Seriously. I've been screaming this stuff since 2007 when we got the House and Senate, but no impeachment proceedings. I knew the Betrayal then.

Obama...I knew he was not what he appeared....just a great marketing campaign.

Do you ever think about going back to Germany?

If you like LA, go visit SF. I think it's even better...but cooler climate, which I liked.

I'm stuck in my home state and the Willfully Ignorant have driven me to becoming a hermit.

It's just so nice to read someone's words that agree with mine. When I speak here, people look at me like I'm speaking some foreign language.

Good luck to you....take your Vitamins and you won't get sick!

[snake in the grass]

304. One of my biggest regrets was leaving Germany.

I miss Berlin for the simple coolness of the city. There's nothing here to compare it to. I'm originally from Florida, but I feel very out of place there - "Stranger in a Strange Land" kind of dislocation, so you do have my sympathies in regard to living in a red district. L.A. is tolerable enough, but I still feel like a square peg trying to fit into a round hole. That's just my nature, I suppose.

I've grown tired of my own apathy and the inertia that accompanies it. I should, we should have been saying this much louder a long time ago. Too many concessions have been made. Too much of our finest silverware has been sold for a fraction of what it was truly worth. Before each round we shake and say this is the last chance; then we take our kick in the teeth and wait for the next round. This time, I'm kicking back and I hope more progressives do the same. In the history of humanity, progress has always been made because of the liberal thought, not in spite of it.

I'll leave you with a quote I find extremely accurate:

"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness."

- John Kenneth Galbraith

[femrap]

360. John Kenneth Galbraith

may be my most admired person in the world. What a brilliant mind along with a heart of gold.

Can you go back to Berlin? I've heard it's a wonderful city. When I traveled in Europe during college (in the mid '70's), The Wall was still up. I did visit Munich, Heidelberg, and the Black Forest. One side of my family came from Baden Baden.

I lived in the Bay Area from 1977 to 1993. That's how I survived the Raygun years. I was encapsulated in a progressive, tolerant, and very fun place. I felt at home there. I worked for a company that required I visit LA every 3 months...I couldn't handle it. The freeways, the Hollywood aura, the tans...

The Bush years were very hard on me. I was in Ohio when he stole the 2nd election. I worked so hard in 2006 to get Dems elected and then no Impeachment proceedings.

These politicians are mere minions that do as they are told by TPTB. The system is corrupt. Obama was selected long ago to be the front man for these evil and greedy men.

Mother Nature may have the final word on all of this.

And more and more people are beginning to see the light. Plus Karma always seems to straighten things out in the end. I try to be hopeful.

Enjoy CA...it's a beautiful state. I had Jerry Brown as my Governor...I hope he gets the job back. He has a good heart, I think.

Keep posting!

[ChiciB1]

351. Boy, Do I Understand Your Hermit Comment!! I Live In A State That Also

thinks that I'm on the dark side of WEIRD! Can't even interact with the local Democratic Party because I've decided that to them "ignorance is bliss!"

I wanted to fight back here, but find it's been useless! While I still keep in touch and spread the word, even some of my own family say I'm "obsessed" and it will ruin my health to boot! While they believe me, some simply say "what are YOU going to do? Nobody is hanging with you, so why keep banging you head against the wall?? I DO understand their concern and theory, but "addiction" is something you WANT to kick, and I don't think I'm there yet! Can't say I totally disagree with the "health" thing because of my FRUSTRATION, but my gut won't let me change my views!

I just want a bigger audience and/or avenue to SCREAM at so many SHEEPLE!! Or better yet, and avenue to ORGANIZE and get something DONE about how we are being FLEECED!

[femrap]

359. I hear you....

I don't have much in good advice. At least we have DU where I find some like-minded people. I wish there were more who were 'obsessed' with having a Democracy. So many people are in Denial over what has happened to this country. They simply can't face the Truth. And they can't hear about it since that will shatter the reality they have built for themselves.

Young people don't realize how much we have lost...I lived it. And it's depressing.

I have faith that Karma will get the evil PTBs.

I'm encouraged by Julian's Wikileaks which is showing what our gov't and military is doing.

There are areas in the country where more progressives live, but I am stuck for the time being.

Maybe writing a blog everyday will help you get rid of frustrations...writing helps me.

Maybe you could print out Snake's OP and take it to the next Dem meeting....and read it aloud or hand it out.

[ChiciB1]

361. I've Already Copied It AND Printed It Out! There Are People Who REALLY

need to see this OP!! I'm almost tempted to send it to the WH. but it's not "mine" to send!

I DO intend to write Bill Nelson and the WH letting them know why I won't be voting in the Democratic Primary here in Florida! It's not something I do lightly, however the Democratic candidates look VERY weak against Charlie Crist! Also, I have heard too many Indies and my Democratic friends telling me that they WILL vote for Crist!

Greene is (pardon the pun) a snake in the grass, and Meek is so DLC and I'm not hearing ANYTHING from him at all! I WAS going to just do the Meek thing, but decided that if they are keeping track of who votes and who doesn't, perhaps statewide Democrats will ACTUALLY SEE that "the base" is REALLY fed up!!

To ignore me and say the base will always be there is really such an insult! Especially when I feel in the end that I'm going to get DLC or Repuke Lite as a nominee!! Crist has surprised me and he seems to have more fight in him than the other candidates! I WILL vote in the general, but only to keep RUBIO from winning!

Some say that I'm throwing my vote away, but I no longer see it that way. Then given that Crist looks like he will win, barring something disastrous my Primary vote isn't that important! The "talk of the state" is that Crist has the head winds and it's not just among Repukes who are talking! Florida This Week is a show I will keep an eye on!

But as I said, I've already printed this out and I'm going to be PROUD to circulate copies!!

[Exultant Democracy]

223. great post

[ProgressOnTheMove]

226. Executive orders are unconstitutional the last one he gave was just an affirmation of current law,..

Plus more women on the supreme court than in history, go after the war criminals didn't we call them a crime family and Pres. Obama is educated and knows this, so he'll avoid all that entail. He's getting things done and avoiding all the serious hazzards and that's all he promised, he specifically said adamantly he wouldn't be perfect. We were not lied to. DADT is coming to an end, if we don't retreat, education wise if we go to the GOP run states and witness their massive cuts to education there is a difference and is that GOP vision what we want nationally. President Obama is the BFD we need to get things done and he needs more support in Congress. Everyone here fought for 10 years to put a halt the right wing pendulum swing, pendulums swings back are very slow, stay in the game. That, is all. Republicans got their dystopia by persistence for many decades, we only get utopia by the same determination.

[Kermitt Gribble]

228. K&R!

I agree 100%.

[bobburgster]

229. Well thought out opinion, even if I strongly disagree with it.

I see very, very few people "thrashing" others who have a legitimate complaint about Obama, but I certainly see a lot sarcasm and put-downs coming from your group.

[snake in the grass]

313. Oddly enough...

...this OP managed to get by with little thrashing by the usual suspects, which I find is often the case when the arguments are presented in the fashion I chose. However, I have seen it on other threads. The substance is never addressed, except to belittle it, as though the killing of innocents in our name is nothing more than a glass of spilled milk; as though the continuation of some of the most egregious policies of the last administration are simply a glitch in the system, on which our reps our working day and night to correct. They're not. It's not happening and it won't until we all get pissed off enough to get vocal.

Nice to see you here, by the way.

[bobburgster]

358. Well, I don't agree with that crap....

no matter which side is doing it. I respect yours and others opinions, but like you it gets very frustrating when you are belittled...etc. I am not satisfied with everything that has occurred with this admin., but I firmly believe not voting and sabatoge of the Obama admin. is not the way to go.

Thanks, enjoy reading and discussing current events with non-reps ;-)

[NorthCarolina]

230. Excellent Post..Bravo!

:applause: :applause: :applause: :applause: :applause:

[1badjedi]

231. Simply excellent!

What a summation of what ills this country. This should be in the op-ed section of every newspaper in america.

Sorry if my gushing is embarrassing but this was well said! After the past few weeks of reading nothing but nonsense here the truth is refreshing.

btw I hope you're not angered but I am sharing this with my friends. WTG!

[snake in the grass]

239. Why should I be angered?

If anything, it's an honour for me that you deem it important enough to share. I don't care if people copy and paste until their wrists hurt. I don't even care if they attribute it to themselves. I want the message out there that some of us are not going to give up that last inch for political expediency. I fail to see the difference anymore between the parties, except like I said, one is willing to give us a few scraps more than the other. The destination, if you will, is the same for both - a corporate state, with us to serve as drones.

When I think of the positive things President Obama has done, three things come to mind; the Lily Ledbetter Act, lifting the international gag rule, and the lifting of the ban on stem cell research. Somehow, though, they just don't outweigh the continuing assault on our liberties, the unnecessary wars based on obvious lies, the renditions, the torture, the selling out of the peoples' interests to the highest bidder, and the refusal to pursue investigations of war crimes and crimes against humanity, which really was the final straw for me, as this is an issue of global importance. How can we ever point our fingers at another country, like North Korea, when there's so much blood on the White House doorsteps? Truth is, we cannot, unless we're willing to accept the laughter that follows.

Things will only change if we change them. The sad recognition is that we are truly alone. There will be no help coming from the Democratic Party. There will be no help coming from anywhere at all.

It's up to us. Actually, it always was.

[BrklynLiberal]

234. I am going to forward your post to everyone I know..and then print it out and mail it to those who

do not have email...and then put a copy on my fridge

Thank you.


:thumbsup: :hi: :hi: :dem:

[earth mom]

237. Squandering of a historic opportunity-that says it all in a nutshell.

HUGE K & R for this OP! Thanks for speaking the truth! :applause:

[democrank]

240. I just read this eloquent and courageous piece three times.

Bravo! and thank you from the bottom of my heart for having the courage to stand up for things that matter and to refuse to join excuse brigade. I applaud your stand.

As a nearly five-decades-long Democrat who worked in the trenches during the Civil Rights Movement and the Vietnam War, principles like yours mean something to me. A lot, actually. What a breath of fresh air after the tidal wave of excuses and sell-outs I`ve read here at DU.

How fashionable it has become to excuse torture, excuse killing of innocent civilians, excuse DADT, excuse obscene bank bailouts, on and sickening on. It`s actually celebrated here that we all stand in the middle of the road and nod, since the new mantra is win at all costs, even if we have to give up everything we used to believe in. What utter bullshit.

If a policy reeked under Junior Bush, it STILL REEKS under President Obama, only worse because he should know better.

[valerief]

241. K&R

:kick:

[mnhtnbb]

246. Great post. LTTE in our local paper suggesting time to apply separation

of education and state in the same frame as separation of church and state.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2010/07/31/605364/private-school-for-all.html#storylink=misearch

Damn. The greedy keep on wanting more and f*ck anybody who gets in their way.

PS: My son (German major) just got back from 7 weeks in Berlin for summer study.
He loved it. Maybe some day he'll be able to live there.

[snake in the grass]

306. Berlin is one of the coolest cities in the known universe.

I envy your son.

Ich sende ihm und Dir schoene Gruesse aus Los Angeles.

[johnaries]

248. No, that's NOT "the deal" at all. Please try to understand.

I myself do not have a problem with a "legitimate complaint" against Obama. I have a few, myelf. HOWEVER, most of the criticisms I have seen are NOT legitimate. They are misrepresetned or based on comments taken out of context and skewed.

First of all, the basic premise of your screed is false. You try to break down the conflict into 2 gategories. It is, in reality, much more complicated than that. That is the first thing one must try to understand.

You claim that Obama "fellated" big business. Yes, he understands their importance enough to see the need for TARP (even though it was begun under Bush). But was he fellating them with the Lily Ledbetter Act? What about his threat to withdraw TARP funds if banks continued uhge bonuses? What about the CARD Act? What about the Financial Regulation bill? Sure, some try to claim that HCR was a big "insurance give-away", but that's simply not true. It imposes strong regulations on the Medical Insurance companies and cuts deeply into their profits. Yes, I wanted a Public Option, but Lieberman killed that - not Obama.

What we "sensible" people are saying is that we support Liberal and Progressive ideals. However, we also have to look at the current climate and do what we can to progress those ideals. And we have to realize that we simply can't accomplish all of them. So we do what we can.

Yes, you are correct that a large portion of the poplace is largely ignorant. Unfortunately, we have to work with them.

When you look at what Obama has accomplished and what he currently has "in the works", he has done much to progress Liberal ideals. He has done much in the way of consumer protections. Especially when you consider what he has had to work with.

No, he's not perfect. Yes, there are legitimate criticisms against him. But, frankly, I don't see another person out there that could have done as much as he has under the conditions he has been given. And although I will admit there are legitimate criticisms, I have seen damn few of them here on DU. Mostly what I have seen here is emotionally-driven drivel with little or no basis in fact.

And although I disagree that the views of Americans can be distilled down to only 2 categories, unfortunately at Election time we only have 2 viable choices. Democrat or Republican. As much as I may wish it weren't that way, it is.

[Capn Sunshine]

252. well, that was sensible

I just don't understand why or how supposedly "informed" posters here at DU could, after all the stuff posted about Obama, think he is going to be "Progressive"

I'm a progressive. I saw the same thing with Howard Dean.

Dean and Obama are pragmatic centrists, you guys.
Alway have been , always will be.

I have had the pleasure to be a part of both Presidential campaigns. Obama always, always, always said he he wanted to articulate an inclusive agenda that attempts to de-polarize the country.
Howard Dean agrees with this. I voted for Obama knowing he wouldn't govern from where I am politically, but would give credence to the other side's positions.

I voted for Barack Obama because he promised to consider our position in his governing. I don't expect him to tow the progressive line, but he's our best chance for fixing this mess, and he's brought us light years from where we were under Bush.

Not far enough or fast enough? Arguably, but progress is progress.

Cheer for the apocalypse if you wish, I'm just trying to keep it together to keep up the push for what's right and what's human.

[TheKentuckian]

305. Threat to Wall St over bonuses? They took their bonus not once but twice

He wagged the finger but took no action.

CARD ACT? What CARD Act? LOLZ Zilch

FinReg? A bunch of shine heavily dependent on a consumer protection agency (that they have constantly worked to hobble) to do jack apple shit and about nothing to stop the shenanigans that led to the crashout in 08 and the massive wealth transfer and wage stagnation that proceeded it.

Another swipe at propping up the Wealthcare and Profit Protection Act. Say you got more people on the rolls and hope they get some kind of care and can keep up with expenses but this fucker is toxic despite potentially helping some of the more lucky and the well off with preexisting conditions.

A bunch of lip service and distortion.

[truedelphi]

250. Sorry to have to tell you this - but we definitely are not on the road to

Change.

Study up on Obama's Corporatist Banking crew. His approval of Bernanke, his appointment of Geithner. The fourteen trillion of the monies from Main Street that went out to Wall Street, so that Bernanke, Geithner (Paulson) could assist AIG and Goldman Sachs.

Why don't we have jobs? Because of the Corporate Set up that Obama aided - everyone in the Upper Circles of Wall Street got tens of billions handed to them, while our small towns, shopping malls, and city industries are being shuttered.

Then Look at his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emmanuel, who is the architect behind Clinton's NAFTA agreements. And try and not be annoyed by all the meetings that Rahm conducted with Big Insurers and Big Pharma exactly one year ago.

Then there is the Obama/Monsanto link. Mike Taylor, who put together the wording of the "Food Safety" doctrine that is the laughing stock of conferences all over the world where real, independent scientists discuss American food policy. The biggest reaction? Our mold-contaminated foods are banned in many parts of the world, from Japan clear over to Europe.

But the Powers that Be figured out some time ago as long as some people can really detest people like Pallin, that these people will be so pleased that the inner circle's setup of One Party composed of the Very Shrill and Stupid and one Party charming and articulate would bamboozle most of these non-thinkers.

So continue being so pleased that Palin isn't in - that is exactly as it was planned.

Fascism is, by definition, the sellout of the State to the Power of the Corporations. And the definition is indifferent if it is brought about by the Charming and the Articulate, or the Shrill and the Scary. In either case, your kids and your grandkids will not have food to eat, water to drink - why, we already are jobless and fighting to keep our houses.

The plan is working perfectly.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

253. Most excellent post.

For some inane reason, your post reminded me of Patrick Henry's speech, especially the last paragraph.

"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace but there is no peace.
The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms!
Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have?
Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery?
Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"

...... Patrick Henry, St. John's Church, Richmond, Virginia March 23, 1775.

We need to unite to the cause, we need to sweep the laggards from our party, from our presence, send them back
to where they were birthed. Feet to the fire, no remorse, no excuses, no apologies, we need to fight as warriors.
The War has begun here in 2010, if not before. Wake up people, we are losing, the corporations own you, I, us as we discuss.

Education suffered for the last 30-35 years, we are a country of not only uninformed, misinformed, but insipid, bleak, mentally weak.
That is what they want, need, to succeed. They are succeeding, they are winning. The mentally weak can only follow, they are incapable of
critical thinking, hell, their incapable of rational thought. I have at current time five teachers in my family, all younger than I.
Myself, without the experience of a Masters Degree, just an Associate, have better thought processes then they.
Charter schools will only train our youth, wearing brown shirts as I tap this out, to yield to the corporate stance.
Good soldiers they will be.

[humbled_opinion]

257. Extremely well written...

The dilemma as I see it is, the right has been launching a campaign to paint Obama as a far left radical ideologue since day one. It is a political master stroke and has worked very well, many centrists and independents now view Obama somewhere between a far left Ideologue and a Marxist Socialist. So here we have a very centrist if not slightly right leaning articulate President who at his core is trying to end Partisanship and bring the nation together at the same time trying to undo the damage of many unchecked and unbalanced years of Repub rule and the opposition has reset the Center to be even further right then it was under Bushco.

The true Danger is the development of a recessive culture that views itself as centrist.

[sagesnow]

259. This may be the first time in my life that

I won't vote. Voting for either party at this point is voting for bad or worse. Why reward either party with my support?

[snake in the grass]

366. Please vote.

To not do so is to not be heard. I know it seems insignificant at times and I know the disgust you feel at the sellout going on, but don't disengage from the process entirely. As one you may be insignificant in your influence, but together we can be a force to be reckoned with.

It's up to us.

[ChiciB1]

370. I Said The Same Above... But Then I Don't Really Have Anyone To Vote For...

I'm just going to make a wish that MY STATE Party will notice that some of my friends and me aren't voting in this Florida Primary! My Democratic friends are REALLY ticked off and feeling SO BETRAYED!

It's a growing feeling around here and th WH SHOULD be listening to "the base" but I FEAR THEY ARE NOT!!

To their PERIL!!!!

[sandyd921]

270. I gotta agree.

Don't know where it puts us or exactly what we need to do, but I think you've accurately described the situation.

[nc4bo]

271. Oh yes and a hearty K&R and thank-you. nt

[dmallind]

274. Irony personified

Bitch about (unidentified, natch) strawmen offered by those who prefer Obama and know we only have two choices, followed by fifteen or so paragraphs of strawmen that try to pretend they think Obama is perfect, rather than preferable.

[snake in the grass]

316. There's another straw man right there.

It wasn't my intent nor the purpose of this OP to address the straw men. My intention was to spell out to some, who have decided to close their eyes to reality, why the Left is angry.

Judging by the responses, I'd say it was pretty successful.

Thank you for your contribution and have a nice day!

[jotsy]

280. Another rec

and a new fan.

An outstanding, solidly supported assessment.

Unlike you, I bit into every word and would see only the promise of light on the horizon. I listened to his victory speech on the car radio my eyes filled with tears of hope and relief. I've tried to be patient since, wasn't surprised when he acted like leader of all, rather than an emissary of a portion as reward for their political faith. I knew what a mess he'd been handed, and that it would take some time before the matters high on my list of agenda terms would be seen to. I want the return of constitutional provisions stripped from the citizenry through the Patriot Act. I want the Bushco's to face a vast array of criminal charges for the acts they have engaged in and buried to further obstruct justice. The financial services industry, oil and gas companies, the vendors of big pharma, and health insurers should be also be prosecuted for their own roles in a collective fleecing of the public.

Now at the mid mark of a presidential term, lots has been addressed, significantly less actually remedied in a manner consistent with what might be considered best for the common good. How we came to be such victims of atrophy through generational apathy is indeed a deal decades in the making. Between what I've learned about Milgram's experiment on authoritarianism and correlate that with the timing of the DOD coined phrase and philosophy of 'perception management', it's easy to see how education would become the first casualty in an apparent battle between those who want all verses those with but crumbs left. We are supposed to have been more thoroughly primed by now for any of this to be questioned.

Thanks for posting!

[BeHereNow]

285. Recommended, for those willing to comprehend reality.

Excellent work SITG.
BHN

[Red Knight]

296. I won't vote Obama

Again.

Nope. No how. No way. I won't work for him and his BS.

Now--I will never vote for the Republican. But if there's no progressive alternative I won't vote.

I never had that attitude before.

I "got in line".

No more.

I'm done.

What will be will be.

[LAGC]

307. Well, I sure hope you'll at least vote in the primaries.

Maybe a strong Democratic primary challenger to Obama will make him come around. My only hope is that IF he is re-elected, his second term is much better than his pitiful first so far.

And I'd strongly suggest voting third-party before not voting at all. The stronger a showing a third-party candidate can make, the more viable they will be next time around. While I doubt I'll vote for Obama either (mainly because I live in a strongly Republican state who will never vote for him anyway, so my vote won't make a difference either way) I still plan on voting third-party, just to make my voice heard and strengthen the third-party ticket, mainly for the local races next time around.

[snake in the grass]

318. To not vote is irresponsible.

And if there is a progressive candidate in the primaries, she or he has my vote. Last time I was a Kucinich supporter, but he was out of the game before the CA primary. At that point, I only cared about the (D), but that strategy isn't working.

Time to regroup.

[flamingdem]

308. A big wet kiss to the GOP then! nt

[inna]

310. what an extremely stupid and offensive comment.

shame on you, "flamingdem".

[flamingdem]

320. There is nothing offensive about my comment

Your overreaction reveals too much.

[snake in the grass]

322. While the comment didn't offend me...

...I'll have to agree with inna that it was stupid and very narrow minded. In case you haven't noticed, the conservatives already have the country. Some call themselves Republicans, some New Democrats, some Blue Ball Democrats - all of them are the scum of the earth, who would send your children off to be slaughtered on some foreign shore to improve their bottom line.

Don't be scared of them. Make them scared of you.

[flamingdem]

323. I think you need to work on your critical thinking skills nt

[snake in the grass]

324. In the realm of critical thinking...

...there is always room for improvement...for all of us. You may also want to consider working on your social skills as well.

Have a nice weekend.

[flamingdem]

338. Discouraging others to act in their best interests

is also a social faux pas.

[snake in the grass]

319. flamingdem...

...you are only limited by your imagination. If you can think it, it is possible.

A better world is possible.

We haven't left the party. It has left us.

[jannyk]

325. Best Post I've read on DU in a very long time -

Thank You for making it still worthwhile to hang out here!

Can't rec anymore - but a great big kick for truthyness.

:applause: :applause: :fistbump: :fistbump: :applause: :applause:

[Delphinus]

344. +1,000

Just found this - want it to be seen by more!

[WheelWalker]

326. Is that you, Keith Olbermann?

[snake in the grass]

328. No.

I'm just a snake in the grass, pissed off and poised to strike!

[WheelWalker]

330. I try to stick to the forest paths, and avoid being the third one down the trail.

[Steely_Dan]

352. I Think Snake Wanted Me To Post This Here...

I think that many people gave President Obama the benefit of the doubt very early even when he was making appointments that (even you might agree) were questionable at best. However, when the road that Mr. Obama was (is) on continued to raise even more questions, many of us began to wonder if we were being hoodwinked in the name of bipartisanship...an approach that smacked more of naivete than a sophisticated political strategy.

Yes, Congress is a major factor. However, the President has a bully pulpit. And for whatever reason, he has not successfully articulated a message that matches either literally or figuratively the speeches he gave during the campaign. The soaring rhetoric of the campaign which emphasized hope and change gave many of us the courage to say...Okay, one more time. It took a while, but now I believe him.

I can only imagine how some feel after giving so much to the President during the campaign only to see so many Bush policies continue taking our country down the wrong road. Okay, so some had unrealistic expectations. But can you blame them after the kind of campaign that Mr. Obama conducted. For many, that campaign now sounds more like a "sales" job appealing to our desire to "believe." Disappointment is necessarily tied to expectation. Is there any doubt that the author of our expectations was (to some extent) Mr. Obama himself.

In the President's defense, much of the fever during the campaign had a "life of its own." It became something even bigger than Obama himself. However, while he stated that it would take time, the "hope and change" mantra continued right through November.

There is a sense among some that what was left by the previous administration is so devastating that no single person could correct the ship of state in a mere 18 months. This is reasonable to consider. However, there is another school of thought that says what was left by the Bush administration is so devastating that only quick and decisive action commensurate to the problems we face is required.

It is my belief that people on the left (especially those who would frequent this board) are passionate about their beliefs. "Passion" runs hand-in-hand with being impatient...I'm one of those. I don't feel like we have the time to negotiate with the RW in the name of cooperation. The problems are too deep.

Many would love the rest of us to look at what has been accomplished in 18 months. And indeed, we should not discount the fact that some progress has been made. I "try" and remind myself of that everyday. However, some would argue that the progress that has been made is somewhat hollow. There is nothing worse than a half-ass attempt. It just doesn't feel right. It is analogous to how I feel towards the Repugs. There is very little that I agree with (policy-wise) with my friends on the Right. However (and this is important), I KNOW where they are coming from. I know what to expect from them and I am not surprised when they side with corporations to the debt of the rest of us. What angers me (and I believe many others) is when our own party does not act like the party we have supported and sacrificed for. This is far more devastating than anything the Right could do.

Because the President didn't grab the message right at the start and let the RW frame the arguments (which is just simply beyond my understanding), Mr. Obama has now been made out to be a Marxist, Socialist...the most Liberal President in history...etc.etc. Well...if the RW has successfully convinced the wingnuts out there that he is as extreme as they say, then you might as well make bold strokes towards what is fair for the "people" of this country and not bow to the right cowering and shaking at every Fox News report.

I will try and be patient. I will try and understand that what I thought would happen with Healthcare didn't happen, but someday it will. I'll try and understand for now, that it is still okay to listen in on my telephone conversations. I'll try and put behind me the fact that we committed horrible war crimes and no one was brought to justice. I'll give it go to accept that banks received bailout money with little or no regulation to insure that the money (at least a crumb or two) would make it to the people. I'll try and accept my new role on the "radical left" when it wasn't that long ago, I was considered just a Democrat. I'll try and give my "new" Democratic friends the time they need to show that they have not abandoned the essential planks that have served the Democratic Party for decades and made us the Party of the People.

-P

[havocmom]

357. Food for thought, thanks

Patience is needed, but so is raising hell with Obama keeps bush policies, agendas, department heads. That is demonstrats that 'change' was an empty marketing slogan.

[upi402]

362. Me too. I'll try and find an inconspicuous place to writhe in pain

so my New Democrats aren't bothered by my untoward moans and gasps.

[snake in the grass]

363. Thanks for posting this Paige.

As I read it, I thought back to the run-up to the election and how happy I was to see that the young and first-time voters had left their shackles of apathy behind them. The motivation and the hope were a refreshing alternative to my personal brand of cynicism, and that was a very good thing. Now I wonder how many of these people are disillusioned as they discover that they were most likely duped by a brilliant ad campaign; one that appears to be turning into nothing more than a soap bubble. The more experienced (i.e. older) among us will just say that that's how life is, but the energy these people brought to the table is something we desperately need. How many will stay home next time? The only people I see praising Obama are here, not in my personal circles. I don't know a single person who is still excited by Obama and many are absolutely disgusted. For the record, these are all Democrats and/or Progressives - I don't hang with the other end of the spectrum. Another squandered opportunity.

I'm also happy you mentioned Fox Noise. The Shirley Sherrod episode was a disaster. As far as I know, Glenn Beck didn't win in 2008, so how is it possible that he has the authority to hire and fire, albeit indirectly? From whom does his veto power come? It's certainly not from us. That was so sad and so damn unnecessary. I really feel like giving President Obama a tissue to wipe the egg of his face, but he brought it on himself. To those who claim he didn't know, that it was done without his involvement, I can only say that he is the boss. The buck stops with him and if he has surrounded himself with idiots, who do these things without his knowledge, perhaps he should consider replacing them. The whole thing makes him look like an amateur as opposed to the ruthless political animal we were presented with during the primaries. The same goes with Van Jones; yet another squandered opportunity.

Sometimes it seems they just don't care. Sad.

[LAGC]

371. Wow, this deserves to be an OP in and of itself.

Good points.

[Steely_Dan]

374. Thanks! I Appreciate It....n/t

[BeHereNow]

367. Stolen from another thread, but SOOOOOOO relevant to this one. George Carlin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
posted by asdjrocky here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8854345

This clip SO belongs on this thread.

BHN

[KansasVoter]

373. Perfect!