I thought only wingnuts believed that simply saying something was so made it so.

[Atticus]

You know, things like "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction" and "Hussein trained the 9-11 terrorists".

None of that stuff was true, but they repeated it loudly and often and then just ASSUMED it that it was common knowledge. For many in this country, they made the nonsense true.

I see some of that same technique being used here.

President Obama is NOT "doing just fine."

He has some accomplishments, to be sure. We have stopped our economy, temporarily, from careening into the abyss and we have improved, temporarily, our image in the world.

But, the watered-down health care bill we got after letting the Republicans grandstand for months felt a lot better when I didn't know that our public option was sold for dross before the "negotiations" even started.

We DON'T HAVE a repeal of DADT, card check for union labor or an immigration bill. We are still pouring billions into the military-industrial coffers and we have prosecuted NONE of the Bush administration war criminals.

Within the last two days, I have learned that Mr. Obama joined with Republicans in heading off criminal charges being filed in Spain against six of Bush's boys AND I have listened to him signal that he will extend the Bush tax cuts for millionaires.

Things are NOT "going according to plan"---unless you are Karl Rove.
President Obama has NOT "done as well as could be expected"---unless you expected him not to lead.
The Republicans did not TAKE 60-plus House seats from us---we GAVE them to them by sheer ineptitude and lack of spine.

Politics, viewed long term, is NOT just about winning or losing. It is about fighting the right fights, and we have done precious little fighting for anything that we SAY we believe in. On healthcare, on DADT, on card check, on these tax cut extensions---we dithered and wrung our hands and pleaded for "bipartisanship" while punks like DeMint and Cantor and McConnell ate our lunch and drank our milk shake.

Finally, if simply stating where we are at and how we got here is now a criminal offense on DU, I hope there will always be enough evidence to convict me.

[BzaDem]

1. The technique you mention is mainly used by the perpetual Obama critics. n/t

[dionysus]

2. +1

[obxhead]

4. Could you possibly explain that a little better?

As far as I can tell this technique is used to primarily to point out an accomplishment or the existence of something, not the failure of something or someone.

[BzaDem]

7. The OP is talking about people thinking that "simply saying something was so made it so."

It happens all the time.

"Obama could have repealed DADT! Obama could have passed the WPA! Obama could have passed a public option! The healthcare bill is not progressive!"

etc

[obxhead]

13. OK

I can agree with those for the most part.

To take just one of those issues...

I don't feel HCR was progressive enough, but Obama could not have made it more progressive alone. It would be better to say Obama could have fought harder for a more progressive bill.

I see your point. I feel it's a 2 way street here on DU though. No side of the Obama camp is using the technique exclusively is what I was really trying to get at I guess.

[BzaDem]

15. I'm not saying it was as progressive as I would have made it.

I'm simply pointing out that redistributing care from the rich and healthy to the poor and sick is progressive.

[obxhead]

19. I would agree with that. nt

[immoderate]

30. distributing the wealth toward the insurance companies is not progressive.

If you follow the money -- in the case of anything Obama has done, you'll find it moves toward the wealthy. Always.

--imm

[BzaDem]

36. Back here in reality though, HCR actually limits profits and administrative expenses to less than

they are now.

So your post is another perfect example. You expect just because you say "it moves toward the wealthy" ACTUALLY MEANS it moves towards the wealthy, even when that is categorically false.

[Atticus]

39. I think you are up to seven. That should be at least "truthy", shouldn't it? nt

[BzaDem]

40. At least I'm not stalking posters, making up counts and pretending other people care. :)

[immoderate]

55. And why are there profits?

And insurance companies are not owned by the wealthy? And they collect this money for doing exactly what?

--imm

[dmallind]

8. you mean like "Obama threw X under the bus" and "Obama is just like Bush"?

Yep that's how it's used - here and on a few other ideologically oriented websites and not anywhere else so much.

[obxhead]

18. Or maybe

Obama has made health care more affordable for you. Obama has ended the war in Iraq!

I've been told those exact 2 statements by posters here on DU, neither of which is true.

It's not a technique used exclusively by either side of the Obama camp.

[OregonBlue]

5. You are correct. That seems to be their modus operandi.

[Atticus]

12. And, how many more times does that have to be said before it becomes true? nt

[BzaDem]

16. That was true long before anyone said it. n/t

[Atticus]

20. That's three.

[ThomCat]

25. You must have a really odd definition of "true."

:shrug:

It doesn't seem to be connected to the real world, or to facts in any significant way.

[BzaDem]

28. Nope -- I'm using THE definition of true, which is based on facts in the real world.

True doesn't have multiple definitions. It has one definition.

[ThomCat]

61. Then I guess you have lots of proof to back that up.

It can't be just exaggerations and hyperbole, because you're absolutely sure that you're right, and know the truth and all that...

I can't wait. :P

[johnaries]

31. Absolutely. I've been appalled at some of the Rovian-type spin

that I've seen on this board against Obama. And whenever you try to present facts and actual reliable sources, you just get shouted down.

[Xenotime]

76. Ha! Good one!

[nashville_brook]

3. very well said -- Dems should be above mindless worship of authority.

[patrice]

21. People should be FREE of both mindless worship & mindless opposition. The truth about Obama,

like it or not, IS a combination of positive & negative and - given the almost indisputable fact that we stand to lose a lot if we don't take real steps toward solutions NOW, and the lot that we can lose CAN cause more suffering and death, and combined with the high probability that Other-than-Obama can deliver nothing in anything like the foreseeable future, except a Republican ascendancy that will last a LOT longer than many folks have - many of us have decided, while keeping his negatives in mind, to try to make some responsible progress with him, instead of engaging in what looks like a lot of ends-justifies-the means speculation about things that aren't even half-way defined yet, let alone anywhere near even being on the horizon.

[nashville_brook]

22. "ends-justifies-the means speculation" -- such as?

[patrice]

26. Self-fulfilling prophecies which are quite common regarding the likelihood of

the Employee Free Choice Act or some other steps toward Right to Organize. It is assumed that, under current conditions, ANY and ALL steps toward that are worthless.

Medicare Reform was initiated in the Health Affordability Act. There is to be a national panel to examine Medicare for recommendations to address fraud, waste, and abuse. Are we going to abandon that to Republicans? It will come out of the quality of care and it will protect the fat salaries that buy public offices for Republicans, as Death Panels become more deeply entrenched. It is assumed that any possibility of making whatever progress toward something like Medicare Reform and, thus, the possibility of Medicare for All and/or creating a door to a Public Option, none of that is worth it to those who have decided that Obama is no good whatsoever.

Everyone's fixed on their own personal issue and they are willing to sacrifice EVERYTHING to their personal evaluations. It's nothing but a balkanized power struggle and it will fail for EVERYONE except the plutocracy.

[nashville_brook]

34. if denying plutocratic victory is desired, then how's about fighting against their tax cuts?

or their off-shoring of our jobs vis a vis the new Korean Free Trade deal? or, how about standing firm with the base instead of using as game chips to be traded away?

you sound as if you blame rank-and-file Democrats for empowering the plutocracy -- that's hard to support with evidence, but go ahead and try.

[patrice]

44. MOST "Democrats" are DOING nothing. They barely know the issues. They almost

never engage in activism and if they do it's got to be by means of a computer.

I'm a Deanocrat. I think we are the ones who are supposed to be doing the fighting, but the only fighting we are doing is with one another: those who have decided to throw Obama out vs. those who want to TRY to get a few steps closer to our goals out of this administration; and issue group vs. issue group ad inifnitum.

If we'd learn how to stick together and be coherent and effective, we'd have a place at the table TOGETHER. But we aren't anything about anything TOGETHER at this point and that is becoming increasingly likely for the foreseeable future. Even if there were someone other-than-Obama to step up in 2012, they'd have to frakking crazy, because it's a DOOMED effort, we have been that effectively fractioned by base-builders who don't give a real crap whether we succeed at anything, as long as they get bigger bases out of what's going on.

[nashville_brook]

45. you think you have a place "at the table" -- like Dean did?

[patrice]

48. No. And I know exactly what happened to Dean. I'm talking about how factions INSURE

all of that over and over and over again.

No matter how right you are.

[patrice]

50. BTW, you need to re-read. I didn't say we have a place at the table. I said it's about how to get

that. And if anyone thinks Obama is going to up and do it for a movement that isn't even really there, they ARE sadly sadly mistaken.

[Atticus]

63. I appreciate your passion and your reasoned responses. I guess I am just to the

point where I see that we never had a place at the table even when there most certainly WAS a "movement" that was ready to enthusiastically go wherever it was lead. The failures have accumulated. And, too many have been failures because of what I see as a lack of dynamic leadership.

We need a leader who will stare unblinkingly back across the table and say "Let it ride. Let's give(insert issue) a full debate and an up or down vote." Instead, so far, we have finger-wagging, repeated statements of faith in the good intentions of the Republicans and concession after concession.

I, too, strongly supported Dr. Dean. Even when I disagreed with him, I felt he was doing all he could to achieve goals which we all share. I just no longer know what President Obama is doing or why he is doing it. Too frequently, his actions just don't make sense to me.

[patrice]

65. I too hunger for that full debate and am nearly fed up with the corruption in the systems: MSM,

campaign finance, election fraud etc. all of which affect what's happening between us at this level and between us and our state & federal governments.

[DirkGently]

24. Honest debate is the right premise. "Obama is our only hope" does not follow from it. nt.

[patrice]

33. Hope? Who CAN deliver what? and how? We're talking about TWO years here.

Many of us who are not ready to quit the issues yet with this President, do not regard him as "our only hope".

It's a matter of timing that leads to success and if you cut a bunch of people loose on their issues for something that you quite likely cannot deliver, the timing for the success about which you speculate will most probably be extended by much much more than is acceptable, certainly to many people who are on the edge now, and quite likely also even to you.

[nashville_brook]

38. if timing was key, you'd think the tax cut issue would have been dispatched when he had congress.

instead he let it ride as if he had all the time in the world.

[patrice]

46. I don't know what's up with him. I do know what's up with me and my friends and we are just now

figuring out that we SHOULD let ALL of those tax cuts go.

THEIR carrot = their GAME

[nashville_brook]

47. funny how that's not being floated. i bet most americans of good faith would give up the tax cut

to "save" the country. funny how that's not "on the table."

[patrice]

51. I don't know where you've been reading, but it IS being floated, by no less than Senator Harkin.

There's also talk that Feingold's recent vote on the issue is because he too knows that by turning down ALL of the Bush Tax Cuts, WE GET THE DRIVER'S SEAT on THEIR issue, the Deficit. We also collect their anti-deficit populists, whom you all may recall are BIG on Medicare.

[patrice]

52. That crap in the House this week was just theater. Plenty of folks said so to Lawrence O'Donnell thi

s week and they said things that support Senator Harkin's position.

[patrice]

54. I've been saying it all over FaceBook and get consistent Likes.

[Hydra]

84. Umm, what happens when Obama delivers Republican ascendancy himself?

Because he's already done it once, and is poised to do it again in 2012.

THAT, more than anything else he's done wrong should be talked about.

He had a dead opposition party. He spent 2 years reviving them and making them credible again.

Can you explain what's positive about that?

[krabigirl]

32. Unfortunately, authoritarians fall on both sides of the left/right scale.

As do libertarians i may add.

[JVS]

70. Not just on the sides, but in the middle

[Ian David]

6. ...

[Taitertots]

9. "A cynic is a man who knows the price of everything and the value of nothing" n/t

[Atticus]

17. "A pregnant armadillo never crosses wet cement." nt

[Taitertots]

23. "The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it...

deliberately with faulty arguments"

[Atticus]

27. "Lithuanian vegans seldom drive stick shifts." nt

[Cerridwen]

49. Quite. That was Friedrich Nietzsche.

The Gay Science, section 191
German philosopher (1844 - 1900)

191.
Against many a Vindication. — The most per-
fidious manner of injuring a cause is to vindicate it
intentionally with fallacious arguments.

eta: http://www.archive.org/stream/completenietasch10nietuoft/completenietasch10nietuoft_djvu.txt">English translation

eta2: a snippet

194 THE JOYFUL WISDOM, III

1 88.

Work. — How closely work and the workers now
stand even to the most leisurely of us ! The
royal courtesy in the words : " We are all workers,"
would have been a cynicism and an indecency
even under Louis XIV.

[Cerridwen]

42. Actually, that was "Lord Darlington", a fictional character in one of

Wilde's plays. In http://www.gradesaver.com/the-remains-of-the-day/study-guide/character-list/">"The Remains of the Day", "Lord Darlington" was...

Stevens' and Miss Kenton's employer in the years leading up to World War II. Darlington, himself, appears to be a German-sympathizer - specifically a Hitler sympathizer, as he seeks to keep Germany from falling apart in the wake of the Treaty of Versailles. That said, Darlington is a gentle man and treats Stevens and his staff delicately - except for one moment when he does fire two Jewish maids because of his German sympathies. Ultimately, Darlington is considered honorable by Stevens and a man worthy of deep respect. (emphasis added)

[nashville_brook]

43. ouch!

[Cerridwen]

53. Indeed.

[Greyhound]

66. How surprising A completely irrelevant, yet misinterpreted quote.

"Dance tiny dancer, dance!"

[Angry Dragon]

10. Who on DU pleaded for "bipartisanship"??

[Atticus]

14. "we" was intended---I thought obviously---to include all Democrats and progressives; not just

those on DU.

[DirkGently]

11. Needs saying. The List of Accomplishments also needs a few "*." As in "Closed Gitmo." (*)

[nashville_brook]

29. then there's the ones that don't need "*" such as Korean Free Trade

[Atticus]

35. But, SEE:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9685452&mesg_id=9685452

[nashville_brook]

41. yup -- dubious, injurious "accomplishment" of running the ball into the wrong endzone.

[jefferson_dem]

57. The one the UAW and Sander Levin just endorsed?

That one?

[Catherina]

37. Rec'd n/t

[jefferson_dem]

56. "I thought only wingnuts believed that simply saying something was so made it so."

I fully agree with that assertion... Only that it applies to the wild-eyed lot of Obama haters and critics on both ideological fringes. Seems that the far right has not cornered the market on "Truthiness."

Here in the DU bubble, and a few other corners of the so-called progressive echo chamber, serial malcontents deny every accomplishment as if it never happened and blame their every untamed concern on one man. Reality calls.

[Atticus]

59. Just a few questions: Are you saying I am one of that "wild-eyed lot of Obama haters? And, if so,

why?

Also, do you consider me a "serial malcontent"? Have I "denied every accomplishment"? Have I "blamed (my) every untamed concern" on President Obama?

[jefferson_dem]

62. Of course not.

I would never directly accuse anyone. I was speaking in general terms.

While I do not agree with much of your OP, I appreciate the perspective. Besides, you refer to "some accomplishments". :)

[Atticus]

64. Thank you.

[Atticus]

60. DUPE---deleted by poster.

[treestar]

71. +1000

It's quite the other way round. How many contentless posts have there been screaming that Obama alone could have forced Lieberman to allow a vote on the Public Option just by using the bully pulpit or twisting Lieberman's arm? These people just don't want to face reality.

[patrice]

74. The other possibility is that they want to use reality for an agenda that is not up front.

They know what the limitations in this situation are and they are using them to advocate for something that may not be what they imply it is.

Happens all of the time.

[Atticus]

75. "these people" used to be a term reserved for Republicans on this site, not

Democrats simply wanting Democrats to act and talk like Democrats.

I'm sure Karl and the boys are chuckling.

[madinmaryland]

58. I read it on the internets, so it is true. nt

[Kaleva]

67. Is there anyone in Washington getting things done to your satisfaction?

[Atticus]

68. Temporarily, yes. Grayson and Feingold. I'd also add Kucinich and Barbara Boxer and a few others.

But, they are not a part of an effective party apparatus because they and their peers are encouraged to simply wander around and wait for the latest "deal" to be announced.

No drawing lines in the sand. No "This is where I stand. If you don't like it, replace me!" It's nothing new, but "going along to get along" makes me want to puke.

I know it's corny, but wouldn't it be nice to add a few chapters to "Profiles in Courage"?

[Kaleva]

69. What have Feingold and Grayson done?

I don't know much of Grayson but Feingold is a senator from a neighboring state and I've long respected and liked him. I think it sad that Wisconsin elected a teabagger favorite in lieu of him. That being said, I know that Feingold hasn't actually accomplished much in the years he's been in the Senate but he is just one of 100 in the Senate and there is really only so much he or anyone else can do.

[treestar]

72. They got nothing done

The only way anything gets done is agreement by both Houses and the President.

A congressman or a Senator does not get anything done all by themselves. Feingold obviously did not convince Nelson and Lieberman to vote for the public option. Therefore he got nothing done.

[Atticus]

73. But, when the Republicans and our president "compromise" and extend all the Bush

tax cuts, then the president will have "got something done", right?

[xchrom]

77. it's our new version of 'progress' or 'progressive' -- so i've been told on DU. nt

[patrice]

78. I hope not & I don't think the Senate is going to let him do that+Something directing this

situation from the wings: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/12/04/what-jamie-dimon-wont-tel_n_792138.html

Since so much of Bush's Crash made EQUITY ***THE*** Issue, anything that any of the key figures, such as Obama, say or do can be taken out, more or less immediately, on Us by means of instruments like Basel.

[patrice]

79. Remember: Most of what went down in Bush's Crash is PRIVATE information, except what we can get at

through the Federal Reserve.

[Egnever]

80. Yes he will

Because as it stands now he is getting something for them, an extension of unemployment benefits and he is not making them permanent.

You can cry like a stuck pig all you want but the reality is that the economy needs the tax cuts for the lower 95% right now and pretty much every economist agrees with that. This president unlike you and many others on this site is not interested in ideological purity he is interested in moving forward with helping the american people, something he has proved time and again by taking the compromise and actually getting things done.

He is getting something for his compromise and even though you and the other perpetually disapointed wont admit it, it will help thousands of people.

[Atticus]

81. Delete---dupe

[Atticus]

82. Delete---dupe

[Atticus]

83. If "getting something" was all that mattered, you'd have a point, but

it isn't and, therefore, you don't.

Too many parents and spouses of Iraq and Afghanistan vets got a folded flag for their loved one's life. They "got something", but it sure as hell wasn't worth the price.

People who buy books by Sarah Palin or Glen Beck "get something" for their 30 or 40 bucks, but it is idiocy and trash, not worth the price of a match to burn them with.

If you are willing to further damage our economy---which ALL economists agree is the effect of extending the millionaires' tax cuts---then, yes, short term, there is a benefit to the middle and lower classes. But, who will pay the REAL cost of this bail out for billionaires when DRASTIC cuts are pushed through to social services? Who will go hungry? Who will be homeless? Who will die for lack of medical care or medicine?

When that happens, and it will, you can tell them "It's OK---WE GOT SOMETHING for the compromise".

[patrice]

85. Right On. And everyone needs to decide the price each is willing to pay for

a chance to prevent the harm caused by Tax Cuts - upper and/or lower bracket tax cuts - because

THERE IS NO FREE RIDE.

Tax cuts of anykind in exchange for Unemployment benefits, BOTH DEFICIT BUILDERS, will be taken out of Medicare. And whereas Medicare DOES need reform for fraud, waste, and abuse, the issue is how Medicare Reform will go down and reduce the quality of care - or - reduce some of the FAT overhead in administrative and executive costs. Unfortunately, I'm afraid, the base-builders we are seeing on this board these days, do not appear to care what happens good or bad to Madicare as long as they can add to their bases. My theory is that they are largely so-called "Libertarians" who are still allowed to milk lies about "free markets" because they don't come out in the open about what their intentions are.

[patrice]

86. And my concern for Medicare also has to do with how some, Senator Bernie Sanders amongst them, think

it possible that Medicare for All is about our ONLY door into authentic Public Option Health Care. If Medicare is destroyed by "reform" that preserves fraud, waste, & abuse, and replication of fat administrative costs in replicated overhead everywhere, there will be NO reason to move toward Medicare for All.