I think, bottom line, the real horror is that neither the President or the Republicans

[theophilus]

want to do what is right for the country. Many Dems fall into the same grouping. In the longrun this fact bodes ill for America. Sliding down the slippery slope....and for what?

[ladjf]

1. I have no clue as to what is motivating Obama. nt

[NorthCarolina]

2. Conservatism. nt

[somone]

6. "Love Thy Enemy"

[ladjf]

7. Maybe he has "Stockholm Syndrome". nt

[Angry Dragon]

3. Into The Bowels of Hells ........ do we march brightly

[aquart]

4. Neither/ nor. Either/or.

Can something not go down the tubes today?

[theophilus]

5. Yeah, so what? n/t

[kctim]

8. The bottom line is

that some people falsely believe it is ONLY THEY who knows what is right for the country and jump off the doom and gloom cliff everytime they don't get their way.

[TheKentuckian]

9. We already tried what you conservatives want and it failed but yet you keep

pushing for more failure because you belong to to Reagan's cult of secular religion.

[kctim]

14. Yea yea

and those who 'know whats best for me' on the right call me a liberal and shout that I am part of a socialist type cult.
Yawn.

[TheKentuckian]

15. I'm just saying the economics is failed, popular or not.

The only tired defense is looking at the exception and ignoring the rule.

[kctim]

17. There is no one rule

and not following the rule one personally believes in, does not mean the end of the system.

[TheKentuckian]

18. Yeah it is. The rule is collapse that puts a heel on the neck of the many.

The exception is the time between WWII and the mid 70's. The entire rest of capitalism is unmitigated failure. Capitalism ALWAYS crashes out, always funnels wealth from the bottom to the top, always rapes the environment, and always punishes the many to reward the few.

[gratuitous]

10. Hey now! Obama's showing plenty of fight and backbone

And if the House Democrats know what's good for them, they won't test the president on this!

[Poboy]

11. recommend

[closeupready]

12. Obama wants to sort of slide his way into history books, not fight like FDR.

When people quote past presidents, they quote things which glorify a fighting spirit, not compromise.

So far with Obama, all we have is compromise and capitulation. One thing's for sure: no future progressive or liberal going to look to almost any part of his presidency as a sort of benchmark.

[DearAbby]

16. It's what we get..

when we hire a Senator to be President...compromise, compromise, compromise, did I say compromise?

[kenny blankenship]

13. Michael Lind: Nobody represents the American people

No matter which party runs Washington, only minor, marginal reforms ever take place

The disconnect between the actions of the government and public opinion is the central fact of American politics today. It doesn’t seem to matter whether liberal Democrats or conservative Republicans are in power. Only minor, marginal reforms ever take place. The basic outlines of American economic policy and foreign policy remain the same, even as Congress and the White House change hands. The changes promised by progressive Democrats and Tea Party Republicans are quickly discarded after the elections.

The changes that do take place are often the opposite of those that majorities of Americans want. Most Americans want Social Security to be strengthened and American manufacturing protected. But the conversation among elites inside the Beltway-New York bubble is about cutting Social Security and more one-sided "free trade" deals with mercantilist nations that, unlike the U.S., protect and promote their domestic industries.

(snip)

The national parties have long since ceased to be healthy mass membership federations. The national and state parties have been reduced to shells. Most Democratic and Republican politicians are independent entrepreneurs, raising as much money as they can on their own. Like the bank robber Willie Sutton, they go to where the money is. It is more efficient to get a few big checks from billionaires and industry lobbies than lots of little donations.

If you keep elections but get rid of mass membership organizations, then democracy breaks down, as it has in the U.S. Contemporary American politicians interact with ordinary Americans only at the polls. The politicians do not need the money of ordinary people, as it is easier to raise large sums from rich people and lobbies. And between elections, the advocacy groups of the left and right that meet with politicians and their staffs are usually funded by the rich and large foundations, rather than dues-paying members.

So, without strong parties and in a regime of ever more concentrated wealth, politicians tell voters whatever they want to hear during campaigns, but govern according to the wishes of the few rich people and corporate interests who can make it rain.