Has Obama made any initiatives that are not Republican?

[immoderate]

I was looking at the attack on California pot dispensaries. A friend recently said, "They always send out those letters. They never follow through."

Nevertheless, the JD has threatened to go after the landlords, confiscate the property -- that's booty, folks. So even if the threats are empty, who wants to take the chance? Why must they go after pot heads, medical or not? It goes against Obama's campaign promises. Is this a jobs-welfare program for justice types who would have no one to prosecute?

How about these ALEC written laws to "keep out the vote" in the Republican controlled states? Why isn't the constitutional professor using his communication skills and his justice department to help people who want to vote? (He never mentions ALEC. Why?)

And why is he a supply sider who goes along with the "job creators" scam? And his health care "solution" was limited to things already done by Republicans. The wars, the banks, the schools, the environment, pipelines, labor -- all follow Republican policy.

So what has Obama done that's Democratic, or liberal? (Note: Ending DADT extends the right to die or be disabled protecting the interests of the rulers. How about ending DOMA? Too progressive? Trite social concessions that cost little, and constitute a bone tossed to the base, are exceptions that prove the rule.)

So what am I missing? :shrug:


--imm

[leftstreet]

1. I've heard there's a List of his progressive accomplishments n/t

[immoderate]

2. Now there are two of us, and pretty soon -- a movement!

--imm

[leftstreet]

5. I have a List of Progressive Accomplishments for Nixon. Will that do?

Created the EPA
Created OSHA
Created Consumer Product Safety Commission
Added COLA to Social Security
Expanded Food Stamp program
Cut Defense spending by 1/3
Engaged in Keynesian deficit spending to get people back to work

[immoderate]

8. Remember the "negative income tax?" Not accfomplished, but a

precognition of the age of automation.

--imm

[leftstreet]

10. Yep. We must be old. We should get off our own lawns!!11

Hell, Nixon wanted a Guaranteed Annual Income

:wow:

[immoderate]

14. I miss him, mostly to kick around, -- but he was not stupid.

--imm

[Donnachaidh]

3. mmm, popcorn!

:popcorn:

chewing might drown out the crickets :rofl:

[TheWraith]

4. What are you missing? Metric shitloads, frankly.

You've been reading far too much of the bullshit propaganda from places like FireDogLake and other fifth column sites dedicated to electing a Republican president.

http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com

[immoderate]

11. I think I accounted for most of the "accomplishments" on the list.

Some are laudable, but it's hard to find anything that inconveniences the ruling class.

--imm

[Blue_Tires]

6. Well, when his Democratic stuff gets constantly kneecapped

by congressional Dems, what can you do?

[Romulox]

7. Bust some sick people, I guess! nt

[immoderate]

12. Do you mean DINOs will help him? That's true.

--imm

[boston bean]

16. You shouldn't be bashing DEMS that do Republican shit on a Democratic Message Board!

oh the irony!

[JDPriestly]

59. You threaten Dems who don't vote for your agenda with

loss of national campaign-fund support in the next election cycle. There is no rule that a sitting president has to support the re-election of candidates who don't support his agenda.

But instead of doing that, Obama sided with conservative Democrats in the mid-terms. It's his own fault if he doesn't have a Congress that will pass his policies (few if any of which are liberal).

Obama should have gone after the bankers. That's what Americans, at least those, mostly undecideds, on whose doors I knocked in the 2008 campaign, wanted him to do. Instead he named the bankers and their representatives to his cabinet.

Americans are mad at Wall Street. Obama should have known that and acted on that knowledge as soon as he got into office.

Obama and Obama alone is to blame for his lack of support in Congress.

[SidDithers]

9. pfffftttt...nt

Sid

[MineralMan]

13. Unrecced for ignoring much. However, I imagine this will

soon be back in positive territory. The negative viewpoint gets a positive reception most of the time in GD.

[immoderate]

15. Ignoring? It's a question!

Is it right to ignore all the opportunities to at least present a progressive view?

There are lots of small things. Nothing that upsets the rulers though.

--imm

[TheWraith]

17. It's a question which, to ask, you have to willfully blind yourself.

Like standing on a beach and asking why you're standing in a desert. Then, when things are pointed out to you, move the goalposts to "something that upsets the rulers," a desire vague enough that nothing short of declaring property to be theft will satisfy.

[immoderate]

33. It's like standing on a beach, and noticing it's made of sand.

I like analogies. :)

--imm

[11 Bravo]

37. Some beaches are not sandy ... just as some questions are not worthy of serious discussion.

quod erat demonstrandum

[immoderate]

45. I didn't allow that analogies prove anything, much less a simile.

Non demonstrandum foramen.

--imm

[MineralMan]

18. It's a rhetorical question. You provided your answer in

the body of the post.

[immoderate]

29. So everybody just disdainfully concedes that I'm right?

That's not playing the game.

All I am asking for is an Obama policy that didn't originate with Republicans? And I kind of precluded most social issues as many of them do not have economic consequences.

Have you noticed that there are people demonstrating and marching? Are their issues rhetorical? Are they expressing their happiness?


--imm

[MineralMan]

32. I'm not playing any games.

I'm just not in the mood to answer rhetorical questions today. Your asking doesn't impose any obligation on me to answer. So, I did not provide the information you requested. You'll have to address those who took the time to do so, not me.

[immoderate]

34. Got it. I did kind of set people up.

But there is a part of me that was hoping for an answer.

--imm

[LanternWaste]

62. I imagine there's a qualifying difference...

I imagine there's a qualifying difference between a sincere and honest question, and a question designed merely to editorialize in and through itself.

Although one not need be clever to discern the difference, I imagine one necessarily needs to be honest to admit to it...

[immoderate]

66. Imagine no dichotomies. It's easy if you try...

You must have missed my "Obama Is Great!" post where I compared him to Fred Astaire. (I may do that -- bet I can rack up 150 recs!)</sarc>

Look, I rang doorbells, made phone calls, and handed out leaflets. I didn't bargain for a center-right president. I listed the areas where I thought he was implementing Republican policy. His governance is neo-neocon. No one has refuted my basic assertion, which does not rely on my sincerity in posing the question. I guess that any question to which the answer is known could be called rhetorical. But I expected a variance in answers.

How did you find the question to be dishonest? Doesn't he mostly continue Republican policies, or resurrect policies they have posed?

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

19. Obviously, you can recite the litany of FUD.

Mission Accomplished!

[immoderate]

24. ?

I didn't even know. Is that good or bad?:shrug:

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

31. Depends who you ask....

But since you're asking me....It's downright sad.

There was a time when I thought DU'ers were more savvy than than your average Faux viewer.

[immoderate]

47. So you were disillusioned about DUers, but have no questions about the guy...

...who is running the country? No vigilance for you, eh?

Who do you think really runs the country? :shrug:

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

50. Did I say that?

I'm pretty sure I didn't even imply that. I don't think anything is quite that simplistic.

Do you?

[immoderate]

51. Nor did you say anything comprehensible to me.

You were not coherent enough for me to tell if it was simplistic. Hey, you were riffin' and I didn't want to break your rhythm.

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

76. Comprehend this...

You weren't interested in an answer to your "question" in the first place.

[immoderate]

78. Is there one? Has Obama ever pushed a liberal initiative?

Does having an answer depend on my level of interest, as deduced by you? I commend your intuition, but is it relevant?

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

79. Well...

It looks like you've summarily dismissed anyone who attempted to respond to the contrary, even from from the outset.

Apparently, "having an answer" depends on your ability to consider it without rejecting it out of hand.

IOW...why bother?

[immoderate]

82. I'm not beyond snark (if I know what that is) however...

I'll tell you what I want in fairly objective terms, and then you can explain why you think I shouldn't ask this question, besides that I think that I know the answer:

The summary of the systemic problems in this country is wealth disparity (enumerated by the Gini Coefficient) which is rivaled in this world only by a few acknowledged plutocracies. The wealth disparity is the symptom of a conglomerate effect of all the workings of our society giving a casino type edge to those that already have wealth. The game is fixed. The house always wins.

I'm contending that Obama makes no move, even a feint, at anything that would reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. That's what makes his governance, IMO, Republican. That is what I am pointing out, and I have seen no refutation of that point, and I am nonetheless buried in unrecs.

People here accuse me of the crime of asking a rhetorical question.

The only thing I can think of is that Obama, being a political genius, employed corporatists and pursued center right policies because he knew that would unite the left and cause a public enlightenment, resulting in mass international demonstrations. You think that's it?

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

83. Oh, I see your goal post

Way down there....

When you start here:

"I'm contending that Obama makes no move, even a feint, at anything that would reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, and the poor getting poorer. That's what makes his governance, IMO, Republican. That is what I am pointing out, and I have seen no refutation of that point, and I am nonetheless buried in unrecs."

and here:

"The only thing I can think of is that Obama, being a political genius, employed corporatists and pursued center right policies because he knew that would unite the left and cause a public enlightenment, resulting in mass international demonstrations. You think that's it?"

.....no one could possibly provide an acceptable response. That you heap "mass international demonstrations" and the trend of decades of RW entrenchment on the shoulders of one man to reverse in 3.8 yrs time, is myopic in the extreme.

Now...if only Obama were allowed to govern (read that RULE) in a vacuum, your question might be considered as something more than simply "rhetorical."

[immoderate]

84. Nonsense. I set no such goal.

I didn't say he had to reverse any trends. I just would like some indication that he wants to change the trends.

I have posted this same question several times in this forum.
Succinctly, what has Obama done to bring down the Gini Index? What has he suggested? And you assert that no one could possibly supply an answer to that because...? :shrug:

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

85. What you're suggesting here....

Is a far cry from has he made any initiatives that "aren't Republican?"

Not only is your goal post far afield, it's a narrow target.

IOW...you asked the question with the expectation that an acceptable answer doesn't exist.

[immoderate]

86. I don't think there is an acceptable answer. And you can't find one.

I'm saying that governance that maintains the status quo (wealth disparity) is Republican. And Barack Obama has not supported any initiative which would alter the flow of wealth to the top. And you can see the results. Where I put goal posts does not determine if Obama is governing as a Republican, Obama's actions do.

All I've gotten is people objecting to the question, or the form of the question, when one factual refutation would serve to put it to rest. Sometimes a rhetorical question, though provocative, may instill a learning experience.

If Obama were doing a good job, would there be those people in the park?

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

87. See post #79

Along with all of the other responses you've dismissed.

[immoderate]

88. Oh no. You are trying to put me in a loop.

I thought for a moment that you might have something that would refute my point.

At least I am willing to listen.

--imm

[Bobbie Jo]

89. A loop you have created....

Your "point" has been refuted, and followed by a lot of "yeah, but's...."

You have set up a question for which AN answer doesn't exist. If things were only that black/white and simplistic, perhaps you would get AN answer.

Again....you're looking to Obama to govern according to your narrowly defined standard, without considering the entrenched system that exists NOW, among the multitude of variables that would ( and do )work to actively obstruct the bold initiatives that would be required to meet your standard. Instead, you just lump your markers on the far end of the field and call it failure.

You say you're "willing to listen," but are you willing to understand the hurdles that must be cleared to reach the goal?

When you say...."I thought for a moment that you might have something that would refute my point," You continue to ignore the points that have already been raised throughout this thread because they don't fit into the specific box have constructed.

To call anything that doesn't fit into your box "Republican," is perpetuating the loop.

[immoderate]

90. I guess I'm ignoring all those great answers.

--imm

[JuniperLea]

20. One more for the slag heap...

I have no use for this bullshit... don't bother replying, you are now on ignore.

[immoderate]

22. What took so long?

And don't worry. This is not a reply. Nothing personal. :shrug:

--imm

[RC]

23. The OP has a good question.

"Has Obama made any initiatives that are not Republican?"

Has he? Do you have a list of accomplishments from this administration that benefit the people?
I'll start with a list of the bu$h administration policies that Obama has rescinded.
1.

It is a shame that today's Democratic party is to the Right of where the Republicans used to be. What is worse is so many do not see it.

[inna]

53. exactly. pretty darn depressing.

[JuniperLea]

21. dupe

duh

[Freddie Stubbs]

25. Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009

[Freddie Stubbs]

26. Ended DADT

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. Stopped defending DOMA in court

[immoderate]

38. Do you think that offsets shutting down pot dispensaries.

The big pharma has nothing against DOMA.

--imm

[Bodhi BloodWave]

54. unless i'm wrong

they are targeting the 'for profit' dispensaries after having been asked by the state.

Unless I'm wrong state law only allow 'non-profits' to give it out *shrugs* so i don't really see to a problem

[immoderate]

57. I think you are wrong.

The feds say they are targeting those, but they are harassing all of them.

None of the accounts I read said the state initiated it. (The WSJ says the state is building a taxing apparatus!) Where's your information?

--imm

[Freddie Stubbs]

55. Absolutely

[immoderate]

58. Talk to some patients.

Not that we shouldn't have both, anyway.

--imm

[NYC Liberal]

63. Good job moving the goal posts.

You asked if President Obama has "made any initiatives that are not Republican" and you've received many answers. So now you're trying to shift the discussion to something else.

[immoderate]

67. No I hedged pretty well in my OP.

I heavily discount social reforms, not because they aren't desirable, but because they don't disturb the wealth disparity that delving into the corporations, banks (reforms? they transferred the fees!) defense, surveillance, energy, etc. will, but they keep the base happy.

To find a non-social policy that doesn't wind up favoring the rulers, is difficult, and I submit most are Republican retreads. Exceptions, can be found I'm sure, but is there any attempt to change the direction of the country, to decrease wealth disparity?

--imm

[JDPriestly]

60. You've pretty much exhausted the list, Freddie Stubbs, pitifully short as that list.

[JoePhilly]

28. Buzz ... What are "Brain cells", Alex.

Correct!!

[blindpig]

30. The initiatives cannot be Republican, he is a Democrat, but.....

they are certainly in the interests of the Capitalist ruling class.

[mmonk]

35. Not that I'm aware of.

So far, just the first stimulus (which relied too much on tax cuts).

[woo me with science]

36. Some token accomplishments for the list, but the core, significant policies

in all major areas are neocon- and corporate-derived.

We are now seeing the beginnings of a push for war with Iran, that will make the military industrial complex and the banking cartels indispensable.

[immoderate]

39. Thanks. Looks like I'm unrecced to oblivion.

:hi:

--imm

[immoderate]

40. Lots of unrecs -- but no answers (besides minor social reforms.)

--imm

[bvar22]

41. That is a LIST I would like to see.

A compilation of purely Traditionally Democratic Accomplishments, Initiatives, or even Proposals
that benefit the Working Class & The Poor without a HUGE BONUS for the Corporations & RICH attached.


One could be tempted to say that he got Unemployment Benefits extended for a year,
and that would be factually correct.
However, that was a CRUMB compared to what he gave away to the RICH at the same time,
the Extension of the Bush Tax Cuts.

If one seriously goes down the The LIST of Accomplishments, a pattern becomes readily apparent.
ALL of the minor "accomplishments" have been accompanied by a HUGE gift to The Already Rich.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Tx4obama]

42. Here ya go here's a list of lists. Peruse the links for relevant ones that answer your question.

Obama’s 2008 Campaign Promises Kept:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/obameter/rulings/promise-kept/

Long partial LIST (with citation links) of what Obama has done: http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/what-has-obama-done-since-january-20-2009.html

Short List of Progressive Achievements by The Obama Administration
http://shoqvalue.com/short-list-of-progressive-achievements-by-the-obama-administration

Obama Administration’s Achievements (Thus Far)
http://obamaachievements.org/list

Lists and graphs: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=433&topic_id=751914

We All Have a Choice in the 2012 Election
http://www.democratsforprogress.com/2011/09/03/we-all-have-a-choice-in-the-2012-election/

So That Ignorance Won't Be The Reason Why "Progressives" Are Throwing The President Under The Bus
http://www.thepeoplesview.net/2011/09/so-that-ignorance-wont-be-reason-why.html

Obama’s LGBT Chart LIST
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x777350

80 Reasons Why It’s Time To Take These Republican/Tea Party ‘Sons Of Bitches’ Down
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/06/80-reasons-why-its-time-to-take-these-republicantea-party-sons-of-bitches-down/

[immoderate]

43. Thanks. I appreciate your extensive efforts here.

And I looked at some, and I have found things that I already conceded. And there are a few genuinely worthwhile things. But remember that some of them came with concessions to the Republicans.

I submit again the notion that Obama must show some progress to mollify his base. But a check on demonstrators will show that he is not really effective for what most people want.

--imm

[Tx4obama]

48. Also, here's something to see

Rachel Maddow On President Obama & Democrats Accomplishments (November 2010)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YLQ-OKa6OZQ

p.s. Well worth watching :)

[immoderate]

49. I'm a Rachel fan, and I have seen that.

But I don't yet feel the change and it appears those "occupy" people have some doubts as well.

--imm

[JDPriestly]

61. That list Rachel read is embarrassingly short of truly liberal policies.

Obama is a Republican. That's all there is to it.

[Lil Missy]

44. FAIL.

[immoderate]

46. You or me?

Anyway, I appreciate succinctness. :)

--imm

[inna]

52. k&r

props for critical thinking

[immoderate]

56. Still under water. Must be about 50 unrecs.

Is this that scary? :scared:

--imm

[LanternWaste]

65. I imagine there's a difference between being scared and simply dismissing a thing

I imagine there's a difference between being scared and simply dismissing a thing that, while possibly relevant, may easily be inferred as somewhat disingenuous also (at best).

However, I do understand the self-validation that may arise from believing one's opinions may "scare" someone else, as it allows us to feel as though we have a bit more strength of character than we actually do.

[immoderate]

68. Well put. And speaking of disingenuous...

You know that scare is used euphemistically.

And I never made any claims of character, and considering internet anonymity, you can assume the worst. :)

My hypotheses exist independent of my "character" and refutation has lost to denial.

--imm

[NYC Liberal]

64. Yes, he has. What an absurd question. n/t

[B Calm]

69. Cash for Clunkers

[immoderate]

72. Yeah, the auto manufacturers really hated that one.

--imm

[B Calm]

73. I drive for a company that makes bumpers for the auto manufacturers

and that program got me called back from layoff. It did save US manufacturing jobs. . .

[immoderate]

74. My point is that Obama never does anything to disturb the wealth disparity.

Whatever he does to help us, actually benefits the wealthy more.

Did any of those US manufacturing jobs pay 1970 equivalent wages? The profits sure soared.

--imm

[B Calm]

77. and my point is it saved US manufacturing jobs. Of course the

wealthy benefited, they always do. . I make $25.00 per hr not counting my benefits. I think I'm worth more and hopefully someday if we ever get a union in, I will!

I'm NOT happy with Obama, but the OP asked for one thing he's done and I answered.

[deacon]

70. Wow. Welcome to another edition of trolling for dollars. -1 n/t

[immoderate]

71. Congratulations on your new trade agreements.

--imm :hi:

[flvegan]

75. He turned me into a newt.

[Jack Rabbit]

80. Well, yes . . . .

. . . the health care initiative initially wasn't anything the GOP would like. But, DINOs like Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, Ben Nelson and Max Baughtkus watered it down while President Obama remained silent.

The wars, the banks, the schools, the environment, pipelines, labor -- all follow Republican policy.

No, it follows what GOP policy was thirty years ago under Reagan. Today's GOP policy is more extreme.

Which seems to bring us to Obama's re-election strategy: Who are you going to vote for? "Me, doing my Ronald Reagan imitation, or a George W. Bush imitation like Rick Perry?"

[TheKentuckian]

81. I'll grant DADT (despite the obvious use of the military overall) and the small bore green projects

as well.

Most proposals are out of the Reich Wing think tanks and some like unemployment extensions and maintaining key manufacturing industries (ie the auto bailout) used to be very, very bipartisan or more accurately non-partisan. You don't have to even fire up the way back machine, fucking Bush extended UI on multiple occasions and even started (seemingly very reluctantly as a "favor" to the transition) the auto bailout.

It is like a great many cannot see that the TeaPubliKlans are a substantial radicalization of what most people in western civilization would call extreme right already.
Right now the "mainstream" left of the Democratic party mostly occupies the former non-partisan "common wisdom" and our spectrum extends to literally all the way right to the Bush era corporate "fiscal conservative" international interventionist which has now become the dwindling "moderate" Republican wing, hence this ideology is now "centrist".