For those few who think DU has become Anti-Obama:

[The Straight Story]

I am not a cheerleader for a commander in chief, I am his employer - and I damn well will call out the person I am paying if they are not doing the job I am paying them to do. Just like I did for bush.

Don't bury your head in the sand, I am a Democrat for progress as well - and when I don't see progress by those I elected I think it is my duty to call them out. Maybe you think it is your duty to stand by them and make excuses.

Give them the benefit of the doubt, vote for them even when they let me down, campaign for them even when they don't agree with me 100%? Sure thing - but I sure as hell will NEVER sit on my ass and give them a pass if they fail and do not do what it was I hired them to do.

Go ahead and find an echo chamber if you like, me I prefer people who stand on principle. Whether it be "Your body, your choice" (and standing on that principle has gotten me labeled a libertarian more than a few times here) or "This is a war based on blood for oil" and I think our troops should be home now like I did under bush. If the people we elected can't stand the heat, they should have not run on a platform of change and ending the wrongs (nor should they let criminals get away with murder for profit - especially when they will pull crap like they have done with wikileaks).

I am NOT against Obama - I am against the same things I was before he got into office. Maybe you have changed in what you believe in, but I will hold our elected officials now to the same standards I did before.

Obama has kicked ass on some things, and I am DAMNED glad he is the President right now instead of McLame and quitter queen palin. I would take a bad dem over a repug any day of the week - but I won't thrust out my pom-poms in support when the things I support are being thrown under the bus.

We are better off today than we would have been with the opposing party in the WH, but we are not better off than we could have been because some people in the party are not working as hard as we had hoped they would.

I owe it to my principles and to my party to hold the feet of those in power who claim to be progressives to the fire. If you cannot handle criticizing your team when they are not performing well then I don't know what to tell you.

either you are for an ideal, or you are for a person who claims to be a part of your family/party.

I am for the ideal.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. snap!

:D

[Tansy_Gold]

2. You got my rec. n/t

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Poll_Blind]

4. +1

PB

[WillyT]

5. HUGE K & R !!!

This is DEMOCRATIC Underground... NOT Obama Underground!

:patriot:

:kick:

:hi:

[blondeatlast]

6. DU has become alarmingly cult of personality-ish on both the pro- and anti-Obama sides.

Do. Not. Want.

You speak the truth, and I think you for it--but there's enough criticism to go around to ALL DU factions, I'm afraid.

[pnwmom]

25. More than a few DUers are unhappy not with the content of posts,

but with the tone -- so many personal attacks.

[DallasNE]

43. The Personal Attacks Seem Misdirected As Well

The problem has been the disfunctional Senate where nothing gets done. As a result Congress has an 18% approval rating. Now Tom Udall and others will try to change Senate rules in January but where has the Senate leadership been. How did Reid allow McConnell to roll him on the filibuster rule. There will have been more filibusters in the last 2 years than all prior 200+ years combined. Reid has been a disaster as Senate Majority Leader.

[texshelters]

100. I disagree

as long as we back up our comments with facts, how is that cultush?

Making an argument for or against Obama doesn't make it a cult or idol worship. He is president after all. Should we NOT write about him?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[ZombieHorde]

7. "Your body, your choice"

That is fine for most occasions, but on Saturday nights it's "my body, your choice."

[treestar]

8. He's the employer of 300 million other people

Many who don't think like you do.

Which is why the employer analogy does not work.

He does do the job if he just shows up for functions and considers bills or does what is in the constitution. Too many take it to mean doing what they want politically.

It is not "making excuses" to recognize they can only do what they can do and to stand by them even if they can't do it all. It's the real world.

[kentuck]

10. And only half have shown outright animosity toward him...

...and didn't vote for him either. He needs to give their concerns equal weight because they hate his guts. That's why we have two political Parties, I guess?

[treestar]

16. WE didn't like it when Bush did it

[kenfrequed]

79. But...

Bush DID do it. And They will do it again when they eventually seize power. There will not be a reasonable republican president for another generation at least.

That consigns us to the road of merely playing moderate to the ultra right wing. How do you suppose that is going to eventually pan out if you advance time past the latest poll, or the latest news cycle, or even the next election? Why is it the accomodationist folk within our party don't think of the long term results of deregulating the cable industry, or cooperating with the banks?

Those of us that are constantly worrying about what people that will NEVER vote for us think are playing a strange game of political Zeno's paradox. We take a step towards the center and the Republicans point and scream 'liberal.' We take another step and they squeel 'liberal' again. We step closer still and they call us socialists and communists (obviously concerned that we will take a step back or two). To the Republican base we will always be liberal-commie-pinko-socialists and there is nothing we can do to convince them otherwise, save the half chance that a few of them pick up and read books not advertised on the Glen Beck show.

Republicans have quit politics or left the party or been primaried out as they go farther to the right. Do we really owe it to them to turn the Democratic party into the party of Barry Goldwater and Nelson Rockefeller?

[texshelters]

102. Right on, Kudos, Praise be!

Well put explaination of what I was thinking.

Bush got away with murder, literally, and now Obama is being "reasonable". I wish he was more santimonious.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[TheKentuckian]

20. Yet again, this is not a volume or speed based because much of the problem is what has been done.

Combine that with the things he won't do and has no intention of doing and you have 97% or more of the complaints and criticisms.

Stating policies won't, can't, and aren't designed to have the desired effect is bitching about quantity but about the content of the policy. If you disagree with the points at issue, Kool & The Gang but the unending attempts to reframe the conversation so you have an argument is tiresome and worthless.

No one is talking about a legislation tally except the Imperial Guard/SuperFriends.

It isn't our job to "understand" the opposition or to allow for their concerns in our calculus. We aren't the legislators, we don't work any deals. In fact, our job is to actually push for what we want and limit our Representatives as little room to give ground as possible.

We push and elect. Those in opposition to our ideals are not spending a millisecond on respecting your concerns. Their focus is their agenda and goals, along with crushing ours.

[PurityOfEssence]

23. This is a cringing, peasant mentality

He ran on being something "other" than just an empty suit, a chair warmer or a "typical" politician. HE is the one who raised the bar, and he needs to clear it, because it's HIS mark.

I do not work for him any more than I work for Bill Gates. He's a great influence and he has partial control over parts of the government. He works for US, and does so at OUR pleasure. We have the right and obligation to question and influence his actions.

The dazzling double-think of his more extreme supporters is beyond any logic, and that's why it persists: it's not based on logic, demonstrable actions, a record or anything of the sort; it's purely emotional projection, just like the Peace Prize. We're betting on the come, and we're betting the kid's milk money.

He IS responsible for the tack taken by the government, and he has shown himself to be far to cozy with business, far too warlike, far too casual with the environment, far too timid with the opposition and far too friendly to organized religion. Yes, that's my OPINION, but that's how this messy little constituent republic works.

The idea of sitting on the ball and demanding others to be as passive and worshipful of the man as one prefers to be oneself is contrary to the heart and soul of this kind of pluralism. Bummer.

As for blaming people for his not living up to the act of "doing what they want politically", it bears repeating and repeating that he played fast and loose with peoples' hopes and dreams, selling us his personality in lieu of policy specifics; as far as many of us can see, this stems from a dearth of real plans and a deep craving for love from all instead of any clear vision of a better deal for the people. All things to all people is progressively showing itself to be not much to anyone. That's not to be commended; it's to be marginally tolerated and viewed as a personality disorder which we all as a group have to accommodate and eventually overcome.

I'm glad some got their thrill of being "right" and "winning", but warming the delusional hearts of my political allies only goes so far.

All of the "stay in your place, peon" dismissals by self-proclaimed realists are sickening echoes of those who cling desperately to the need to not have been wrong about an individual human being, and, much as that could be stomached at times of stability and prosperity, these are not those times. These are the times of great economic and social upheaval, and having "the coolest man in the room" presiding over the garden party of doom is a nauseating reality to face, not one to be endured silently and CERTAINLY not one to be applauded.

Not only did he and his people claim that he was other-worldly and a transcendent super-leader of glorious dimensions, they swept many along with the deliberate vagueness. Now that they find that he's not just a run-of-the-mill politician but a one-trick pony at that, they're disillusioned, upset, disgusted, confused and many other versions of verklempt.

The term is "Public Servant".

[AdHocSolver]

34. Well said. Moreover, HCR is a weak "win", and the tax cut bill is simply bad policy.

The defenders of the health care reform bill claim it was a big win because what was gained was all that could be expected under current political and economic conditions. These defenders point to the Clinton effort to get reforms enacted and maintain that current conditions are as bad or worse to get reforms through that Clinton faced.

This excuse is totally incorrect. In the 1990's, more people had jobs and more jobs provided health insurance benefits. Those conditions precluded a groundswell of public support for changes in how health care was paid for.

Currently, there is significant unemployment, millions more who have no health insurance, and health care costs are more burdensome for those still getting employer paid insurance, as well as many jobs that no longer provide benefits. Many more Americans (a majority) are now more agreeable to significant health care reform.

Instead of explaining how reform could be accomplished to help the most Americans, and countering the lies used to attack reform by the insurance industry, Obama took single payer and the public option off the table. That is the dumbest negotiating position imaginable.

This tax cut deal is not only NOT going to help the economy, it is going to make the recession/depression deeper and longer lasting. The major effect of the tax cuts is the transfer of more assets from the middle class to the wealthy.

The extra money going to the wealthy will be used to buy T-bills from the government which will eventually be repaid by the taxpayers with interest. The taxpayers are giving the money to the wealthy to then borrow it back to be repaid with interest. This is stupid beyond belief. Even if the wealthy don't buy T-bills, they will use this new found largesse to invest in factories in China which are more profitable. This explains the big lie of trickle down economics.))

The tax breaks are going to increase the deficit, which is going to mean that eventually the government is going to pay more in interest to get the loans, which means that the dollar is going to drop in value (a condition known as inflation). Actually, the economy is already exhibiting inflation. Prices have been creeping up for many months now.

Moreover, even the tax breaks to the middle class will not accomplish any long term good, since most everything we buy is imported. Few other Americans are getting income from what we spend. Most of what we spend is just increasing the U.S. trade deficit.

A better solution would be to directly put people to work in family supporting jobs in infrastructure, education, and other public service activities.

The last straw is the promotion of a NAFTA-like agreement with Korea. The U.S. trade deficit is so huge, that the U.S. can never hope to reduce the deficit by merely increasing exports. The only way to save the U.S. economy is to remove the huge profits gained by exporting jobs to low wage countries. If that requires import tariffs and import quotas together with fair trade requirements on imports, then that should be done.

Even if Obama's motives are good, he threw away a golden opportunity to turn this country around and make it a much better place to live. The excuse that Obama got all that was achievable under the circumstances is nonsense.

The issue is not that he failed to improve the country because of circumstances out of his control. The problem is that he didn't make a good faith effort to accomplish anything significant.

[PurityOfEssence]

35. It seems to me that it was, once again, the appearance that was most important

Thanks for the thoughtful and well-wrought post. Sometimes it seems like the whole world's crazy, and self-aggrandizing as a statement like that is, this site consistently disproves the point. There are plenty of people able to see what the true dynamic of our bought-off showy political system is bringing us, and it's somewhat reassuring amid the gathering clouds to hear others saying effectively the same thing.

There's a galling consistency in this administration's hucksterism, and it reeks of a blowsy carny's hyping of the latest and greatest attraction. It's more important to sign a "Middle Class Tax Cut" into law than to either hold the line on dangerous fiscal imbalance or actually do something that truly benefits the Middle Class. This kind of flagrant grandstanding is no better than calling a fascistic reining-in of personal freedom a "Patriot Act".

He kept himself out of the fray of the health care battle, except to send Rahm in to twist liberal arms and enforce the pro-business bent. There he was, however, to claim credit for it even while just having distanced himself from any residue to his vaunted image should it fail.

Increasingly, it seems that it's all about him. It's seemed like that to many of us for a very long time now. Somehow we "owe" him something for squandering a great pivotal moment of new-found control, and we owe it to him to risk everything for it and be quiet while we let him glad-hand and amble on as he pleases.

It's amateur hour in the lion's den, and it's worse than that: this guy isn't being straight with us; much as he maintains plausible deniability by not really promising specifics, he's playing games with our expectations and hopes, and he's not delivering. He doesn't intend to really deliver. Sure, we're to get SOME sort of health relief, but ONLY as long as the entrenched corporate interests are guaranteed safety and even increased profit in the doing. It's transparent and it's disgusting.

The financial regulation is beyond derision. If things continue like this, the right is going to have to prop him up to keep him in the fight; the economy will be so weak that he'll be vulnerable, and the left (and yes, there actually IS a left) will howl.

This is all deplorable and astonishing, and it's going to be very messy.

[Enthusiast]

64. Good word-astonishing.

And right in our face. If we are willing to see it.

[COLGATE4]

60. K&R

[Enthusiast]

61. It seems that someone always

comes through with an excellent post. Your's gets my recommendation, plus one and right on!

Even if Obama's motives are good..............................

I no longer believe Obama's motives are good. My mind isn't capable of such gymnastics. Why use stealth and subterfuge if your motives and intentions are good? Why negotiate a trade deal with Korea after the obvious and undeniable harm the other deals have done to the working people of this nation?

The mere mention of an additional free trade should forever tarnish a politician in the eyes of working people. And no real Democrat will repeat the GOP talking points of how great the consumer has it since Wallmart is full of low priced Chinese goods.

[PurityOfEssence]

88. Yes, "free trade" should be the stain of economic monarchy to all

...but it isn't.

The news reporting about the trade deal was quite a tightrope act, too: it seemed strategically placed to placate conservatives and make Obama seem yet more amenable just after getting a drubbing at the polls. Still, it wasn't trumpeted endlessly and loudly, and I attribute this to its being targeted for the right; the poor plebes must be sick to death of these crappy deals, even if they're not really listening.

He's lost the left, and there's more of it than the media would like people to believe. Truly, the propaganda is snaring its own proponents, as is often the case, and this is one of the glimmers of optimism I hold out for the near future. Obama's firmly convinced he's got some of the left schnooked into believing he's on their side, and the rest resigned that they have nowhere else to go. His endless courting of the affection-denying right is based on his own delusion that he still has the base. Math is not his friend if he wants to take a sober second to tally his position. Mercifully, the reactionaries really believe that they have a huge groundswell of support now, and they're going to go on an over-reaching rampage that'll sicken the electorate.

Yes, the mental gymnastics also loop back into my irritating theme of this being a cult: the only way one can see this man as a progressive or even a moderate is if one's premise is already calcified into a literal faith that he is. His actions not only don't sustain the contention, they disprove it at virtually every turn and his record slam-dunks the reality down one's throat so cleanly one can almost hear the cry "no lip!"

It smacks of the celestial mechanics used to disprove Galileo: planets had to go on a curvy course, then stop cold and start moving in a different direction. Still, Church Astronomers could find a way to plot the observations and "prove" the "truth" they'd already arrived at, but that isn't science, it's rearguard, fear-based denial of the most pathetic and childish sort.

Regardless of my mitigating optimism, this is not going to play out well...

[WiffenPoof]

72. Excellent Post! n/t

[tpsbmam]

80. Great posts! K&R the original OP & permlinked the AdHoc/PurityOf posts. Thanks!

[rhett o rick]

116. Well stated. nm

[stevenleser]

127. I searched in vain for an argument in your long post. "Cringing Peasant Mentality" was your

highpoint, I am afraid.

[Kalun D]

132. I'm a Bit More Cynical

I'm a Bit More Cynical

""The dazzling double-think of his more extreme supporters is beyond any logic, and that's why it persists: it's not based on logic, demonstrable actions, a record or anything of the sort; it's purely emotional projection, just like the Peace Prize.""

It's based on a corporate funded Madison avenue persona, a carefully cultivated TV (false) image.

""far too timid with the opposition""

He IS the opposition, the SS funding cut is the final nail in the coffin for me. He's a straight up fake.

Barack the Betrayer. Obama the Oligarch

""dismissals by self-proclaimed realists are sickening echoes of those who cling desperately to the need to not have been wrong about an individual human being""

bingo, you just nailed Randi Rhodes big-time, I can't even listen to her anymore.

[GeorgeGist]

28. He's not my employer.

[polmaven]

76. I have to say,

I assume the poster meant to say "He is the employEE of 300 million other people", and made a typo.

[whopis01]

95. I thought the president worked for the people - not the other way around.

Shouldn't he be the employee - not the employer?

[texshelters]

101. Okay, but then how did Bush get his unpopular agenda passed

when he was president? He used the media, manipulated and cajoled, he used fear (where's the hope Obama) and many other tactics to get us into a war he lied about and pass the tax cuts mainly for the wealthy.

It's not all "just facing the facts". He's president, and he's using the kiddie chair and not the bully pulpit. Where's the fight?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[stevenleser]

128. Unfortunately, the folks you are addressing are not fans of reality. n/t

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

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

[Hello_Kitty]

21. Which was an accomplishment of Congress.

Amazing how something good coming out of Congress must be attributed to the President's leadership but all failures belong to Congress solely.

[SkyDaddy7]

36. I got the exact opposite over the past two years.

Especially this tax cut compromise...Nancy Pelosi could have ended this on her own as she holds enormous power but she chose not to...WHY? Was it that she agreed with Obama and felt this was as good as they could do considering or was it she refused to stand up to Obama? I seriously doubt it was the latter. However, I saw many make excuses why somehow it was different & others refused to even acknowledge Nancy Pelosi's role...I know neither are perfect but I what politician could ever be. All politicians deserve criticism and the case of the tax compromise that was simply not the case here on DU. Congress got the pass while Obama took most of the blame. It takes both the congress & the POTUS to get things passed good or bad.

[Hello_Kitty]

111. Blame? People keep telling me the tax compromise was a good deal

A success for the President.

[SkyDaddy7]

120. NO, I TOTALLY AGREE!!

My point was everyone on DU is falling over themselves to attack Obama in such nasty ways over this tax cut compromise but they do not criticize others who voted for it are Liberal sweethearts...Do not get me wrong I love Pelosi & Obama & I think they did the right thing I just hate the hypocrisy here on DU!

[pnwmom]

11. I'm glad I don't have 300,000,000 bosses.

Trying to please all of them on every issue would be quite a stretch.

[October]

48. Yes, but you can't lie on your resume -- or campaign trail and not expect to answer for it.

[dkf]

12. Tea baggers employ him too.

[Kaleva]

13. Because of health problems, I haven't paid income taxes in years.

Simply don't make enough.

An excerpt from your OP:

"and I damn well will call out the person I am paying if they are not doing the job I am paying them to do. Just like I did for bush."

Are you arguing that since you pay taxes and someone like me doesn't, you have the right to call out a politician and I don't? Or maybe you are also saying that those you pay more in taxes and thus a larger percentage of a politicians salary should have a bigger say in what a politician does?

[obxhead]

57. I don't think that's what this poster is saying at all.

I don't read this as a tax issue.

I read it as a principle issue. If you stood against something Bush did, you should stand against it when Obama does it. That's how I take it.

[Kaleva]

81. That's basically how I read it too.

But I was curious as to the intent of the comments he made to support his argument.

[hlthe2b]

14. Absolutely...

+++

[Yo_Mama]

15. I like your distinction

There's one thing I would like to add. If the people who ARE the party don't insist on the principles that are the reason for the party to exist, then the party as we know it will cease to exist.

I have been asking myself a lot of questions in the wake of the tax bill, which seems anti-Democratic to me. I do not have answers yet even for myself.

But the bottom line is that I think we have let this become too much about rooting for the team and forgotten to concentrate on the score, and the paradox may be that we are undercutting the politicians in the party who are willing to stand for core principles by doing so.

I have in the past been rather irked with many of the criticisms leveled against Obama. I still think that many of them were unfair. But I have to now concede to myself that perhaps those people I dismissed before had a point, and perhaps I let my judgment be skewed by wanting to support particular politicians.

I do appreciate your post. I think it is time for us all to sit down and try to figure out how we got where we now are. Elections should have consequences, and while the past two years are by no means all negative, the reality is that a Democratic sweep of the House, Senate and Presidency ended with what was touted by the WH as a presidentially brokered tax compromise that even Reagan could not have pulled off. And if Reagan or Bush had ever proposed cutting taxes by the thousands for people who are doing quite well while raising taxes on the poor, especially in economic circumstances such as these, virtually every newspaper in the land would have blistered the proposal and every Democrat would have spoken against it.

One core adjustment that needs to happen is that we need to be able to hold our individual senators and representatives responsible for how they vote. To do that, this bit in which huge bills are released at the last moment just before a scheduled vote has got to stop. A lot of newspaper articles are still getting the details wrong about unemployment, for example. It is a good bet that many of the Democratic politicos didn't even understand what they were voting for.

[WillyT]

22. + 1,000,000,000... What You Said !!!

:applause::applause::applause:

"It could be worse!" Doesn't cut it, as a party platform.

:kick:

:hi:

[Myrina]

39. Highly recommended reading, this one!

:applause: :applause:

[toddwv]

17. I agree.

He's the President. He's not perfect and neither is he the spawn of Satan. It's our right and responsibility to criticize our elected leaders. There is nothing wrong with disagreeing with some part of this or that.

Let's remember that the man is not the left-wing Messiah, no matter how bad the right-wing wants to label him as such.

[alturn]

52. That's the problem. We ignore the 'Messiah'

If people would take the time to consider the value of having the Planetary Christ - the World Teacher Maitreya - speaking openly, they would find that it is the solution to making 'Obama problem' would go away.

Living in London since July 1977, Maitreya has been awaiting the time when people would want to hear what can be considered a radically progressive message of rebuilding the world on the principles of love, justice and sharing. With that message backed up by not only Maitreya but 14 other illumined Masters of Wisdom (including Jesus) those who sell hope and change would have a very hard time straying to the dark side.

It is our choice. We can invite Maitreya forward at any time.

"My task will be to show you how to live together peacefully as brothers. This is simpler than you imagine, My friends, for it requires only the acceptance of Sharing. Sharing, indeed, is divine. It underlies all progress for man. By its means, My brothers and sisters, you can come into correct relationship with God; and this, My friends, underlies your lives. When you share, you recognise God in your brother. This is a truth, simple, but until now difficult for man to grasp. The time has come to evidence this truth."
- Messages from Maitreya the Christ

[Iggo]

77. Oh my...

[Ikonoklast]

107. Xenu disputes this claim.

[JamesA1102]

18. But the ideal can never be reached

Being for the ideal just sets up unrealistic expectations as well as an unwillingness to take incremental steps that are more realistic than the ideal.

[highprincipleswork]

69. The Real and the Ideal

What is "real" is what can be accomplished. And can't we agree that to accomplish something you have to at least try? You don't get what you want without trying. Having strong ideals and lofty goals in mind as part of your process while you reach for something is important, because that is the only way to get something good. Maybe not absolutely as good as you were shooting for, but sometimes damn excellent.

Could be that the Republicans think that they got that by putting in place the "payroll tax holiday", which they have been clamoring for over a long period of time. And the public doesn't even know that this could be pernicious in regards to Social Security. That is, undoubtedly, more than they expected to get from a "Socialist" Democratic President.

The recent overturn of D.A.D.T., to be fair, could be said to be an unexpected win for our side. I hope the cost doesn't prove to be too great.

Too many White House policies seem based on what is easy, rather than what is good. That includes all that Mr. Rahm Emanuel was such an advocate for. And then they are sold as "what is possible". By these measures, George W. Bush did a much better job as President, because he got so much of what he wanted, even without the famed 60 vote advantage.

Yeah, when you operate with ideals and principles, they often fill in, sometimes in "miraculous" ways. When you don't, well you get the shit you paid for.

Too many of us think that what we're going to get out of these policies is ...

[JamesA1102]

130. You've got a lot of talking points stuffed in there

but the point is there what is realistic and what is the ideal are often 2 different things. Is it worth sacrificing realistic incremental progress for a pie-in-the-sky ideal?

[WiffenPoof]

74. Reaching for the Ideal...

is critically important. Yes, you are correct, we cannot reach perfection (or the ideal). However, it is important that such ideals remain as goals. It is only in this way that we can assure ourselves of progressing as far as possible.

-PLA

[JamesA1102]

129. I don't disagree

But that is not what the OP is saying.

[Skittles]

19. I want Obama to succeed

I live in Texas and would love the bragging rights his success would give me! But I am with you - I call it like I see it - I'm no raving idiot like the rabid bush fans were. But, I won't give up.

[madrchsod]

24. i figured if he got 50% of what he promised he`d be doing good.

even after losing the house he`s still more popular than the republicans. if his team plays their cards he`ll walk over any rethug presidential candidate.

he`s got about a year to pull this country out of the mud

[pacalo]

26. Regardless of what gum-smacking Britney Spears said about support & faith in our president

no matter what, I'm with you, Straight Story. Maybe it's because I have more to lose than the two-percenter ingenue?

[donheld]

27. Right on

[Xicano]

29. +100

Thank You!

[Dappleganger]

30. "Maybe you have changed in what you believe in."

I've not, but there a number of democrats who seem to have done so. I will not be following them over the cliff willingly.\

Well said. ;)

[Arkana]

31. A not-so-subtle callout, if I do say so myself.

And the goal isn't an echo chamber, champ--it's a place where criticism is constructive rather than venomous and unfounded.

[SidDithers]

32. +1...nt

Sid

[Radical Activist]

33. In order to have intelectually honest, open discussion that's critical of Obama,

it's sometimes necessary to disregard those who are engaged in an intellectually dishonest campaign against him no matter what he does.

[highprincipleswork]

68. Including those who support him no matter what he does.

In that allegedly "intellectually honest, open discussion", you advocate ignoring some voices. Seems a little contradictory, doesn't it, if it's going to be an open discussion? Who gets to decide who and what is being ignored? Following that logic to its conclusion, we would also need to disregard those who support him no matter what he does.

[Radical Activist]

83. I keep hearing rumors and accusatios about those unquestioning people.

As far as I can tell, the people who support Obama "no matter what" only exist in the minds of those who make the patronizing accusations.

[highprincipleswork]

86. As is the case in the reverse

Do something good, get praised, do something that seems incredibly destructive, unnecessary, and/or contrary to long-held popular platforms of the Democratic Party, get criticized.

Simple.

Except when the criticizing gets criticized or deleted or unrecced.

Patronizing? I do not think my comments are more patronizing than yours. In fact, I believe they are a good deal less. But it really gives me a pain when those who argue against those who would criticize Obama get on their high horse - for what principle or principles do you fight?

[Radical Activist]

93. hmmm...

You wrote: "But it really gives me a pain when those who argue against those who would criticize Obama get on their high horse"

The trouble is that so much of the criticism against Obama on the netroots is misleading exaggeration and/or total bullshit. When someone is criticizing Obama with a bullshit argument then they're going to get a negative response. When someone makes bullshit arguments criticizing Obama on a regular basis then they're going to be called a hater. That's how things work.

For example, I've read repeated accusations that Obama:
Gave up on repealing DADT
Gave up on passing Health Care Reform
Is leading the assault on Social Security
Created the deficit commission as part of a plan to privatize Social Security
Is practicing "Reaganomics" despite the fact that he's pushing for the exact opposite of what Reagan did.

All of these are bullshit arguments and I'm under no obligation to take people who advance them seriously just because progressives are supposed to hold Obama's feet to the fire. I stand for the principle of not being a gullible dupe who believes bullshit hyperbole.

[LiberalLovinLug]

104. "..for what principle or principles do you fight?"

Brilliant response.
Because the only way those still caught up in the cult of personality or party can respond is "the principle of only moving progressive values forward as far as the opposition allows you to, and giving them back more than they asked for just to be sure"

One step forward (DADT repeal) does not balance two steps backwards (privatizing HCR and extension of Bush Tax Cuts)

[rhett o rick]

117. That works both ways. nm

[LoZoccolo]

41. I see what he did there. n/t

[jerseyjack]

37. I am not anti-Obama

but I am against his decisions that went against his campaign promises....Afghanistan, illegal wire tapping, health care and so forth.

[Ikonoklast]

109. Mr. Obama is doing exactly what he said he'd do in Afghanistan.

Guess you don't listen very well.

What illegal wiretapping? Be specific, please.

And what part of HCR that he campaigned on didn't you like? Not what you think he said, or what you wanted him to say, what he actually said?

[rucky]

38. If we can't air our grievances on DU, during Festivus nonetheless...

Where else can we?

[LoZoccolo]

40. Well OK, you speak for yourself.

I find that the tone on DU has gotten laughable and the mendacity of the criticism has gotten ridiculous. There is no longer a requirement that criticism be constructive, and people are taking advantage of that, and for some reason, according to the survey, they wanted that. If the ratio of unconstructive criticism reaches a certain point, expect people not to come here to be constructive. Some of us don't want to have the same argument over and over again about whether or not we should abandon the Democratic Party on a message board to which we came to support Democrats.

The "echo chamber" argument is a popular strawman; what people want is serious discussion.

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

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

[BrklynLiberal]

44. K & R

[bertman]

45. Recommend highly. nt

[fascisthunter]

46. pretty much where I have been

glad more people are sticking to their principles. I think sometimes we all have to make some concessions, but when we do, we risk being compromised in what we believe in and understand.

I have gotten to THAT point where I can't do it anymore and I think the more we compromise ourselves the worse this country becomes.

[October]

47. Nicely stated. /nt

[elias7]

49. It's not the anti-Obama sentiment, it's the sanctimonious tone

And your post, though cloaked in civility, is sanctimonious as well.

"Don't bury your head in the sand"
"Maybe you think it is your duty to stand by them and make excuses"
"Go ahead and find an echo chamber if you like, me I prefer people who stand on principle"
"Maybe you have changed in what you believe in"
"either you are for an ideal, or you are for a person who claims to be a part of your family/party"

OK, Dad. You're right, I'm wrong. Thanks for the lecture. Clearly you imagine that you know what's in my head and why I voted for Obama and what my expectations were. Thanks for the word edgewise...

[ecstatic]

50. +1000 nt

[Frisbee]

53. I don't think the OP claims to know why you voted for Obama...

but rather what Obama's campaign promises were.

[elias7]

55. Agreed, but the OP has rendered judgments about me

Look, I have been alive through 10 presidents now, hundreds even thousands of elected representatives, and have heard multitudes of campaign promises that were not kept. I don't scream betrayal when this happens, and I certainly don't render judgment less than two years into a leader's term, one who is fighting against the most formidable economic and political forces I have ever witnessed (read: vast RW conspiracy x 100), and express contempt for those who do not agree with my judgments.

We're on the same side. We see politics a little differently. Play nice is all I ask.

[ElboRuum]

113. +Several Million

It is this constant "j'accuse" mentality around here. Whether surreptitious or blatant, this "wake up sheeple" nonsense, this more liberal than thou thinking modality, coupled with the complete lack of respect for opposing views and the summary ad hominem that reliably follows is just fucking odious. Once that happens, you can put aside any hope of engaging in meaningful conversation of any sort.

You know, I came to DU to escape lockstep groupthink. Idealism is fine but that isn't why I'm here. I'm here for the exposition and critique of ideas. It's why I don't post much these days. DU has become too meta. It has become a bastion of solipsism, seemingly more concerned about its own identity and membership and less about the issues it claims to care about. It is no longer a place where a reasoned individual who would like to engage in consideration and debate of issues can feel at home, spending more time backhanding his/her uncivil detractors and playing with the ignore feature than actually responding to individuals who seem like minded in their desire to engage that debate with reason and respect.

[Number23]

124. Perfect post.

It is this constant "j'accuse" mentality around here. Whether surreptitious or blatant, this "wake up sheeple" nonsense, this more liberal than thou thinking modality, coupled with the complete lack of respect for opposing views and the summary ad hominem that reliably follows is just fucking odious.

I couldn't agree more. It's the "more liberal than thou" BS that really makes me shake my head. As if whipping out the "liberal card" means a damn thing to the majority of people in this country.

There was an OP a few days ago from a poster who referred to herself as a "proud liberal" who was also a proud supporter of the president. You should have seen the number of people running -- not walking, RUNNING -- to tell this grown, educated woman that she could not POSSIBLY have any idea what a liberal was if she supported this president. The arrogance, the condescension and the utter stupidity of it would have been laughable if it hadn't been so ridiculous.

[wisteria]

51. Frankly, DU is become nothing more than an angry mob.

IMO, it is as bad as FDL and I for one do not feel my ideals of seeing all sides of an issue, and compromise when necessary, is welcome on this site any longer. It is all about the angry mob always being right and everyone else always being wrong.
I don't know what kind of Democrat I am any longer, but I know I am not your kind.

[bettyellen]

94. there's a lot of over simplistic nasty bullshit posted that is pointless to read

much of it is not constructive, totally thoughtless and frankly it;s just gotten really tiresome. I'm embarrassed for some of the posters here, and how little they know about how govt functions. They are all too willing to make every govt failure- including Bush's -Obama;s fault.

[baldguy]

54. On too many issues, I didn't leave Obama. Obama left me.

+1

[The Wielding Truth]

56. Yep.I feel the same. I do also think he was the right man at the right time.

He has been working to turn around this titanic disaster.

[PurgedVoter]

58. Dead on! K&R nt

[onehandle]

59. 'Obama. Barack Obama. I am a supporter of Barack Obama.'

'Glad to hear it. Feel free to post your opinions on our board.'

'I will post many things, because Barack Obama is the best President ever.'

[texshelters]

62. Many of the apologists for Obama's actions can't give reasons

to defend his decisions since he became President. They just think I should support Obama blindly, without reason.

I support Obama, but I am against many of his policies, especially the ones he took and continued from the Bush White House: Gitmo, rendition, drone attacks increasing, capitulation on taxes, etc.

He's better than McCain, but my standards have been a bit higher considering all of Obama's rhetoric before the election.

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[RZM]

70. Perhaps your problem is that you took the rhetoric seriously

That's certainly not meant as an insult -- there's nothing wrong with taking people at face value and expecting them to make good on their promises. But I could never really get on board with his campaign since I had such a hard time taking it seriously. But I still voted for him and since I didn't expect a whole lot in the first place, I can't say I'm disappointed in him now.

[texshelters]

97. I didn't believe all of it, but

shouldn't we hold politicians to their word and when they break that word make them accountable. When didn't the norm become NOT trusting politicians about anything ever?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

63. I agree with you, and I'm sure there are other who are right there with you. However...

there have been sycophants on BOTH sides: those who never, ever question Obama and defend him no matter what he does. And those on the other side who never really liked him in the first place, so every thing he says and does he shunned and dismissed.

At the same time, I wish DUers would not bash supporters of the president. Just because we praise him when he does something right doesn't mean that we're Obamabots who are incapable of criticism and intellectual honesty.

[russspeakeasy]

65. He said " I expect you to hold my feet to the fire".

and that's what we're doing.

[Jakes Progress]

66. K&R Just exactly what many to most are feeling.

[SidDithers]

67. DU is now much less anti-Obama than it was last month...nt

Sid

[Radical Activist]

85. It does feel less stalkerish around here lately.

[OhioBlue]

71. unrec

admittedly, I didn't read the entire post.

the first 3 paragraphs were so condescending and narcissistic that I found myself filled with the same level of disgust as when i read the first paragraph of a Floyd and Mary Beth column.

[Lisa D]

110. +1000

How is this OP not a call out?

[Scurrilous]

73. Unrecced. n/t

[nashville_brook]

75. nicely said TSS -- :)

big big k and r!!

[Hamlette]

78. there is a difference between holding his feet to the fire and burning him at the stake

just saying

[Name removed]

82. Deleted message

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

[bobburgster]

84. At first I thought....same old whining, but

after I finished reading the OP I can understand and respect where you are coming from. I have no problem with members pointing out his policy faults, and pushing him so he does not drift away from the progressive ideals he so eloquently spoke of during the campaign.

In my opinion, the following paragraphs from the OP validated what he said.

I am NOT against Obama - I am against the same things I was before he got into office. Maybe you have changed in what you believe in, but I will hold our elected officials now to the same standards I did before.

Obama has kicked ass on some things, and I am DAMNED glad he is the President right now instead of McLame and quitter queen palin. I would take a bad dem over a repug any day of the week - but I won't thrust out my pom-poms in support when the things I support are being thrown under the bus.

We are better off today than we would have been with the opposing party in the WH, but we are not better off than we could have been because some people in the party are not working as hard as we had hoped they would.

[highprincipleswork]

87. K and R

[Phlem]

89. Hey Now

Don't be messin with the color of the sky in my world! :sarcasm:

But seriously, I whole heartedly agree with you. I don't know why this little nugget of common sense escapes some people. It's disheartening to watch people defend Mr. President so blindly, it's like watching a GOP town hall.

-p

[madmax]

90. 'Quitter Queen' I like it!

has a nice ring to it. Should be used if she makes it to the finals ;)

K&R

[ProSense]

91. This entire point is incongruous

Obama has kicked ass on some things, and I am DAMNED glad he is the President right now instead of McLame and quitter queen palin. I would take a bad dem over a repug any day of the week - but I won't thrust out my pom-poms in support when the things I support are being thrown under the bus.

All too often what's being said is Obama is weak, his accomplishments are meaningless, and you're reinforcing the notion that he is "a bad dem," someone who is simply better than a Republican. Not everyone agrees with that assessment.

I don't buy that.

"I am not a cheerleader for a commander in chief, I am his employer"

Supporting the president is not cheerleading, and you are not his employer. The notion that the President works for everyone who has an opinion of him simply because they voted for him is inaccurate. The people elect a President to serve their common interests, and part of the bargain is that he gets to exercise his judgment. Those who disagree with his actions have the right to vote against him, and people will do that for various reasons.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[apex nerd]

96. Voltaire said it best...

The perfect is the enemy of the good.

[texshelters]

99. I'm still waiting for the good

When the bad outweighs the "good" then it's time to reevaluate, don't ya think?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

[jtown1123]

98. I am for the Ideal as well. K&R

[texastoast]

103. BIG K&R

I too am for the ideal and will never give up. Settle sometimes, but never satisfied until we make that progress.

[defendandprotect]

105. Forget it ... it's just another act to try to hold the fort -- attack the messenger ....

it's been going on for two years now -- even mentioned as a new

"no-no" in Skinner's new, new, new rules -- !!

[GreenTea]

106. Not "Anti-Obama" - more I am Anti-Obama POLICY agenda & reversing of his own campaign platform

promises......that I believed & agreed with, what he said BEFORE he was elected - and that he now chooses to ignore, change or has left in the dust - much of it with his watered-down policies or a complete 180 on other policy & agenda!

Duh, do you all get the fucking distinction yet?

[Uncle Joe]

108. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, The Straight Story.

[creon]

112. Comes with the territory

The Congress and the WH did not do what was necessary. It did a half hearted and mediocre job.
63 seats were lost as a result.

We have a serious recession and millions are having hard time. They are afraid, worried and angry.

The WH and Congress have earned criticism.

[peace13]

114. This is very eye opening.

There are so many posts pissing on the president, but yet yours is of higher caliber. Right. The fact that this made it to the top on the front says volumes for DU. I am not opposed to holding the administration accountable but posts that go up simply to bash are not positive and will accomplish the goals of the right wing. Congratulations on feeding the frenzy.

[Piggy56]

115. Would have liked to see the dems get much more done, but what's the alternative?

President Romney?
President Palin?
President Gingrich?
President Huckabee?

NO THANK YOU

[xchrom]

118. Recommend

[somone]

119. Speak truth to power, lies, and hypocrisy

[Jamel]

121. Obama supporter

Obama supporters are not apologists. We just aren't reactionaries, and we allow the man to be human and make mistakes. We understand that Obama is the president of ALL of us, even the ones who didn't vote for him. He doesn't ALWAYS have to do things they way we want. We know that they'll be disappointments. We give the man credit for having "INTELLIGENCE". We don't call him names like "weak, spineless, or capitulator". We have respect for the president, and know that deep down, he's a GOOD MAN", dealing in a corrupt, crappy govt system. We know that the blame for problems can't ALL be dumped in his lap. Anger get's you nowhere, unless you use it in a positive way. WE ARE FOR REALITY. Standing on principle is NOT always good.The republicans stand on principle, and they have destructive policies.

[OhioBlue]

131. well said Jamel

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[NorthCarolina]

122. K&R

[badgerpup]

123. Straight Story, you are well-named.

:hug:

Thank you for all you do...you are much appreciated!

:kick:

[burnsei sensei]

125. If you think I should accept his policies

uncritically, then you have mismeasured me and Obama's critics.
We do not "follow our leaders" uncritically.
We have every right to opinions and expressions on policy.

[johnnyplankton]

126. DU is like Playboy now. I only read it for the articles.

Too many petty douchebags on both sides with little to do but
whine. Go volunteer somewhere will you? Do something
constructive, you babies. See its contagious. That is all.

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

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