HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Dem lawmaker blasts ‘Prof...

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:36 PM

Dem lawmaker blasts ‘Professor Obama’ as arrogant, alienating

Dem lawmaker blasts ‘Professor Obama’ as arrogant, alienating
By Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Calif.) - 12/13/11 06:05 AM ET

After observing President Obama for the last three years, it has become obvious to me that the president might prefer to be a university professor rather than do the job he holds today. While he might not realize that he feels this way, the evidence is very clear to those who work with or watch him closely. ...

In the president’s first year in office, his administration suffered from what I call “idea disease.” Every week, and sometimes almost every day, the administration rolled out a new program for the country. There was no obvious prioritization and, after the rollout, very little effort to actually pass the latest idea/imperative/plan/edict. ... This lack of focus also made it easy for congressional Republicans to stall and foil many of President Obama’s best initiatives — which they did with relish!

Early in his administration, President/Professor Obama repeatedly referred to “teaching moments.” He would admonish staff, members of Congress and the public, in speeches and in private, about what they could learn from him. Rather than the ideological or corrupt “I’m above the law” attitudes of some past administrations, President Obama projected an arrogant “I’m right, you’re wrong” demeanor that alienated many potential allies. Furthermore, the president concentrated power within the White House, leaving Cabinet members with no other option but to dutifully carry out policies with which they had limited input in crafting and might very well disagree. From my experience, this was especially true in the environmental, resources, housing and employment areas. Not by coincidence, these areas have also been responsible for much of the president’s harshest critiques.

......................

the rest:
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/cardozas-corner/198861-the-professorial-president

133 replies, 18745 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 133 replies Author Time Post
Reply Dem lawmaker blasts ‘Professor Obama’ as arrogant, alienating (Original post)
kpete Dec 2011 OP
Autumn Dec 2011 #1
bhikkhu Dec 2011 #76
Post removed Dec 2011 #2
ProSense Dec 2011 #3
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #8
ProSense Dec 2011 #13
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #43
ProSense Dec 2011 #45
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #66
ProSense Dec 2011 #69
Sheepshank Dec 2011 #77
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #81
Post removed Dec 2011 #84
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #86
ProfessorGAC Dec 2011 #87
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #94
ProfessorGAC Dec 2011 #122
Ms. Toad Jan 2012 #133
Wait Wut Dec 2011 #55
spanone Dec 2011 #59
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #67
Life Long Dem Dec 2011 #85
opihimoimoi Dec 2011 #4
bigtree Dec 2011 #5
MisterP Dec 2011 #18
doc03 Dec 2011 #6
ProSense Dec 2011 #7
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #10
ProSense Dec 2011 #15
zipplewrath Dec 2011 #42
Vincardog Dec 2011 #83
creon Dec 2011 #92
Vincardog Dec 2011 #93
creon Jan 2012 #131
doc03 Dec 2011 #11
ProSense Dec 2011 #24
doc03 Dec 2011 #29
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #61
doc03 Dec 2011 #64
ellisonz Dec 2011 #14
PragmaticLiberal Dec 2011 #26
doc03 Dec 2011 #33
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #37
emilyg Dec 2011 #32
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #35
ProfessorGAC Dec 2011 #88
tblue Dec 2011 #103
vanlassie Dec 2011 #119
GusFring Dec 2011 #9
Whisp Dec 2011 #12
cherokeeprogressive Dec 2011 #16
vanlassie Dec 2011 #117
doc03 Dec 2011 #17
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #23
ProSense Dec 2011 #27
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #47
PufPuf23 Dec 2011 #115
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #116
PufPuf23 Dec 2011 #118
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #120
doc03 Dec 2011 #31
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #38
Lord Magus Dec 2011 #40
Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #51
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #52
treestar Dec 2011 #89
RBInMaine Dec 2011 #36
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #49
treestar Dec 2011 #90
eridani Dec 2011 #19
Proud Liberal Dem Dec 2011 #25
frazzled Dec 2011 #20
LineLineReply .
ProSense Dec 2011 #22
Number23 Dec 2011 #30
midnight Dec 2011 #21
MrScorpio Dec 2011 #28
great white snark Dec 2011 #44
Ikonoklast Dec 2011 #48
GoCubsGo Dec 2011 #72
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #34
emulatorloo Dec 2011 #106
saras Dec 2011 #39
Post removed Dec 2011 #41
ProSense Dec 2011 #50
Freddie Stubbs Dec 2011 #53
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #62
Laelth Dec 2011 #46
Robb Dec 2011 #54
ProSense Dec 2011 #57
spanone Dec 2011 #56
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #58
Robb Dec 2011 #60
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2011 #63
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #65
ProSense Dec 2011 #70
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #73
ProSense Dec 2011 #75
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #126
Robb Dec 2011 #79
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #80
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #101
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #102
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #107
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #108
AtomicKitten Dec 2011 #109
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #124
AtomicKitten Jan 2012 #132
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #105
Robb Dec 2011 #111
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #125
Mass Dec 2011 #96
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #104
Mass Dec 2011 #113
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #127
Mass Dec 2011 #128
Hart2008 Dec 2011 #129
Mass Dec 2011 #130
TwilightGardener Dec 2011 #68
ProSense Dec 2011 #74
Poll_Blind Dec 2011 #71
Gman Dec 2011 #78
ProSense Dec 2011 #82
creon Dec 2011 #91
Mass Dec 2011 #95
ProSense Dec 2011 #97
AlbertCat Dec 2011 #98
Muskypundit Dec 2011 #99
yurbud Dec 2011 #100
Thrill Dec 2011 #110
rocktivity Dec 2011 #112
DirkGently Dec 2011 #114
blackspade Dec 2011 #121
Azathoth Dec 2011 #123

Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:41 PM

1. Very interesting read

Not sure about the ‘Professor Obama’ part but I think I agree with Rep. Cardoza assessment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #1)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:42 AM

76. ...as opposed to "one of the guys", a "good old boy", etc

or perhaps "he doesn't know his place". I look at the examples given and they look appropriate to me - congress is very much in need of "teaching moments", and very much in need of someone to deliver them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:45 PM

3. He's retiring, but

this statement is absurd:

Many on the Democratic side wish Hillary Clinton, Gov. Jerry Brown (Calif.), Gov. Martin O’Malley (Md.) or Gov. Andrew Cuomo (N.Y.) were running instead, but the president still has time to learn a thing or two from these skilled politicians. I’ll still take Professor Obama over the “goat rodeo clowns” the Republican field offers, but I fear the overall student body — American voters — will give him a failing grade next November if he doesn’t improve his performance


Sounds like someone with issues!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #3)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:07 PM

8. Sure attack the messenger

I mean really, that's all ya got to say?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #8)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:14 PM

13. Well,

"Sure attack the messenger I mean really, that's all ya got to say?"

...he's a blue dog, and he sounds bitter.

He votes with Republicans more than 50 percent of the time. He just voted for Boehner's crazy bill: http://www.democraticunderground.com/100214138

Democrats voting "yes" were Reps. John Barrow (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.), Leonard Boswell (Iowa), Bruce Braley (Iowa), Dennis Cardoza (Calif.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Dave Loebsack (Iowa), Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike Ross (Ark.), and Tim Walz (Minn.).

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/199175-house-passes-payroll-tax-extension-bill


I'm not a fan of the remaining blue dogs who are in the House.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #13)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:20 AM

43. So you justify attacking the messenger

He writes a long opinion piece based upon personal experience and you have no reply except character assassination. We used to hammer the Bush administration for that approach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #43)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:49 AM

45. Doesn't

".So you justify attacking the messenger"

...bother me in the least. I know the comments on these articles are dominated by RW kooks, but reading the comments, I'm sure that's not the reaction Cardoza expected.

Along with the vicious comments aimed at the President and Democrats, he's getting slammed with some vile crap.

His piece is nothing more than a whining from a sellout Democrat who is pissed the President doesn't agree with his preference for what the Republicans are selling. In his view, the President is "arrogant" and lecturing the likes of Boehner instead of working with them to screw the country over.

You can agree with him and consider my opinion attacking the messenger, and that's fine by me.

His support for Republicans was part of the problem. Good riddance!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #45)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:06 AM

66. I can disagree with him

And not attack him, in the context of his message, but in fact attack the message.

Your's is just lazy.

But I see we've now switched to false dichotomies

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #66)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:10 AM

69. Your

I can disagree with him

And not attack him, in the context of his message, but in fact attack the message.

Your's is just lazy.

...point makes no sense. What makes this asshole the messenger? You disagree with him? It's his message. He isn't delivering a fact, it's his opinion. You disagree with him, well so do I.

The problem here is you're simply twisting in the wind trying to sound logical: he isn't the messenger, it's his idiotic opinion.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:42 AM

77. Just what I was thinking.

 

His opinion..he owns it, it is his message and his value system implemented in how he interprets Obama's actions and motivations. How can disagreeing with him not be an attack on the messenger?

I disagree with his opinion. The idea that Obama cant multitask, and offer numerous solutions to a complicated economic situation, without being called a professorly elitsit, is ludicrous on its face.

Publically demanding for the further dumming down of America and it's leaders is to be lauded?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #69)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:19 PM

81. You don't even attack the opinion

You just trash his reputation. The specifics of his opinion are ignored. It's basically an adhominen attack, another logical fallicy in which you are choosing to indulge.

But go ahead and argue the semantics rather than the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #81)


Response to Post removed (Reply #84)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 01:08 PM

86. And again

Do you ever address points or opinions or just character and personality?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #86)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 01:13 PM

87. That's What You're Doing Though

You keep hammering the same point over and over and won't address the fact that attacking the guy who is OFFERING AN OPINION is the problem, rather than the statement itself.

If someone uses a racial epithet toward Obama, should be debate the merit of the term or should we just dismiss the person proferring the epithet as a racist buffoon?
GAC

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #87)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 04:18 PM

94. Sort of

The logical fallacies keep moving around, but yes the underlying point is the same. Some guy being labeled as a "Blue dog" is criticizing Obama for not being cooperative with congress. Kind of a funny position for someone in congress to take, especially a blue dog. I suspect a very good argument can be made against this point, although we have heard alot of this out of the democratic congress, so it isn't unique to this individual.

But I'm not sure what your new point is about raciel epithets. The guy didn't make a particularly personal attack on Obama. He made a professional assessment of his performance as president. One many of us probably wouldn't completely agree, but it is THAT opinion that should be addressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #94)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 05:38 AM

122. Of Course You Didn't Understand

You didn't understand, on purpose.

The point is too simple and straightforward for you to have missed.

You only missed it because it was inconvenient to your repetitive point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProfessorGAC (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 03:58 PM

133. Using a racial epithet

is not even in the same ballpark with what happened here: Prosense responded to a paragraph from the article which said, in essence:

Many democrats wish someone else were running.
Obama still learn has time to learn from other respected dems.
I prefer him over anyone the Republicans have to offer
I am afraid the general voting public will not.

Her response "this statement is absurd . . .Sounds like someone with issues!"

The points made in the quoted paragraph are not in any way equivalent to a racial epithet - they are a mixture of opinions/concerns and purported facts.

A constructive response to that paragraph would be to dispute the purported facts (show that the first statement is factually inaccurate), or to disagree with the opinions. Explain why there isn't time - or why she don't want Obama to learn from those other dems, or why she believes the fear expressed in the last paragraph is not justifed.

Instead, Prosense responded with a character attack - the messenger has issues. (Arguably the assertion that that the statement is absurd is an attack on the message - but an attack more suited to a discussion board would be as I have outlined above - one liner dismissals aren't conducive to discussion.)

I opened this thread hoping that there might be some real discussion going on. I probably should have known better since Obama was part of the discussion. Instead of discussion I was greeted with the first dozen (probably more by the time I hit return) comments being pretty much a street brawl. It would be nice to evolve to a group that really could discuss political commentary on the merits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #43)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:17 AM

55. It isn't attacking the messenger...

...when the message is his own. Attacking the messenger would be attacking the poster of the thread. ProSense is attacking the message that came from this guys lips by pointing out fallacies and hypocrisy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:34 AM

59. it's his message to be attacked.

who would you rather the poster attack?

ah, Obama....i see.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to spanone (Reply #59)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:06 AM

67. The message

It's the logical thing to do, literally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #8)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:35 PM

85. I'd like to add for him to have a happy retirement.

 

Good Riddance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:49 PM

4. Right Winger Blue Dog Doing what GOPers do....push Division, Negativity...whine whine...screw him

he is a POS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:50 PM

5. winger dog whistle

 

made it through to the DU eardrum

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bigtree (Reply #5)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:41 PM

18. he needs tips from the king of winger dog-whistles, President Blue Dog

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:53 PM

6. I have heard the same criticism about Obama from both sides

so I figure there must be some truth in it. He had minimal experience in politics when he took office and hopefully he will learn from his mistakes eventually. So far he has been a slow learner.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 09:58 PM

7. He's

waiting for the 3 a.m. call, huh?

To quote Krugman: Send in the Clueless

And you also have to denounce President Obama, who enacted a Republican-designed health reform and killed Osama bin Laden, as a radical socialist who is undermining American security.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/05/opinion/send-in-the-clueless.html


President Obama has done what most Presidents attempted to do and failed. He doesn't need lessons from the blue dogs and Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:09 PM

10. Well I'm glad we agree on one thing

"...President Obama, who enacted a Republican-designed health reform..."

Many have been trying to make this case, practically including the president himself, and getting and argument around here for years. Glad this finally appears to be settled.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #10)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:17 PM

15. Krugman

"...President Obama, who enacted a Republican-designed health reform..."

...did so to illustrate a point. He knows the deal. He's one the health care laws biggest supporters.

Krugman: Paying For Health Reform

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100211410

Thanks President Obama!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #15)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:18 AM

42. I'd hardly say "biggest"

But he is a supporter of what finally past, and even HE admits that it is "Republican-designed health reform".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zipplewrath (Reply #10)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:27 PM

83. +1 BO has enacted a LOT of Republican-designed "reforms" TOO MANY to be running as a Democrat

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #83)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 04:02 PM

92. lol

The 111th Congress passed those bills.
PBO did not.
PBO does not give orders to Congress

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to creon (Reply #92)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 04:07 PM

93. Right and he NEVER negotiated to take Single Payer off the table

Or to make sure that "Health CARE" reform kept its' promise to make sure Insurance Companies were not harmed.
He NEVER made a deal with the drug Companies to kill re-importation.
He Never put Social Security on the table.
He NEVER agreed to extend Bush's tax cuts.
I can't think of a single thing he has done that the Republicans would like.
That explains the Klown Kar chase in the GOP Primary:
They already have their man in the WH.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vincardog (Reply #93)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 03:32 PM

131. arrant nonsense

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #7)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:11 PM

11. Few Democrats or even Obama himself wants to be associated with what

was supposed to be his greatest accomplishment the HCR bill.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #11)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:13 PM

24. Actually

Few Democrats or even Obama himself wants to be associated with what

was supposed to be his greatest accomplishment the HCR bill.


...wrong!

Vermont Awarded $18 Million for Health Care

WASHINGTON, Nov. 29 - Vermont will receive more than $18 million to help the state implement a new national health care reform law, the state's congressional delegation announced today.

The federal funds will help the state devise an insurance exchange to make it simpler for consumers to select affordable health insurance policies.

Under the national health care law, insurance exchanges must be established in every state to provide consumers more affordable choices for health insurance coverage beginning in 2014.

Vermont plans to structure its exchange to be converted by 2017 to a public, single-payer health care model that would provide better care at less cost.

http://sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/news/?id=1a62f145-05a3-46e0-9ef7-888891ec73d1


Health Reform in Action

http://www.whitehouse.gov/healthreform



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #24)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:04 AM

29. Where are the Democrats in the house and Senate touting the HCR bill? The Republicans took

the House because of the HCR, we lost our Democratic congressman because he voted for it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #29)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:49 AM

61. No! You lost because people didn't come out and vote! PERIOD!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #61)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:01 AM

64. I'm sure you are right about that in some cases. We all come out

and vote in the presidential election than expect him to take care of everything all by himself for the next four years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:16 PM

14. Or that he's doing something right...

..and it's pissing a lot of people who are set in their ways off!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:17 PM

26. "He had minimal experience in politics when he took office?"

I'm assuming you're referring to his tenure as a U.S. Senator because Obama was a state senator for 7 years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PragmaticLiberal (Reply #26)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:19 AM

33. There is a big difference between being in a state senate controlled by

your own party and being in Washington.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #33)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:20 AM

37. He has 11 years legislative experience.

 

Plus he kicked the tag-team asses of Clinton Inc., so your attempts to marginalize him are ludicrous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:13 AM

32. Slow learner? - You're being kind.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to emilyg (Reply #32)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:04 AM

35. Bless your heart.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 01:14 PM

88. He Had More Than Bush Or Reagan

So, are you sure you want to stick with that premise?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #6)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:37 PM

103. I know someone who knew Obama personally many years ago.

Asked to describe the President as he was back then, the answer was "aloof."

I see it. He's not really a "people person." Now, you don't have to be one to be a good president. But that can't but hurt someone who is not.

I have perceived for along time that our POTUS is winging it in this job. There was no master plan, there was no clear ideology or steadfast adherence to priorities. The operative word was and is EXPEDIENCY. If we weren't in such dire straits we might be able to get by with ad hoc leadership. Unfortunately such is not the case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tblue (Reply #103)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:39 PM

119. Yeah, I'm aloof sometimes too. I call it "Not suffering fools gladly."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:09 PM

9. this type of stuff really pisses me off.what purpose does this serve?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:11 PM

12. why can't the repugs have turncoat assholes like this...

 

''One former administration official told me directly that the people in the White House “NEVER TALK TO REAL PEOPLE.” Another former Obama staffer confided to me that it was clear to him that the president didn’t mind giving speeches (lectures), but really avoided personal contact with members of Congress and folks outside the Beltway. “He doesn’t seem to derive energy from spending time with regular people the way Clinton did.''

Mr Cardoza, one former colleague of yours said that you eat your toenails when you think no one is looking and you NEVER clean up the crumbs. You carry out your duties by shaking an 8 ball then whiting out the result if you don't agree. Oh, and you should wash your shorts more frequently (this from an unnamed ex personal friend of yours)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #12)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:17 PM

16. And the bar is raised... n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Whisp (Reply #12)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:49 PM

117. Perfect!

Poor Denny- the Pwesident snubbed him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:33 PM

17. Just yesterday Senator Joe Manchin was on Morning Joe. Manchin said Obama had never even

as much as called him and asked for his support on anything. I have heard that over and over from people on both sides and journalists that Obama just doesn't have any friends in Washington and doesn't seem to like to get engaged in working with congress. I don't understand why when anyone criticizes the president for anything everyone goes on the attack. I mean what is in it for a Democrat especially to just make things up without reason?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #17)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:13 PM

23. With THIS Congress??? Really???



Can't say I really blame him. Manchin? The guy who ran for the Senate last year by running AGAINST Obama? And he's wondering why Obama doesn't pick up the phone and call him? Somebody needs to buy this guy a cluebat! Hell, some of the first words right out of the mouth of the DEMOCRATIC SENATE MAJORITY LEADER Harry Reid after President Obama's inauguration were "I don't work for President Obama." Obama also had a bunch of Blue Dogs in the Senate and House dedicating themselves to be obstinate pricks whom would make life difficult for President Obama RIGHT OUT OF THE GATE!

I don't mind legitimate criticisms of President Obama but I think that at least some of us can't stand to hear people, particularly people whom are supposedly members of his own party smearing him with lies and innuendo- stuff that is too far "out there" to be credibly believed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #23)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:38 PM

27. Well,

"Can't say I really blame him. Manchin? The guy who ran for the Senate last year by running AGAINST Obama? "

...so far we've heard from Cardoza and Manchin. All we need now is for Lieberman to weigh in.

Every time I come across Democrats criticizing the President from the right, it reinforces my thinking that some of the President's loudest critics actually identify with the blue dogs and have been projecting these last few years.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #27)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:51 AM

47. The Blue Dogs have NEVER been the President's "friends" at all since he was elected

Their *criticism* means very little to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #47)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:20 PM

115. POTUS Obama has declared himself a "Blue Dog"

since the 2008 election.

One can find on YouTube.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #115)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:30 PM

116. Why do they all hate him so much then?

They ought to just doggone love him if he was actually one of them, right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #116)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:21 PM

118. I don't think the Blue Dogs hate POTUS Obama at all.

Potus Obama is a Blue Dog and he has stated so; and made appointments and supported policy more conservative Blue Dog than New Deal / Great Society liberalism.

There is a vast difference between neoliberals and Democratic Party members of age; neoliberals have coopted the Democratic party but do not represent the moral standing nor domestic prosperity of Keynesian Democrats.

Take an honest look at history and foreign economic interventions now come home to the USA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PufPuf23 (Reply #118)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 11:28 PM

120. They sure have a funny way of showing it IMHO

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:12 AM

31. That's what Joe Manchin had to do to get elected in WV or else you

would have had a Teabagger Republican. It wouldn't have mattered with Bill Clinton he would at least tried some arm twisting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:21 AM

38. Manchin is as rightwing as a teabagger, so I see little difference.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:09 AM

40. Instead, we get a Teabagger Democrat.

How's that any better?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:58 AM

51. OK, Manchin got elected. Why is he still running to the right?

It's because that's where he's most comfortable, also, his constituency is the most racist in this nation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #31)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:59 AM

52. What could Obama have done to "twist his arm" exactly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Proud Liberal Dem (Reply #23)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:52 PM

89. Sounds like Manchin's ego is injured here

Not even invited onto Air Force One! Wonder if Obama would seat him in the Newt area of the plane if he did, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to doc03 (Reply #17)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:19 AM

36. "Not working with Congress?" Weeks of deficit reduction meetings. Meetings with ALL congressional

 

caucuses from both parties. Allowed the congress to write the health bill and others. And on and on and on.
This is BULLSHIT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RBInMaine (Reply #36)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:56 AM

49. YUP!

I feel like Congress (most of them) are like a bunch of squabbling toddlers that, when they realize they can't solve their own problems, demand that President Obama step in and solve their problems for them and then when he tries, they just start attacking him. I feel like we've become trapped in some kind of surreal bizarroworld.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RBInMaine (Reply #36)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:53 PM

90. And then if the President had called Manchin or whoever

It would be "caving" to the Blue Dogs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 10:43 PM

19. Jeebus. Talking to the public as if we were adults is alienating?

I have had problems with Republican messaging coming from Obama (thankfully abandoned for the 2012 campaign), but "too academic"? WTF?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eridani (Reply #19)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:15 PM

25. Yeah

Some people really need to grow up. I want an intelligent person, preferably somebody even smarter than I am, running this country and who will treat me as an adult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:02 PM

20. The head of the conservative Blue Dog coalition--who won't even be running again

Are we attacking Obama from the right now? I guess anything that works, huh?

And this has gotten 6 recs. I wish the unrec function were back.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #20)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:08 PM

22. .

"Are we attacking Obama from the right now?"










Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #20)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:07 AM

30. As long as it attacks this president, there will always be some here

that support it. Doesn't matter who said it or why.

The fact that this person is criticizing the president from the right is immaterial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:02 PM

21. I hope the idea this week will be to roll out a real jobs program...

I'm witnessing families who haven't worked in 19 months...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Tue Dec 13, 2011, 11:41 PM

28. Sounds like he's saying that the President is too darn uppity nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:30 AM

44. My thought as well. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrScorpio (Reply #28)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:52 AM

48. "Aloof". The New Racists like that word much better.

"Uppity" is now just soooo passe now in the no-longer running the show White Male Club.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ikonoklast (Reply #48)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:23 AM

72. I'm surprised he didn't use "dithering".

It's the other favorite word with that crowd. Must be getting tired of that one, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:01 AM

34. Anybody tipping their hat to this Blue Dog might want to check their hypocrisy meter.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #34)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:41 PM

106. Beautiful

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:45 AM

39. Every good candidate gets dissed as "arrogant" and "intellectual"

 

Without those, you're a Reagan or a Bush

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #41)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:56 AM

50. The guy is pissed

Last edited Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:44 AM - Edit history (1)

that the President threatened to veto Boehner's bill, which he just voted for.

Democrats voting "yes" were Reps. John Barrow (Ga.), Dan Boren (Okla.), Leonard Boswell (Iowa), Bruce Braley (Iowa), Dennis Cardoza (Calif.), Joe Donnelly (Ind.), Dave Loebsack (Iowa), Jim Matheson (Utah), Mike Ross (Ark.), and Tim Walz (Minn.).

http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/199175-house-passes-payroll-tax-extension-bill


WASHINGTON — Defying a veto threat from President Obama, the House on Tuesday passed a bill extending a cut in Social Security payroll taxes for 160 million Americans for another year. But the Democratic majority in the Senate vowed to reject the measure because of objections to other provisions, including one to speed construction of an oil pipeline from Canada to the Gulf Coast.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/14/us/politics/house-passes-extension-of-payroll-tax-cut.html


Maybe the President should be less "arrogant" and agree with Cardoza, sign this legislation and make his "progressive" critics happy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Post removed (Reply #41)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:00 AM

53. He votes with the Democratic Party 70% of the time:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Freddie Stubbs (Reply #53)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:50 AM

62. Still a Blue Dog and it shows.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:51 AM

46. Interesting. k&r n/t

-Laelth

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:11 AM

54. The author just voted to speed up the Keystone XL pipeline.

So now the destruction of the environment is taking a back seat to the destruction of Obama's presidency?

You want to talk GOP tactics, there it is. Health care? Jobs? Keeping government running? NONE of that is as important as getting this uppity polysyllabic motherfucker out of office!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #54)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:21 AM

57. Here's what else was in the bill

Breaking: CBO Just Scored the Boehner Tax Bill: Major Fail!!

by joelgp

Here we go again with one of the most incompetent, legislative Houses in U.S. history producing yet another laughable piece of legislation. They could have quietly given the middle-class a tax cut and headed home with their heads held high. But nooo!!!

That was just a bridge too far for them. They need to add “sweeteners” like the pipeline, federal layoffs and more federal cuts. Well, the CBO took a look at their ignorant document and said this according to TheHill.com:

1. The House bill will add $25.3 billion to the federal deficit over the next 10 years

2. Take billions from Medicare

3. Take billions from Social Security

4. Create another racist illegal alien ruse

5. Reduce Medicaid by billions

6. Freeze federal worker pay

7. Take 10s of Billions from federal worker retirement benefits

8. Take 31 billion from “Other” health provisions

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/12/09/1043787/-Breaking

These Blue Dog assholes like to pretend they care about the deficit, when in reality, they simply share the Republicans' goal of screwing over the most vulnerable Americans.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:18 AM

56. what's new?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:31 AM

58. Obviously, Rep. Cardoza is supporting Darcy Richardson now. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:34 AM

60. Well, *someone* was bound to.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:51 AM

63. Who's that?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #63)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:01 AM

65. Darcy Richardson: The progressive Democrat running for President of the United States!

 

I think it’s fair to say, and should be said, that President Obama needlessly squandered his first two years in office, saddling the nation with health care legislation that nobody really wanted instead of fighting for a single-payer Medicare-for-All program that would insure the basic health needs of every American.

While pushing for legislation seen by many on the Left as a boon to the private insurance industry, the President virtually ignored the country’s mounting jobs crisis — until he started running for re-election, that is.

Extending the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy added insult to injury and, in no small measure, helped to give rise to the Occupy Wall Street movement. Unlike the last Democratic administration, the gap between rich and poor has widened substantially during Obama’s presidency.

The recipient of a staggering $37.6 million in Wall Street money between 1998 and his election in 2008, the President has been about as effective in turning this recession-ravaged economy around as Herbert Hoover in 1932. That was, of course, the year when the beleaguered Republican President tried to rescue the ailing U.S. economy with the passage of the relatively modest Emergency Relief and Construction Act and the creation of the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, neither of which came close to ending the Great Depression.

Instead of modeling his economic policy agenda after Herbert Hoover, President Obama and his advisers should have instead studied FDR and the New Deal.

The President’s $787 billion stimulus package in 2009 — much of which was used by Republican governors and GOP-controlled legislatures to balance state budgets — did little for the private sector and was simply too meager to pull the country out of the depths of the “Great Recession,” a devastating economic downturn that millions of Americans believe never ended.



http://www.battlegroundblog.com/2011/10/26/darcy-richardson-why-im-running-for-president/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #65)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:16 AM

70. Hmmm?

Instead of modeling his economic policy agenda after Herbert Hoover, President Obama and his advisers should have instead studied FDR and the New Deal.

The President’s $787 billion stimulus package in 2009 — much of which was used by Republican governors and GOP-controlled legislatures to balance state budgets — did little for the private sector and was simply too meager to pull the country out of the depths of the “Great Recession,” a devastating economic downturn that millions of Americans believe never ended.


I smell bullshit!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #70)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:29 AM

73. I smell Herbert Hoover. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #73)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:37 AM

75. Yeah,

"I smell Herbert Hoover."

...Darcy is the next coming of FDR...in your dreams.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ProSense (Reply #75)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 07:55 PM

126. Obama channels Hoover: "Prosperity is just around the corner- in 2 or 3 more presidents' terms!"

 

Sure sounds like Herbert Hoover to me.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #65)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 11:00 AM

79. Darcy is a former Tea Party hack

10 years at Merrill Lynch and sent cash to Nader in 2000. String of failed attempts to fool progressives into voting for him with no wins, now he's trying the act on Democrats.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #79)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 11:17 AM

80. OMG I didn't know that - Darcy Richardson a former teabagger.

 

from the belly of the beast --

BTP member challenges Obama
link: http://www.bostontea.us/node/1049

BTP member Darcy G Richardson (Darcy2012.com) has filed as a Democratic Party candidate for the New Hampshire primary. According to articles here and here Darcy will be seeking primary ballot access in more States aside from New Hampshire.

Darcy says, "I hope that my candidacy, as limited as it may turn out to be, might in some small measure restore a belief in American politics and American government, reinforcing the notion that real change can be achieved at the ballot box."

As Chair of the BTP National Committee, I wish Darcy the best of luck in his campaign!

In Peace, Freedom, Love & Liberty,
Darryl W. Perry

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #80)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:18 PM

101. Self delete-dupe

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #80)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:34 PM

102. WOW! A smear with a bad link!

 

Let's read the actual quote from Richardson's interview:


Q: You are (or were at one time) a member of the Boston Tea Party, a minor third party whose platform supports "reducing the size, scope and power of government at all levels and on all issues, and opposes increasing the size, scope and power of government at any level, for any purpose." Do you agree with this platform?

Richardson: My involvement with the Boston Tea Party — a freedom-oriented, limited government entity — was relatively short-lived. I assisted them a bit here in Florida because of Tom Knapp's personal involvement. Tom, a self-styled anarchist and original thinker, had founded the party shortly after the Libertarian Party's mid-term convention in 2006. An edgy and contemplative guy, Tom is a libertarian writer and activist for whom I have tremendous respect. He's one of the smartest people I know and is also probably one of the most talented writers that I've ever encountered.


http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Wikinews_interviews_Darcy_Richardson,_Democratic_Party_presidential_challenger_to_Barack_Obama?dpl_id=310400

So the Boston Tea Party to which you are referring began 6 years ago and was not the "Teabagger" Repuke party of today. (And wasn't there also a restaurant chain by that name in the 80's?) It is worth noting that Democratic Party of today was founded by Thomas Jefferson. Jefferson's also decried needless government expansion:

"I think, myself, that we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious." --Thomas Jefferson to W. Ludlow, 1824.


After the folly of the Bank bailouts, which Obama voted for as Senator and continued as president, and the unpopular individual mandates which Obama has enacted, it is unlikely that Thomas Jefferson would be able to support such laws. The Democratic Party loses its way when it supports bankers and insurance companies over ordinary workers.


"[Ours is] a government founded in the will of its citizens, and directed to no object but their happiness." --Thomas Jefferson: Reply to North Carolina General Assembly, 1808. ME 16:300

"The only orthodox object of the institution of government is to secure the greatest degree of happiness possible to the general mass of those associated under it." --Thomas Jefferson to M. van der Kemp, 1812. ME 13:135

"The happiness and prosperity of our citizens... is the only legitimate object of government and the first duty of governors." -- Thomas Jefferson to Thaddeus Koscierusko, 1811. ME 13:41


To the extent that the bankers and insurance lobby have captured Washington, D.C., the desire to shrink the size of government is a natural reaction to that problem. The better solution is to reform government itself to limit their influence such that government better represents the will of its citizens. However, in the present political atmosphere, there is nothing wrong with a candidate who has expressed those concerns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #102)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:52 PM

107. Good thing I copied the text before they disabled the link, huh?

 

Here's another source validating BTP (Boston Tea Party) member, Darcy Richardson, that reflects verbatim the content of the now disabled link:

http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2011/10/darcy-richardson-challenges-obama-in-democratic-presidential-primary/

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Of course from the horse's mouth is always an excellent source. Note the interview Richardson gave admitting (and trying to minimalize) his membership and participation in the Boston Tea Party.

http://saluteguam.com/news/74-news/8321-wikinews-interviews-darcy-richardson-democratic-party-presidential-challenger-to-barack-obama

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Your support for a teabagger (Richardson) and a nutcase (Ron Paul) is precious and not something you can easily deny what with the trail you've left here. Let that freak flag fly!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #107)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:56 PM

108. Darcy Richardson is a Eugene McCarthy Democrat. He embraces values the present party has lost. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #108)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:57 PM

109. No, he's a teabagger. You can't deny it so embrace your choice for president!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #109)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 07:51 PM

124. So in 2006 when BTP oppossed Bush it was bad??? It was not the same as the present "teabaggers" NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #124)

Sat Jan 7, 2012, 03:44 PM

132. Richardson was involved in a faction of the BTP that began in June 2008

 

on edit: I just noticed the poster to whom I'm responding has been TS'd. Oh well.

... following President Obama's nomination. Here's an email he wrote corroborating that and seeking affiliation with the national Boston Tea Party.

link: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/btpnc/message/410

----- Original Message ----
From: Darcy G. Richardson <darcyrichardson aol.com>
To: btpnc-talkyahoogro ups.com
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 7:54:22 PM
Subject: Florida Requests Affiliation



The Boston Tea Party of Florida, organized on June 23, 2008, and

dedicated to keeping the flame of liberty alive in the Sunshine

State, hereby requests formal affiliation with the national Boston

Tea Party. We have adopted bylaws (subject to modification) for our

state organization and have elected the following officers:



State Chair:
John Wayne Smith of Leesburg, Florida


Treasurer:
Nicholas Galindo of Jacksonville, Florida


At-Large Member:
Charles Jay of Hollywood, Florida

We currently have nine active members and recently started a Yahoo!


Thank you for your kind consideration.


With best wishes,
Darcy G. Richardson

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #79)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:40 PM

105. Another unsupported smear. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #105)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:02 PM

111. Which facts are you denying tonight?

Be specific.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Robb (Reply #111)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 07:52 PM

125. Uh, you need to provide facts before they can be discussed intelligently. NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #58)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 05:44 PM

96. Obviously, if Richardson is a blue dog who wants to stay in Afghanistan.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #96)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:37 PM

104. Completely imagined speculation. Can't support that assertion with a link, right? NT

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #104)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:07 PM

113. No, the speculation is that Cardoza supports Richardson.

Cardoza opposed the Kucinich resolution.

http://cardoza.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=87&parentid=6&sectiontree=6,87&itemid=750

His statement about Afghanistan is exactly what you would expect from a blue dog.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #113)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 08:00 PM

127. Richardson is the only game in town to dump Obama. You expect a McCarthy Dem to support Afghanistan?

 

There is nothing in the record to suggest that Richardson wants to continue the military occupations in Afghanistan or Iraq.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #127)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 11:34 PM

128. WTF does Richardson have to do with Cardoza?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mass (Reply #128)

Fri Dec 16, 2011, 06:02 AM

129. So who else does Cardozza have to support to oppose Obama?

 

Unless Cardozza wises to challenge Obama himself at this late date?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hart2008 (Reply #129)

Fri Dec 16, 2011, 09:53 AM

130. Given his political leaning, certainly not Richardson. He may be more inclined to support the GOP

nominee.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:08 AM

68. Well, that's unhelpful. What a prick.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TwilightGardener (Reply #68)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:35 AM

74. Actually,

it's very helpful. It shows that there is a level of anti-Obama sentiment not based in reality.

Think about it. Most people have been accusing the President of being "weak," "caving" to Republicans and spending too much time seeking "bipartisan" solutions.

Now, these same critics seem to agree that he's "arrogant" and "alienating."

What makes it more interesting is that it's coming from someone who often votes with Republicans against the President's policies.

What we have here is irony and hypocrisy.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:19 AM

71. I've read better, more well-sourced and expressed OPs on DU.

He does a terrible job of explaining himself and regardless of whether or not I agree with any of the points he makes in some other context, I find his piece unmoving.

PB

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 10:59 AM

78. So vote for Newt in November

I'm sure you'll be much happier. Seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 12:26 PM

82. This isn't

going to get much attention, but here is what Cardoza voted for:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100216296

What a guy!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 03:57 PM

91. His opinion

With which I have no problem. Free country.

It is this person's job to write and pass legislation. he should have done a better job in the 111th Congress.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 05:39 PM

95. Cardoza is a conservative Democrat. He is certainly entitled to his opinion, but he is probably more

in line with the RW of the party than with people here who think Obama is too right wing.

http://cardoza.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=87&sectiontree=6,87&showallitems=true

One of the title on his website is "Cardoza questions EPA head against agency activism"

Cardoza, Blue Dogs Call on President Obama to Push for Bipartisan Budget Compromise

http://cardoza.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=87&parentid=6&sectiontree=6,87&itemid=750

Congressman Cardoza Opposes Irresponsible Afghanistan Withdrawal

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 05:48 PM

97. Hey, Cardoza is

recruiting candidates:

“The American people are tired of the gridlock in Washington that has been created by the extremes of the right and left,” Rep. Dennis Cardoza (D-Calif.), the co-chairman of the Blue Dog PAC, said in a statement. “They want mature leadership capable of solving problems. That’s who the Blue Dogs are, and that’s why these candidates actively sought our endorsement. They know what the Blue Dog brand represents and wanted to share in it.”

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10142921


Anyone know any Blue Dogs who meet the "mature leadership" criteria?

What a friggin joke!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 05:49 PM

98. Great, just what we need.... Dem anti-intellectualism.

 

Because the triumphs of the anti-intellectualism, Dubya & the TeaBaggers, are so good for America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 06:03 PM

99. This idiot is a DINO, blue dog, republican.

And regularly votes against democratic bills, and supports boner. He gets to put a D By his name and regurgitate talk radio points at us, and we are supposed to give him the time of day because he says he is a D.

I don't buy this crap. I am critical of the president, and I will listen to attacks on him from actual progressives, but not from republicans.

He is a minor member of a 300+ house. Obama probably has never met the guy, yet he pretends like he has an inside view. Bull. Bull. Bull.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 06:05 PM

100. is this guy on drugs? both in legislative process and dealing with cabinet, Obama has done opposite

often to the dismay of progressives and detriment of the country.

He took a hands off approach to health care reform that left it in the hands of the most corrupt members of the Senate.

His stimulus bill start with half Republican snake oil of tax cuts

and when he does negotiate with the GOP, he either gets his ass handed to him or helpfully gives it to the GOP to hand it to him.

It would be nice if he just issued orders to members of his cabinet like Tim Geithner, who reportedly refused to break up big banks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 07:57 PM

110. Democrats attacking a Democratic President

Whats new?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 08:05 PM

112. HIT PIECE ALERT!

Male cattle droppings.

This article is written by a fake "Blue Dog" Dem, and doesn't offer a single example of Cardoza's direct personal dealings with Obama. Instead, it's riddled with unsourced second-hand anecdotes and generalizations so broad it malfunctions even an opinion piece. Unless I missed the article he wrote about Bush II doing the exact same things.

I guess it takes a victim of "idea disease" to know one.


rocktivity

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Wed Dec 14, 2011, 09:16 PM

114. I actually like his professorial tone. I wish he'd use it more, to explain how wrong Republicans are

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 02:43 AM

121. Ouch.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kpete (Original post)

Thu Dec 15, 2011, 06:15 AM

123. No specifics, gossip from unnamed staffers, and a parting wish for Obama to be more like Hillary

Yeah, this is a useful analysis.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread