Americans Are Outraged Because in Voting for Obama, They Thought They Were Rejecting Bush

[kpete]

In 2008, Americans voted for Obama for two primary reasons: 1) to embrace his health care and economic stances in the wake of the financial collapse, and 2) to reject President Bush's hawkish national security and foreign policies.

Of those who voted for Obama, 87 percent strongly disapproved of the war in Iraq, 90 percent claimed McCain would continue Bush's policies, and only 13 percent found the War on Terror to be the election's most important issue (compared with an incredible 86 percent for those who voted for McCain).

Meaning: the greatest divide between voters was the issue of terrorism and how our country was addressing it, both domestically and abroad.

Meaning: many Americans who voted for Obama were reacting in various forms to the war in Iraq, The Patriot Act, and a myriad of perceived constitutional abuses in the name of fighting terror.

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

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/06/08/1214650/-Americans-Are-Outraged-Because-in-Voting-for-Obama-They-Thought-They-Were-Rejecting-Bush

[Autumn]

1. You tell people you are going to do something and turn around and do the

opposite, well yeah any thinking person is going to be pissed.

[Laelth]

14. What's more, Obama could end this program with the stroke of a pen.

As President, he controls the executive branch. He could order the NSA to stop collecting all this data on American citizens. All he would have to do is sign the order.

Why he has not done so is the question.

-Laelth

[Autumn]

31. Yes he could, and said he would.

That he hasn't says all that needs to be said.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022968735

[blkmusclmachine]

50. Ignore his words. Watch his actions.

THAT'S where the truth is.

[Life Long Dem]

69. That was 2007

Obama switched his position in July 2008 while still a candidate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/02/us/politics/02fisa.html?_r=1&

[limpyhobbler]

158. So he had the liberal view through the key primaries & then switched to the authoritarian view?

How convenient.

He changed positions after the choice had been narrowed down to a crew of candidates who all agree on the issue. Sounds horrible when you put it like that.

[Doctor_J]

116. He also said he wouldn't enact HC without a public option

Oops! Gotcha!

[tblue]

183. Well if you're gonna be picky.

I KNOW! Drives me crazy. People keep saying I wanted a pony. No. I wanted a Democrat!

[juajen]

218. When Clinton supporters said he did not have enough experience, who

listened? I personally forgive him for having to make corrections in mid-stream, for there lay dragons and quicksand. This is why you have to take promises made as, perhaps, instead of absolute. Grow up, people.

Are any of you among the idiots that say he is just another Bush? If so, I feel sorry for you.

This man, I believe, is a good man. That is perhaps the greatest characteristic a President should have, in addition to having the ability to make corrections midstream when needed. He is a very smart man, also, and this is another characteristic sorely needed in the man or woman who will lead our nation, and perhaps the world. Perfection is just not possible, nor is pleasing disparate people.

[LovingA2andMI]

155. Exactly!!

Just one Executive Order away to the National Security Agency and all this mess would have been stopped in its' tracks!

[L0oniX]

41. Are you saying that the Obama church of worshippers don't think? OMG!

...I think I agree with you.

[xtraxritical]

143. So who're ya' gonna vote for next time, Diogenes?

[Amonester]

192. Lemme guess...

Ralph nadeR

[Cha]

76. Yeah, things can change with National Security.. any "thinking person"

can understand that.

[Autumn]

79. It's the same as it ever was.

Whatever.

[Cha]

90. And a "whatever" to you too, Autumn.

[rhett o rick]

127. So you are telling us that "things can change" and not that things did change?

We all know that things can change, even candidate Obama knew that when he made his promises.

But this "thinking person" doesnt believe things changing relative to national security is the reason Pres Obama now embraces Bush's policies. IMO it's very important to the Ruling Elite to have lots of power under the control of the President.

[Plucketeer]

164. What you boldly proclaim you're GOING TO DO,

and what you actually DO DO - or don't..... is what makes you a person of integrity or a LIAR.

[sabrina 1]

184. That was certainly Bush's excuse too. 'Everything changed after 9/11' and he got the Patriot Act

passed because 'things can change with National Security'. We're still not safe, they tell us, there is no end to the great WOT which means we will never be safe. What will take since all their policies have failed so badly, according to them? We've killed so many people no one can even count the numbers, men, women and children, THAT was supposed to make us safe? Any 'thinking person' knew that was a lie. We've tortured and detained people for years, and still we're not safe, according to them. They've spied on the American people for years and persecuted Whistle Blowers, they've droned people to death thousands of miles away and still we're not safe.

They've spent billions, maybe more, to make us safe, and still we're not safe.

So since we are less safe than ever, we MUST be or we wouldn't need to keep killing people and spying on people and spending billions and billions of dollars, can someone please tell us, what rational reason is there to continue to repeat everything that failed to 'keep us safe' over and over again

Do they think we are all stupid

This whole terror/national security garbage has been a very expensive scam, both in lives and money. More people have died from lack of health care than any terrorist could dream of over the past dozen years.

We have been scammed and still there are a few who continue to believe the same old 'national security' bs.

[JEB]

216. That is exactly right. What a scam!

They are draining the treasury and getting an iron grip on the great unwashed citizens. It's going to be very difficult to pry their cold dead hands from that kind of power.

[BrotherIvan]

222. This should be an OP

You ask the essential, all-important question: where does it end? If we keep allowing the slow slide we are in 1984 in no uncertain terms. Perpetual war and servitude is the only outcome of this path.

[warrant46]

150. They voted against Bush and got BUSH LITE instead

[cheapdate]

175. I understand being pissed,

but I also recall Obama as a candidate and as a president repeatedly vowing that as president he would use all available means to protect the United States from terrorist attacks. He said this, like, a lot.

[freedom fighter jh]

195. But much of what's he's doing is making us less, not more, safe from terrorist attacks.

Drone strikes and torture of our prisoners create enemies.

Secrecy in government and punishment for talking about what government is doing in your name if you do find out, these things limit citizens' participation in government -- which is supposed to be government by the people -- and thus open the door to drone strikes and torture.

This voter, at least, did not interpret the constitutional law professor's promise of protection to mean a continuation of the infringement on the rights of U.S. citizens as well as of others around the world. At least in 2008 I didn't.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. The problem isn't the guy in the chair.

The problem is the freedoms we threw away. The guy in the chair is doing exactly what we asked him to do.

[titanicdave]

24. Exactly....

Those who are pissed at President Obama should think again and just look at all the things that are so much better than in the days of Cheney-Bush.....wake up people...the law is what the law is and President Obama is doing an outstanding job all the way around.

[RC]

40. Outstanding job for whom?

Most certainly not for us. Look at all the Republicans he has appointed. Look at the all the bu$hit he has continued from the last administration. The tax breaks, the wars, the surveillances... Look at what he campaigned on vs what he has done. This is not all Congresses doing.
I enthusiastically voted for Obama the first time. I have been mostly disappointed ever since. I did not vote for a mostly honest Republican, but that is what we got.

[sabrina 1]

55. The law is the law because Democrats like Obama shamefully voted for it. You clearly do not recall

the outrage when Congress changed a law that Bush broke when HE was caught using the Telecoms to spy on the American people, making it retroactive, so clear to those who had any functioning brain cells at the time, to safe Bush and his Telecoms spies from prosecution.

Obama spoke out eloquently, at first, against that 'adjustment' to the law and we who supported him were proud. But then, inexplicably at the time, though not any more, he turned around and voted for it, saving Bush, but though only technically, from being a law-breaker.

We had a law that made these actions illegal, it worked for decades until Bush violated it. Were you always in favor of spying on the American people btw? Or this something new we are seeing now from some Democrats? Did you oppose Church, support Nixon? Because this is what that law was about, to prevent another Nixon, and then we got worse than Nixon and this time we had a law that could have put him out of office, BUT, Congress intervened and saved him, with help from THIS president.

'The law is the law'!! Really? The 'law was the law' when African Americans were denied basic human rights, would you have said 'the law is the law' then? Are you really of the opinion that just because something gets passed into law, no matter how bad it is, it becomes acceptable??

Thankfully we have had people throughout history who do not agree that we are obliged to obey bad laws, otherwise would still be a British Colony. Those 'terrorists' weren't of the opinion that the laws that diminished their status as human beings, that made vulnerable to abuses, should be respected because the 'law is the law'.

Please find another excuse for this, 'the law is the law' just doesn't pass. The Patriot Act, do you support that too, it is the law after all.

[xtraxritical]

146. The FBI and police departments have been spying on Americans for years and years.

They need a warrant to do that just like the President does. I support the Patriot Act until my elected representatives decide it's not required anymore. I did not vote for the President to micro-manage him. I know he has much much more relevant information than all the "outraged" posters here. BTW people, the police will physically enter you home anytime they want to, if you want to pursue your constitutional rights you can and good luck with that.

[sabrina 1]

190. 'I support the Patriot Act'. That says it all to me. Did you support it when it Bush was president?

Did you know that your 'elected officials' are there to represent the PEOPLE? That THEY are supposed to listen to the people? Why would you wait to be told by an elected official what to think about the Patriot Act? We don't need them to tell us, we knew how bad it was, what an attack on our democracy it is, from way back during the Bush era. It is still bad, it did't improve when Bush went away.

Your elected representatives have a 6% approval rating right now so a very small minority of the people feel as confident in them as you do.

Violations of Constitutional rights should ALWAYS be met with OUTRAGE. Every politician takes an oath to 'defend and protect the CONSTITUTION. THAT is the MOST Relevant information anyone, politician or otherwise needs as a guide to whether they are doing right or wrong.

The Constitution is still the law of the land and when it is discarded, dismissed, ignored and overs-ruled, every person in this country has an obligation to try to stop such abuses. We sure tried when Bush was president, and some of us will remain consistent and continue to do so.

[tomp]

199. wow, talk about a "good german."

shameful ignorant acquiescence to power. unfortunately WE get what YOU deserve.

[DissidentVoice]

187. I'm thinking it wouldn't have been so bad to have remained British...

After all, Canada, Australia and New Zealand did...and they evolved from colonies, to self-governing Dominions, to independent Commonwealth Realms, with, dare I say it, because I know no system is perfect, more responsible governance, no damned Electoral College and health care for all.

[sabrina 1]

191. Lol, you've got a point, even Britain has, or had before Blair, a fairly responsive government.

[dbackjon]

209. Without America breaking away

Doubtful Britian, Canada etc would be the democracies they are today.


When the US broke away, Britain was a current Republican's wet dream

[DissidentVoice]

233. At least they had the Magna Charta nt

[sulphurdunn]

73. What things?

He talks the talk. He doesn't walk the walk. That's the difference. He hasn't done shit for me or mine or those for whom I have responsibility, but we sure did plenty for him. We helped elect him twice. We deserved what we got for being so credulous, I suppose.

[kardonb]

104. pissed

BRAVO . Titanicdave ! I am getting pissed about all these phony "outrages " . No one was Outraged when buschboy started all this . Enough already of all these pseudo-scandals !

[laundry_queen]

107. Absolute bullshit and I'm going to call you out on that

there was enormous outrage here on DU when Bush did this. HUGE. People were pissed. Was it a 'phony outrage' then? huh? Maybe you need to take a gander over to DU2 and read the archives.

[quakerboy]

131. WTF are you talking about?

Im fairly sure that most on this website were royally pissed at Bush, for his spying among many other things, through his whole illegal occupation of the whitehouse.

Maybe not some of those who signed up later purely to shill for Obama. But the rest of us were. If I recall correctly, that's exactly why this website was created in the first place.

[Doctor_J]

179. No one was outraged????

You apologists have completely gone nuts. Everyone bitched except dinos like Sen Obama.

[progressoid]

194. no one was outraged when bushboy started all this??!!

[MadrasT]

207. "No one was Outraged when buschboy started all this"

That is possibly the most ridiculously false statement I have ever seen posted on DU.

[Phlem]

140. "President Obama is doing an outstanding job all the way around."

I'm still waiting for meaningful, livable wage jobs to be created or returned. I've been out of work for a long time and I've heard all about republican obstruction (it's not a new thing and it was called stonewalling around 30 years ago) and I'll have to say no, he hasn't done a good job in that respect. We don't need anymore trade agreements and we need to stop the gushing of "meaningful" jobs in the US to other countries.

I've been fortunate to freelance in my field but when my job started getting shipped overseas I knew the future looked bleak. To say we don't have skilled workers here in the US is complete bullshit. Now most of my colleagues and their colleagues are looking for jobs. There's a massive group of talent out there in the tech industry and elsewhere who can't find livable wage jobs in their respective fields.

The trend I'm starting to see now is that there are no more full time jobs in my field (that I put myself through college for). When the company has new business, your hired temporarily at first with no benefits. If the job lasts more than a year your laid off, and if your lucky you get hired back on as a temp after 3 to 4 months of no employment, if your lucky. Meaning it has nothing to do with the lack of talent. They have a lot to choose from.

I'm not surprised underpaid service jobs are the growth industry now.

-p

[xtraxritical]

147. Your troubles are from Congress not from the President.

[Phlem]

149. You mean

the guy that puts pen to paper on free trade agreements is not my problem?

-p

[dbackjon]

208. So that is a fucking excuse?

Well, I know our guy has broken promises, failed to restore the 4th amend, but hey, the other guy would have been worse.


YOU WAKE THE FUCK UP. This type of blind allegience is what allows this shit to continue to happen.


Is Obama doing better than McCain/Romeny? Yes.

Is he outstanding? fAR, FAr from it.

[Autumn]

38. I'm going to guess you didn't read the article

because those are the reasons I voted for him. I didn't not ask, nor do I support him continuing the policies of Bush.

He sure as hell isn't doing what I asked him to do. Nobody threw those freedoms away, that fuckerbush and his ilk took them.

[blkmusclmachine]

51. Stole them.

And the cheerleaders here don't want you to think.

Think.

[lumberjack_jeff]

225. Here's whom to blame.

http://educate-yourself.org/cn/patriotact20012006senatevote.shtml

The original act passed 98:1. It was reauthorized 89:10 in 2006. Most of those senators were reelected to office twice since then.

That's a mandate. Americans are so terrified that they want people to read their mail, listen to their phone conversations and log their website habits.

The righteous indignation is bullshit. If we don't really want the CIA to read our mail, we should commit to vote against every fascist asshole who voted to support it.

[grahamhgreen]

66. Horse hockey. It ain't the rapist, it's the dress she wore. Blame the victim, no.

[lumberjack_jeff]

85. Victims my ass. Americans elected all those assholes who voted for the patriot act.

"Please, Puhleaseee! Please just keep us safe, we'll do anything it takes!!!"

[grahamhgreen]

232. No, you are very wrong. The elected representatives did not represent the will of the people.

[Bluenorthwest]

84. No one asked for this, we were not even told. Senator Wyden from 2011:

May 26, 2011

M. President, the United States Senate is now preparing to pass another four-year extension of the USA Patriot Act. I have served on the Intelligence Committee for a decade, and I want to deliver a warning this afternoon: when the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry. And they will be asking senators, “Did you know what this law actually permits?” “Why didn’t you know before you voted on it?” The fact is that anyone can read the plain text of the Patriot Act, and yet many members of Congress have no idea how the law is being secretly interpreted by the executive branch, because that interpretation is classified.

It’s almost as if there are two Patriot Acts, and many members of Congress haven’t even read the one that matters. Our constituents, of course, are totally in the dark. Members of the public have no access to the executive branch’s secret legal interpretations, so they have no idea what their government thinks this law means.
http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/in-speech-wyden-says-official-interpretations-of-patriot-act-must-be-made-public

[lumberjack_jeff]

91. Wyden is right. Yet voters elected assholes who disagreed with him.

Scared voters don't really want to know all the unimportant details.

The simple fact that it is legal is proof that Obama is doing exactly what the cowards want him to do.

[Bluenorthwest]

110. Voters also elected Wyden, Merkely, Udall, Feingold and many others who have attempted to

bring some transparency to these programs. You fail to note that fact. If you are intent on blaming the voters for what even their elected officials don't know, you should at least note that millions upon millions and entire States voted for officials who have been doing the right thing, elected and re elected them. So maybe some of you are cowards demanding babysitters, just don't think you will get by claiming this is a universal thing, this tea bagging and blue dogging. We are not all Tea Dogs and Blue Baggers.

[tomp]

201. secrecy is a HUGE problem.

the very things we need to know are the things that the govt refuses to allow to be known. it's related to the media not doing its job. how can americans make reasonable judgments without the appropriate information? well...one way is to judge historically. look at the things that once were secret that have now been revealed. the trend therein is sufficient grounds for a priori distrust of govt as a whole. and this is true of all sectors, domestic, economic, legal, military, and intelligence. that is my position and i have yet to be surprised by anything the govt does or proved wrong in my assessments.

[cheapdate]

168. Obama should have the conviction to go in front of the American people

and say that although congress authorized the use of special measures designed to prevent terrorist attacks against the United States, there are just some things he is not willing to do to protect the country.

That's what most American's want to hear, right?

<sarcasm off>

[dotymed]

204. That is real pretzel logic....I am being nice.

Obama is doing exactly what "we" asked him to do? REALLY?
I assume you are part of the 1%, that is the only way that your statement could be even close to true.

He is doing SHIT for average Americans and all for corporations. That is not exactly true, by keeping and "enhancing" bushco policies, he is doing a lot to average Americans. NONE of it good. Unless you consider a couple of half-assed measures good.

[lumberjack_jeff]

224. It's an uncomfortable reality that we elected (and then largely re-elected) the people who did this.

I don't consider the status quo good at all, but it's happening because it is legal. More than legal... it is in fact what congress explicitly requested.

And I'm definitely not a 1%-er nor will I or my offspring ever be.

[zeemike]

3. We did get fooled again...

The message is to America....you cannot reject Bush.
K&R

[Octafish]

4. American Politics = Catch-22

No matter which lever one pulls, out pops a pol who supports the needs of the wealthy and the aims of the military industrial complex.

[premium]

5. K&R. nt.

[cantbeserious]

10. Obama - Protecting The Status Quo Daily - Hope He Enjoys Our Telephone Conversations

eom

[LovingA2andMI]

156. Listen Good President Obama As I Know Your NSA Is Reading This --- As I Type!!

Lucky you're a lame duck because after this, I would never vote for you to be dog-catcher, anywhere.

Also, if my State Democratic Federal House and Senate Representatives don't take a strong stance against this "data-mining" BS, I'll just skip this area of the ballot in 2014 and guess what....I won't be the only one!!

Locality and Statewide, I will more likely than not vote for Democrats but only after truly examining on they feel about my Civil Liberties, U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights being threw out the window....by you!

President Obama....although you're not running for office again....you so do have coattails on this issue and they are not pretty for your fellow Democrats (especially in the U.S. House & Senate) at all.

[wilsonbooks]

153. Yes. One party the corporate party.

[arely staircase]

6. Americans are not outraged

nt

[Laelth]

15. You forgot the sarcasm tag. n/t

-Laelth

[arely staircase]

16. "Americans" implies most or a majority are outraged, or that more than usual are outraged

there is no evidene of than whatsoever.

[Laelth]

17. I see what you mean now.

Perhaps sufficient "evidence" of outrage will emerge soon. We shall see.

-Laelth

[arely staircase]

20. he has an 83 percent approval rating among democrats, so it isn't emerging yet.

http://www.pollingreport.com/obama_job2.htm#CBS

[Laelth]

22. I'm not worried about Obama's chances of being re-elected.

But, I know what you mean. We'll see if his numbers take a hit. I'd prefer it, though, if he would just do the right thing and not spend quite so much time worrying about his numbers.

-Laelth

[graham4anything]

26. +a zillion.

It's smears and bogus faux issues in an attempt to fracture the democratic party like happened
in 1952 and 1968 and 1980 and 2000

except nobody is falling for it

[xtraxritical]

72. It's old and not news like Benghazi, IRS, AP, Reston and what ever I'm forgetting.

It's just more Daryl Issa throwing things at the wall to see what sticks. It's working well on the "outraged" youngsters here.

[freedom fighter jh]

197. What's Reston? nt

[bvar22]

98. Binary Choice polls...

...don't really tell you very much about what Americans are thinking,
or what they really want.

[Doctor_J]

121. It's not the Dems he has to worry about

but a cursory reading of the link at the OP would have told you this. But it is only readable outside of The Bubble

[LovingA2andMI]

159. Here's a REALITY for ya!

President Obama is a LAME DUCK. He does not ever have to be elected to any position, again.....

But, his fellow Democrats in the Senate and House do....

Along with State Democrats in offices Nationwide....

The State Democrats might be Okay from this NSA Scandal because they are FAR REMOVED from it. Voters can just in most cases call their state-based legislative offices, ask how they feel about our Bill of Rights, U.S. Constitution and Presumption of Innocence until proven guilty by law and vote according to their answers on these manners.

Yet, Barack Obama's coattails WILL INDEED be felt by Democrats in the U.S. House and Senate on this NSA Scandal in 2014....and if they don't have the right answer along the lines of, "Yes, President Obama did engage in overreach of Americans Civil Liberties Rights -- and I'm supporting legislation to amend the Patriot Act -- RIGHT NOW".....

It will not be pretty!

Have fun with your Cheer-leading efforts until then....

[dotymed]

205. A VIABLE (NON-CORPORATE) THIRD PARTY IS OUR ONLY CHANCE.

I am sure this will be removed but unless we start a non-corporate party and get some real for-the-people candidates, we are doomed. Either to a fascist police state full of serfs and a few masters or a civil war.

data-mined 6/9/2013

[Doctor_J]

117. No it doesn't imply "most or a majority"

it means a large chunk of the Obama voters, and you're an idiot if you don't realize this.

[arely staircase]

130. obama is extremely popular with democrats - 83 percent approval

so large chunk would be wrong too.

[Doctor_J]

182. which has nothing to do with the op

The Indies and undecided voters and first timers, who don't declare a party and showed up in droves in 2008, now realize they were lied to, and that no change is coming.

[Ava]

7. I think it's even worse for my generation

Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 01:22 PM - Edit history (1)

Obama was the first President we voted for in 2008 and it wasn't about voting against Bush. He really gave us hope for a new way forward and a new type of politics. He talked about valuing education and human rights (health care for all being a human right). He talked about ending the wars and bringing our troops home and closing Guantanamo Bay. His subsequent presidency has crushed much of that hope and instead given us a healthy dose of reality and pessimism that our parents already possessed. I know many people my age who didn't even vote in 2012 because they were so disgruntled. Young people who are outraged are so because they thought in voting for Obama they were voting for campaign trail 2008 Obama. Turns out we weren't.


*edit to add "who" to "young people who are outraged"... apparently I need to be very careful with my wording here.

[cantbeserious]

8. Buyers Remorse Is An Ugly Revalation - Turns Out That Obama Was An Ad Campaign For The Status Quo

eom

[graham4anything]

88. Pictures of matchstick men

[arely staircase]

19. could you please quantify "young people are outraged"?

obama has an 83 percent job approval rating among democrats. i can't find numbers by age groups right now but i assume you have them.

[Ava]

29. I never said "all young people" or "most young people" even

I'm talking about in my experience as a young person who speaks with other young people about Obama and our disappointment with him. I'm not a pollster, and I'm not a reporter telling you facts. I'm telling you the sentiment that I and others that I know feel. Last I checked this is an online discussion forum for fuck's sake.. not a formal forum or panel. Seeing several of your responses here gives the impression that you need to chill the fuck out.

Personally I couldn't care less what the polling says or what polling among "democrats" says. I don't know many young people who identify as democrats anymore, and I'm talking about very liberal young people. Hell, I shy away from the term for myself as the party is more center-right than my personal beliefs.

[arely staircase]

45. all the young people i know are dems and are happy with the president

so anecdote is as anecdote does, i suppose.

[blkmusclmachine]

52. Rah Rah Sis boom bah.

[arely staircase]

56. such bon mot

[blkmusclmachine]

60. Fooled ya!

[choie]

82. guffaw!!!

"I sure put one over on those suckers on DU"...

[bvar22]

132. Check Out WHERE old arely staircase found that photo he is so proud of.

It is linked back to a site called "Conservative 50 Plus Alliance, and here is a little about what they say at Conservative 50 Plus.

"Conservative50Plus delivered over 60,000 petitions to the US Supreme Court calling for the repeal of Obamacare."

If you have a strong stomach, plug "Conservative 50 Plus" into google, and go take a look.
I refuse to post a link to that site on DU.



I ReHosted the photo because I refuse to link DU back to a Conservative Cess Pool like
Conservative 50 Plus where old Arely found that photo.


[font size=3]Go Ahead and Spy on Americans.
What are they going to do?
Vote for a Republican?
Hahahahahahahahaha![/font]



"What are they going to do,
Vote for a Republican"
is the punch line for a lot of jokes at the White House these days.

[dotymed]

206. Really?

What a crock of shit unless the young people you refer are your kids.

[arely staircase]

211. nope, college age and otherwise twenty somethings, and they love our president

worked hard for him on the last campaign and would do it again. i just showd a couple of them your post and they are rolling with laughter.

[Dragonfli]

123. You don't need to justify yourself to the newbe Ava. As a well known "young person" here

You were intelligently speaking out against bad policy when that person was still searching for a new Idol to replace it's old David Cassidy teen beat poster on the wall.

You are well respected here, not for your years, but for your intelligence and convictions.

When I first read you you were too young to vote yet spoke with passion and truth about issues in a way superior to anything being said by the seasoned talking heads. If I recall correctly, you even were threatened by some right wingers for speaking your truth publicly, your courage, intelligence and integrity are known to many, brush that flea off your arm, it is nothing more than a nuisance with the ability to idolise and type at the same time.

[JaneyVee]

25. Young people are outraged? That's where his highest approvals come from, combined with

the fact that a GOP study just found out that Obama's presidency basically turned an entire generation into progressive voters. If young people are outraged it's at the Republican party.

[blkmusclmachine]

53. We're all Republicans now.

[Doctor_J]

124. Great! We will sweep just like we did in 2010 then!

[bvar22]

134. I was just about to point that out.

First, they want to blame the "stupid voters" (everybody but themselves) for the Failures of Leadership in 2010.

THEN, they want to whistle past that graveyard by saying they are unconcerned because the President has a high approval rating among those who claim they still approve.

[font size=1 color=gray]OH....my brain......it hurts....

[Doctor_J]

181. don't forget how they despise"the left"

We are so tiny that we can be ignored but God forbid we don't show up and vote for dinos, we're suddenly big enough to swing an election

[fredamae]

70. Obama gave Hope to

just about everyone....young, mid and old. His perfectly worded rhetoric, however, could have and in retrospect Should have raised many "red flags".
He was well vetted by some and they did warn, but were labeled "Angry Hysterical Hillary Supporters" and worse.

In some cases we could have listened to what he didn't say for other clues.

In many ways, while he was talking, we heard what we wanted to hear as he basically outlined exactly what he was going to and ultimately did do.
In my very humble opinion he masterfully Exploited our weariness, anger, pain, fear--our total rejection of the BushCo Admin--to his benefit as a politician aiming to win a contest.

I was (then) a Hillary supporter--but willingly jumped on to the Obama bandwagon, like a "good little Dem" post the primaries.
It didn't take long for the "mirage of hope" to disappear shortly after his inauguration after the first couple of "cave ins" to the GOP.

Since then? I officially left the Dem Party after 54 years of dedication and support. To remain registered as a Dem, imo, somehow approves of what they have become and I don't.
If nothing else, this President has awakened my awareness to look at All Dems with great scrutiny-I finally admitted what Clinton did--sure the economy was good--but I also could no longer excuse Clintons Damage and the "set-up" for BushCo---Some of the more nefarious..NAFTA/CAFTA/DOMA/FCC Deregulations and the Repeal of Glass-Steagall.
I learned that no matter what a candidate claims to be - Dem/GOP/Ind/TP/Libertarian etc--we Must look deeper in their past-see what they've supported, Votes, who they've worked for, successes, failures, papers, interviews, books, people they associate with and many etcs.
If we've learned nothing from history and indeed our own most recent history? We've learned there are masters with the spoken word...and being impatient, hopeful, angry etc--gets in the way of a calm, cool, collected, informative and factual vetting process. We must stop "rationalizing and excusing" Dems failures and bad votes--Hold them just as accountable as we do "non-Dems"-We must learn to listen to what they don't say and what they do say while trying not to say it--the answers oft times lie there. We must become skeptical, critical realists if we are going to make better choices in the future and we absolutely Must Never "Settle" for the lesser of 2 evils.
The way things are right now--Both major parties decide Who they will run--We Don't. Their choices are presented to us as a "take or leave it--and you'll take it because the other guy is really fucked up"
This Dem Party is Nothing like the "old School Dems"--They;ve abandoned the values and principals of the Dem Wing of the Dem Party and today call us "Fucking Retarded" and with nasty under-tones call us "Liberal".
Todays Dem Party is More to the Right than the GOP was in the 60's.
Unless and until we face this harsh reality nothing will change, imo.
We simply must replace about 75 Senators and roughly 395-400 in the House with actual non-partisan, sensible, common sensed, unconnected to wall street et al folks. Folks who believe In America And Americans at the Same time--Not just well monied self serving Corporatists. And That will be done by "us" if it ever is to be.

[DonCoquixote]

166. with all due respect

If you were a liberal, what made you think Hillary would govern as one? Her record in the senate? I can support your wishes for old school dems, but the Clintons were never those, and unless she changes between now and 2016,she still will NOT be.

[DissidentVoice]

188. No, the Clintons were never old school Dems

They were/are products of the odious DLC.

President Clinton rolled over and played dead on health care in 1994. I almost voted for Ross Perot in '96 because of that.

[fredamae]

215. I know

but I was still blissfully in "Unawareland" back then.

[fredamae]

214. I was a Lot more

naive' back then....I had yet to accept (pull my head out) about many things political then.
Yes, I admit I was "blindly stupid".

Part of it was fully emotional after coming off 8 years of BushCo--Clinton looked real good.

I was still willing to rationaize, forgive and ignore.
I was still willing to vote against my own best interest---
If Hillary emerges as one of the Dem Leaders "pick" on our behalf for 2016? I can't support her.
We need change and that is Not rinsing and recycling "old "21st century dems/new dem coalition/third way" ideology, imo.

[LovingA2andMI]

160. I wish you could have been born earlier....

And voted for President William Jefferson Clinton....I voted for him twice too and have NEVER REGRETTED MY VOTE!

My biggest beef with former President Clinton was NAFTA and he has said in retrospect, this was not the best law he signed.

President Clinton never made me feel I was a potential terrorist, criminal or that as a American -- The Bill of Rights and US Constitution was not worth the paper it was written on by the Founding Fathers.

Only Barack Obama has done that....because he promised in 2007, to be different from George W. Bush when it came to these manners....but he's not.

Also, as a "young person" you have every right to be "outraged"!!!

[dennis4868]

169. Wait!

President Obama is wiretapping domestic calls without a warrant like Bush did? That's news to me.

It's fun to read so many paranoid and hyper emotional posts here at DU. Most people here don't even understand the specifics of the NSA program. They just hear surveillance and go ape shit.

[LovingA2andMI]

173. WAIT!!!

If the program was NOTHING TO BE WORRIED ABOUT at all....why did the President who told us in 2007 he believed in TRANSPARENCY....avoid telling the truth about his NSA SPYING ON ALL AMERICANS --- not just the suspected terrorists like George W. Bush -- and Bush's actions were not right either -- the Patriot Act --HELLO!

Maybe because if we listened closely, he already did. Shame on me....fool me once. Shame on you....2014 is around the corner and holding on to the U.S. Senate or overtaking the House for President Obama's fellow Dems will be that much harder.

?t=1m52s

But I suspect State House and Senate Democrats or Democratic Governors and potential governors far removed from this NSA BS....have nothing to worry about.

Enjoy some popcorn ----

[dennis4868]

174. I just made a point

That there is no evidence Obama is violating FISA by wiretapping domestic calls without a warrant like Bush. People here stated that Obama is following all Bush policies. That's obviously a lie. People here are hyper emotional now and facts mean nothing. That's the point I was making

[Skittles]

9. um.....those of us who were paying attention knew better

[cantbeserious]

11. Right You Are - Kudos

eom

[Ava]

12. it's funny how this news comes out

And suddenly people are outraged. Meanwhile Obama has been letting us down, with both foreign and domestic policies, for quite a while.

[graham4anything]

30. hasn't let me down once. I don't care nor follow Ron and Rand Paul and what they think.

[Ava]

33. Nor do I

So i'm confused as to why you would reference them

[graham4anything]

36. They are part of team Bush. Looking to fracture. And NO Obama core supporter is outraged.

and I personally am looking to continue the Obama agenda forever and a day.

The linear line goes from Lincoln to LBJ to Carter to Obama
and I am sure, somewhere, there probably were people who didn't like everything Lincoln or LBJ did either.
(not to mention how FDR who seems to always be the meme of the day, seems to be forgiven for entering the war
years and years too late after who knows how many died, and well, what he did to the Japanese was quite not in keeping with
his legend either).
(and it goes without saying Truman wasn't perfect either, far, far from it).

it is after all, in 2013, all about Bush's Paul's and Guns, guns, guns and the NRA.

which is why there has been one debunked smear after another after another after another.

[Dragonfli]

126. You don't know shit about Ava, she is no "team Bush" player, the opposite in fact

You sound so old and foolish addressing Ava the way you do, she was young and wise before even being able to vote, you appear the opposite in both respects. Read the archives newbe before you insult someone of intelligence and character that can teach old fucks like us more than just a thing or to.

[idwiyo]

135. Don't bother to argue with this poster, ask him instead about "first they came for the rich" :)

[Dragonfli]

136. Check out it's OP newly on the greatest page, worth a few laughs.

[idwiyo]

138. WOW... Thank you for the tip.

[ReRe]

151. Hear! Hear!! n/t

[ctsnowman]

42. Many Democrats on here seem

to think that the only people who are independents are Paulites. Many of us are left of the DLC and vote Democrat against the Cons. To some it's either you are with us all the time or you are against us all the time.

Have a great day and peace.

[John2]

148. I have a more positive

out look than you about President Obama. You have to understand the nature of Politics and the History of this country. Shifts are caused by movements and not done in the short term. You have to change the attitudes in this country and Rome wasn't built in a Day. The President is a Politician and acts like one.

The real power within this country, does not lie with the Executive Branch, but the Legislative and Judicial Branches, dominated by the Republicans. This didn't happen over night, but through three consecutive terms of Republican rule and solidifying their base. That base is in the South, even among young whites. It is still the most segregated region of the country, dominated by white rule. The young people usually vote like their parents. if you want to break the rightwing Policies of this country, then you need a Liberal movement in the Southern Region. Part of that is already happening, but slowly. Frustration, will only hinder it.

I've said many times on this Forum, I do not agree with the President's Foreign Policy, and neither wholeheartedly with his domestic Policies, but that doesn't mean I will abandon him. The reason why, is because he is the best we have at the moment. He has not completely with drawn from Afghanistan, but he has opposition. He has not yet committed to a War in Syria or Iran, because of opposition. If it was not because of his Hesitancy, we would already be in a War, witrh a Republican President. We will already have a court more to the right, if it was a Republican in the Executive Branch, rubber stamping Congress.

Congress is the real culprits. They cause confusion and point everything at the President. It is the same with the media. At the same time, they are trying to rig the Electoral vote, to erase the last line of defense in this country. Put your anger where it would be most productive. It would be most productive if you place it on Congress and the Judicial Branch. It would be most productive if you get more young white people in the South, to break ties with the older generation. If the next candidate is Hillary, or Biden, then they need to be challenged within the Democratic primary, instead of just coronated. A Liberal, need to step up to the plate and run, just like Obama did. If you are young, and so concerned, then why not you run?

[asjr]

202. Very well stated! Add the media to Congress as another culprit.

[GoneFishin]

43. He didn't change parties if that's what you mean.

[freedom fighter jh]

196. Personal Threshold

Each person has a threshold for how much stress their belief system can take before it crashes under the load. We wanted to believe in Obama, because we so wanted deliverance from Bush, so we built Obama up as the hero. It's not easy to take down someone who's a hero in your mind. But after 4+ years of disappointment, a lot of belief systems out there were ready to collapse under one more straw.

[dkf]

13. The smugness of the Bushies on TV pisses me off so damned much. Arggghhhhhgh.

Obama is validating all these policies, not repudiating them and reversing them. WTH? And a constitutional law professor? Are you kidding me? Don't you assume you will get someone with the greatest respect for our rights when you elect an expert on the constitution? Or is it like a freaking tax attorney who knows the laws so they can get around them?

This is not what I voted for, not what I contributed to, not what I canvassed for. It's deceptive and its wrong.

[blkmusclmachine]

54. "Like a freaking tax attorney who knows the laws so they can get around them."

+1

[bhikkhu]

18. The world sucked under bush, in several ways

and to some extent I think people voting for Obama were hoping to bring back the nicer world we had once, or seemed to have had once. Of course, it doesn't work like that.

I guess I'm not outraged because I try to be realistic about how things are, and how human nature is. Obama said that he came into office with a "skeptical eye" toward the NSA and some of the intrusive intelligence programs, but became convinced that they were doing more good than harm, and were necessary. At least its done following the law willingly (rather than grudgingly) now, and everything is done under court supervision and congressional oversight. I think that's sufficient.

[xtraxritical]

77. ^THAT^ I voted for him because I trusted him to do the right things and I think he is.

All this angst and outrage over something initiated by the Bush administration illegally. Then the Bush Congress goes and changes the law and gives Bush "cover". I'll continue to trust the President and have faith that he is much more informed than the outdated and way too late "outraged" ones here. All you "outraged" ones are at best being duped by a Republicon "divide and conquer" ploy and a lot of trolls are fanning your flames. How come you're not "outraged" at Congress?

[Demit]

94. Yeah, you go ahead and trust and have your faith. Me, I'll pay attention to what he DOES.

Faith is what you need to rely on when you can't see. "Trust me" is what charlatans say when they don't want you to see what they're doing.

[xtraxritical]

141. I don't vote for someone to micromanage them and I'm comfortable with the decisions he makes.

FISA warrants are necessary to do anything beyond look at phone numbers and addresses. It's watched over by all three branches of government too. I've been around quite along time and know that the Constitution is not carved in stone. The Constitution is and always will be malleable. The founders could grow and use any type of drugs they wanted too and own slaves. Those rights were "stolen" from us along time ago too. Anybody that does not know that their data is being mined by everyone is really misconceived.

[dennis4868]

170. I'm with you

Good post

[B2G]

21. How many congressmen & judges have something being held over their heads?

Enquiring minds...

[GoneFishin]

44. Sometimes when an otherwise good democrat does something inexcusable

and/or inexplicable I ask myself that same question. I can't help but notice that I started asking myself that question a lot after Carl Rove became a public figure, and I haven't stopped asking it since.

[Le Taz Hot]

105. Then they're compromised

and they need to move out of the public sector. Problem solved. 'Course this has nothing to do with having anything held over anyone's head. Think Occam's Razor.

[xtraxritical]

142. J. Hoover would know, but he's gone now.

[JoePhilly]

23. Americans are outraged?

Um, no.

Part of DU is outraged.

And parts of the media, right and left, need to generate some excitement (eyeballs) during what is an otherwise slow news cycle.

[ucrdem]

28. This American is outraged:

[blkmusclmachine]

59. And the sock puppets come on liberal/progressive websites to blow more smoke about how

30,000 drones surveying your neighborhood, lies about spying on American citizens, evidenceless indefinite detainment and torture, kill lists, massive corruption on Wall Street, attacking working people/unions/public education is all hunky-dorey now that there's some dude who woke up one morning and slapped a "D" after his name is in the White House. NOT. GONNA. HAPPEN.

[ConcernedCanuk]

172. nailed it - "our political process, it's a real scam"

.
.
.

as is ours, sadly.

I believe our Canadian political system is better than the USA's, but not enough to brag about.

"Democracy" is overrated imo.

Think about it this way -

50% of eligible voters exercise the right to vote - if that.

5% of voters that exercise the right to vote (if that) are somewhat cognisant of the issues -

so we are down to possibly 2.5% that know what they are voting for.

And remember, politicians spend enormous amounts of money to put on a good face - advisors to tell them what/what not to say, what to wear, cosmeticians re make-up/haircuts dental work, etc.,

So even the small percentage that have any real knowledge of the issues are swayed by the image of the politician.

I believe the last real leaders with any "balls" in our two countries were Kennedy in the USA, and Chretien in Canada.

But I digress - "democracy" is a fable.

The "people" are not really ruling their own fate.

Oh yes, we have all sorts of organizations trying to do just that - but think about who they are fighting - - - -

OUR OWN GOVERNMENTS!!

Something is wrong with this picture . . .

Most of us spend much more time playing on the net, watching sports/news/sitcoms/movies etc. than we do studying and paying attention to our political process (well duh, it's boring . .)

SO

in the final analysis (imo) - less than 1% of the voting population actually control our countries, and our fates.

Hardly a rule by the "masses" I believe.

AND - the voters that DO control our fates/governments are the ones who can afford them $1000 a plate or more "fundraisers" for wannabe leaders.

while the poor dig in dumpsters for a "decent" meal.

We, as a human race, are pretty disgusting methinks.

If all the species in the World could vote on a specific species to eliminate,

Which species do you think it would be??

Right . . .

u got it.

CC

[DissidentVoice]

189. At least in Canada...

You have things like the vote of no confidence.

You DON'T have the damned Electoral College.

You have more than two parties to choose from, even if one of those (Bloc Quebecois) is dedicated to breaking up Canada.

And...though it's not been used since 1975 in Australia, when Governor-General Sir John Kerr removed Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, you have the "Reserve Powers Of The Crown" exercised through the Governor-General to remove a corrupt Prime Minister.

[Chan790]

32. Well...yeah.

[MotherPetrie]

34. K&R

[Douglas Carpenter]

35. well they should be, but most Americans are not outraged about this. In fact the public has been so

scared of the terrorist threat and rumors of terrorist threat that they essentially demanded it. When the entire Boston Metropolitan area is shut down over two deaths - when it is an enormous scandal to have even one single death related to terrorism and the public is demanding to know who failed and why - the message is established - do whatever you have to do - just stop the threat of terror. If thoughts of pipe bombs don't get them demanding an ever intrusive security state - try dirty bombs - if that doesn't do it - mention mushroom clouds -,OBVIOUSLY - a surveillance state this big invites abuse and is a threat to our liberty - but the American people have been frightened and are demanding it. Someday they may come to regret it. But for now they are demanding it.

[blkmusclmachine]

63. We're all Germans now.

[Bluenorthwest]

87. you keep claiming that the people demanded that which was done without their consent.

Do you make that claim in your social or business life as well? Lack of consent is equal to demand?
Here is one of my Senators in strong disagreement with you:

Statement of Senator Wyden

On Patriot Act Reauthorization

May 26, 2011
M. President, the United States Senate is now preparing to pass another four-year extension of the USA Patriot Act. I have served on the Intelligence Committee for a decade, and I want to deliver a warning this afternoon: when the American people find out how their government has secretly interpreted the Patriot Act, they will be stunned and they will be angry. And they will be asking senators, “Did you know what this law actually permits?” “Why didn’t you know before you voted on it?” The fact is that anyone can read the plain text of the Patriot Act, and yet many members of Congress have no idea how the law is being secretly interpreted by the executive branch, because that interpretation is classified.
http://www.wyden.senate.gov/news/press-releases/in-speech-wyden-says-official-interpretations-of-patriot-act-must-be-made-public

[Douglas Carpenter]

102. please try to grasp the over all point people try to make when they say something

[Bluenorthwest]

108. I do. You claim the people demanded something they were not told about and which this person's

Senator has been raising alarms about for years. When shown what the people's elected voices in the Senate have been saying, rather than comment upon that, you make a rude, pointless personal swipe. One assumes this is for lack of anything to say about the topic.

[Douglas Carpenter]

122. you are complaining about rude personal swipes? my what irony

Of course the public are not literally consciously demanding the surveillance program, But when we have a political culture that has a zero tolerance policy for any acts of terror - Whenever - even one single terror related death of an American occurs anywhere in the world - all hell breaks lose and there is a culture of demanding questions about who is to blame and why - in such a political culture of course a demand is created that everything and anything be done - even intrusive surveillance. This is not how it should be. It is how it is. As long as the public is scared of its own shadow - you will not hear a whole lot of complaints about this program from the majority of people. Just wait and see how many candidates for public office or office holders seeking reelection run on a campaign promise to end this surveillance program. No doubt there will be a few - but very few. If the public stops being afraid - then you will hear screams of outrage and then candidates and elected officials will be calling for its end. Until then the spying will go on and most people will not care. They should care -but they won't as long as fear remains in the air.
.

[Bluenorthwest]

163. Yeah

I showed you my own damn Senator calling for the end of this in 2011 and yet you type this:
"If the public stops being afraid - then you will hear screams of outrage and then candidates and elected officials will be calling for its end".
That's not a discussion, that's you preaching. No need to hear the next performance.

[Douglas Carpenter]

167. as I said a few well - very few - you will see

[xiamiam]

37. my blood boils everytime I hear the words from campaign Obama vs the real Obama

I just don't understand how anyone can justify it. I don't and I never will. Along comes a politician who looked the part and sounded the part and spoke eloquently and I believed him. Ok, I accept responsibility for that now but we just needed an extreme left turn from where we were headed and I believed him. Never again. I cant stand to listen to him. I don't believe a word he says ...not a word.

[blkmusclmachine]

62. Someone LIED.

[Demit]

96. Exactly how I feel. Can't stand to watch him.

We were had.

[LovingA2andMI]

162. He's done with me.....

Believing another one of this lies, ever. "Change we can believe in".... What a liar! While his NSA was secretly spying on my mega-data from my phone calls along with storing/reading everything I write on the internet.

Thank God he's a LAME DUCK as I would not vote for him to be Head Tree Chopper in my community!

[gussmith]

39. Headline

Yes, that headline says it all.

[gulliver]

46. Yes. It says "the thing that is not"...

...and therefore does in fact say it all...about the poster.

[Politicalboi]

47. Tell the complainers to get out the vote in 2014

And give Obama a Dem majority in the house and senate. Obama can't erase EVERYTHING Bush did.

[blkmusclmachine]

49. F U N N Y

[DisgustipatedinCA]

58. Oh...we should just work for our spymasters

My, what an admirable thing to say.

[Hissyspit]

65. And there it is, the argument used to try to shut down any discussion

The discussion about actions and activities of the current Dem administration that may be suppressing turn-out in 2014.

[Cha]

74. No, that wasn't said to shut down discussion. It was good advice if you

want the laws to change then get out and vote.

[Hissyspit]

83. So is letting the President know when he's screwing up.

My mom (a liberal Democrat) to me after she read articles on the NSA (I didn't say anything to her about the issue, she brought it up): "The next President is going to be a Republican if Obama doesn't stop screwing up. I voted for a Democrat to stop this stuff.&quot

There is a certain poster here who whenever he has no counter-argument defaults to "GOTV!" It gets old.

[Cha]

95. And, I have a different opinion than your Mom.

I think the next President is going to be a Dem.

Voting is still key. Mass has an election on June 25th and we'll all pulling for Markey who is ahead but GOTV is what my Massachusetts friends are working on.

[dotymed]

210. Exactly..

It was good advice if you want the laws to change then get out and vote.

For a candidate from neither corporate owned party.

IT IS TIME FOR CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN.

[SlimJimmy]

93. The President could erase many of the past policies with the stroke of a pen, yet

he hasn't done it.

[blkmusclmachine]

48. Fooled ya!

The 1% ain't going anywhere. They own DC.

[blm]

57. Never naive enough to believe he'd be ABLE to end programs institutionalized before

he took office.

[boilerbabe]

67. well i was never naive to think he would WANT to end them. nt

[Zorra]

61. Instead of change, we got more of the same ~ Business, as usual. nt

[blkmusclmachine]

64. IOKIYAD

It's OK If You're A Democrat



The New "Normal"

[Autumn]

99. I was wondering what the hell that stood for

Thanks.

[RBInMaine]

68. TeaLeft irrational purityism. 1 issue doesn't mean he is Bush. And no one is being listened in on.

Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 03:56 PM - Edit history (1)

Hyperbolic TeaLeftism. Yawn.

[burnodo]

71. TeaLeft?

jeez!

[YoungDemCA]

80. Seriously. "TeaLeft", "Professional leftists", the "Where's My Pony?" brigade....

Add that to the list of ad hominem attacks on those who dare to have principles.

[Jamaal510]

101. Having principles

is not the same as falsely equating one president with another over a few issues and venting outrage over some story that broke 7 years ago when there are other important issues to be discussed (such as jobs and Congress voting on food stamps).

[LovingA2andMI]

176. Speaking of almost seven years ago

President Obama said this....about transparency.....which should ironic and eerie as heck in light of his administration NSA reveal....

Listen specifically to the last 10-15 sections of this video.

So does that make him a Tea-Left Liar or was the line "Just imagine what we could do" (with technology) a forewarning in which we failed to listen, because we're all Hopey and Changey?

[Doctor_J]

113. One issue????

Holy shit. Please go to a KoolAid detox center stat. You are so deep in denial it will take Seal Team 6 to extract you. Or Dr. Phil & Dr. Oz together.

[Lunacee_2013]

75. Yep, 100%!

I wasn't expecting a huge change, but I was hoping that this part of bush's policy would be left behind.

[Major Hogwash]

78. We were losing 750,000 jobs a month in October 2008!!!!

So, how is it that fact was just simply forgotten about in that stupid KOS comment?

[davidn3600]

81. So we trade our civil liberties so we can have more McJobs?

[Major Hogwash]

92. You forgot about Sister Sarah already??

The KOS comment was about the 2008 election.

[Cha]

86. Ah yes.. and here's Glenn Greenwald on the bush.. he liked him better.

http://theobamadiary.com/2013/06/06/rise-and-shine-521/

[Bluenorthwest]

97. So his support of Bush on Iraq is damning, but Hagel's is reason to make him Sec of Defense, is that

how it works? Comey supports Bush in very real and direct ways, and that's reason to let him run the FBI, but a pundit who wrote words of support should be held up for mockery for it?
Personally, I think everyone who bought that war and sold it should be excluded from any future leadership role and none should have a shred of my trust. But to claim that it's great to put Republicans in charge of Defense and FBI, Republicans who voted for Iraq, for Bush, worked to elect him takes away the standing to use support of Bush for a time as some point of damnation.
Is Hagel wonderful and Greenwald awful for supporting Iraq for any specific reason? Hagle actually voted for it with a vote that only 100 Americans get to cast.

[Zorra]

100. Ouch! Cha hits a 3 pointer from the top of the key to tie the game in overtime.

Thanks, you just gave me a new perspective on Mr. Greenwald.

Anyone who was not perceptive enough to totally see through what Bush was doing back then has extremely suspect judgment.

And never, ever trust a republican.

[Bluenorthwest]

106. Except for Chuck Hagel, 'cause of some reason. And Comey.....

That's the problem. I don't even read Greenwald since he supported the war. Then again, I'm not appointing nor supporting Republicans who supported the war. I don't get how one can be for Hagel in charge of Defense and have issues with anyone who supported that idiot's tale told poorly.
Not that I think you support those other war supporters, but some sure do. I put much stock in consistency.
I'd also never cite Andrew Sullivan's opinion on so much as a bean casserole.

[Zorra]

129. I simply didn't know that Greenwald supported the war.

His support of Bush and Bush's war now makes everything he writes suspect in my world view. And, like you, I disregard Sullivan's opinions on bean casserole and everything else.

Bringing up that someone supported Bush and his wars is always a good way to point out that their credibility is suspect in my POV.

"I don't get how one can be for Hagel in charge of Defense and have issues with anyone who supported that idiot's tale told poorly."

Agreed, I believe we are totally on the same page here.

[bvar22]

109. So Greenwald agreed with many mainstream Democratic Party contenders...

...for the highest spot in the Democratic Party like John Kerry and Hillary Clinton, and YOU want to use that to condemn him?
...a Good Blue Team Party Democrat like YOU?

Now THAT is a very revealing aspect of your character.

I am willing to give Greenwald permission to agree with the Democratic Party Leadership,
and then change his mind as information becomes available, just like the Democratic Party leadership, except Hillary.
She never changed her mind and STILL goes along with the whole Bush thing about invading Iraq and national Security.
You remember Hillary?
the Democrat that President Obama appointed as his Secretary of State?

[Bluenorthwest]

115. But loves Hagel, who voted for the war and is a Republican

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2301998

And also loves war cheerleader Andrew Sullivan. Dig it:

14. The aritcles I was refering to ..are nothing but slop.

Edited on Mon Nov-23-09 06:40 PM by Cha
I don't use that term lightly.

Just because Andrew Sullivan use to be gop is no reason not to agree with now.

I don't hold grudges against people who aren't always perfect.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x13266#13281

[LovingA2andMI]

165. Oh, they are getting quite desperate now, right CHA?

Should we take away the Freedom of the Press or just the 1st, 4th and 14th Amendments rights in our U.S. Constitution because it would make Barack Obama feel better....or maybe you? That way Glenn Greenwald or anyone else couldn't report ANYTHING negative against President Obama....kinda like how China runs their government, right now!

"The First Amendment (Amendment I) to the United States Constitution prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, impeding the free exercise of religion, abridging the freedom of speech, infringing on the freedom of the press, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances."

"The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause. It was adopted as a response to the abuse of the writ of assistance, which is a type of general search warrant, in the American Revolution. Search and seizure (including arrest) should be limited in scope according to specific information supplied to the issuing court, usually by a law enforcement officer, who has sworn by it. The Fourth Amendment applies to the states by way of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment."

"The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution was adopted on July 9, 1868, as one of the Reconstruction Amendments. Its Citizenship Clause provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling the Supreme Court's decision in Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857), which had held that people of African descent could not be citizens of the United States.[1] Its Due Process Clause prohibits state and local governments from depriving persons of life, liberty, or property without certain steps being taken to ensure fairness. This clause has been used to make most of the Bill of Rights applicable to the states, as well as to recognize substantive and procedural rights."

WOW...(thought in my head -- they're sounding so much like crazed baggers its' downright scary).....:

[HiPointDem]

89. kr

[Jenoch]

103. I first voted for

President Obama to reject McCain. The second time I voted for President Obama to reject Romney.

[Doctor_J]

111. Ding! I have been saying this since the 2010 debacle.

They wanted the entire Republican party repudiated. Instead they got appeasement on every fucking front. They won't vote for Repukes in 2014 - they just won't vote. The disaster will be the same.

[LaydeeBug]

112. I rec'd because I'm mad abt this, but I'd still vote for Obama again. nt

[Doctor_J]

119. People like you and I aren't the problem, LadyBug

we're going to vote and campaign and raise and spend money anyway. It's the disengaged, hopeless, and young people who Candidate Obama energized in 2008 that are discouraged. They have been betrayed so many times by the DINO's and appeasers over the last 4.5 years that they believe - actually they know - that the grand HOPE that they were sold in 2008 is never going to materialize.

[Dragonfli]

133. Ava explains well the effect you describe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2971267

Obama was the first President we voted for in 2008 and it wasn't about voting against Bush. He really gave us hope for a new way forward and a new type of politics. He talked about valuing education and human rights (health care for all being a human right). He talked about ending the wars and bringing our troops home and closing Guantanamo Bay. His subsequent presidency has crushed much of that hope and instead given us a healthy dose of reality and pessimism that our parents already possessed. I know many people my age who didn't even vote in 2012 because they were so disgruntled. Young people who are outraged are so because they thought in voting for Obama they were voting for campaign trail 2008 Obama. Turns out we weren't.

What she hoped for and believed in in 2008
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7660212

As a first time voter, I couldn't be more proud of my candidate
or more hopeful for the future of this great nation. We've had a rough past 8 years, and I've grown up during that time. I just turned 18 last week, and was excited to get my voter ID card in the mail. This campaign has been inspiring from the start. Friends of mine who were never interested in politics before started reading the news and keeping up with the issues. I've seen houses in my small Alabama town with Obama signs, and I've seen pick-up trucks with rebel flags that have Obama bumper stickers.


Tonight I cried watching Obama's special. Part of the reason I cried was because of the touching stories of average Americans struggling to get by during this economic crisis. I think the biggest reason I cried though, is because while this campaign has had a slogan of "yes we can" in reality it is "yes we MUST." We absolutely must elect obama, because if not things are either going to stay the same or get worse. The struggling retired couple, the single Mom with two kids, the Dad that works in a factory and has had his hours cut back, and the middle-class Mom that carries her kids to school and football practice while worrying about paying the bills that we saw tonight shouldn't have to suffer anymore... America shouldn't have to suffer anymore. Tonight I cried because I have hope in this country and in our candidate. Hope won't win this election though, and we MUST make sure to cast our votes and encourage our family members to not stay home on election day.. to get out and vote.

So I'll be casting my first vote next week, along with many other young people. This time we cannot let our candidate down.. we cannot let our country down.

Governing center right after campaigning under a vision the young people embraced but that he himself discarded has taught them to be cynical, an understandable reaction to the bait and switch IMO.

[LaydeeBug]

152. Skittles said mine in post #9...this "news" is not "new", and I certainly witnessed 'teh ponies' bc

it got out of hand. Truly.

But I *still* expected better. His presser on the matter showed how ill at ease he is with this. I am not sure about you, but "modest encroachment" is NOT what I'm looking for...

[ProSense]

114. Well,

"Americans Are Outraged Because in Voting for Obama, They Thought They Were Rejecting Bush"

...damn sure didn't vote for Bush, still reject him and see no similarities between Obama and Bush.

Here's my point (originally posted here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022969079)

What can we all agree on?

It seems to me the outrage is all about proving that President Obama is doing something wrong, not illegal, but controversial. This was the premise of the recent NYT editorial on the NSA issue: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022959738

When Bush was in office, we agreed he sucked, but we also agreed on concrete actions: ending the Iraq war, ending torture, ending illegal spying and enacting laws to end or prevent abuses.

Where are the editorials, petitions, members of Congress pushing, with a similar intensity, for shield laws, repealing the AUMF and fixing or repealing the controversial parts of FISA amendments/Patriot Act?

We all agree that certain things shouldn't be continued, but it seems that there is more focus on fanning outrage directed at the President, proving he's just as bad as Bush, than there is on pushing for solutions.

A USA Today editorial from 2006.

Congress keeps itself, public in the dark on surveillance

Updated 6/14/2006 9:58

With its wiretapping of international phone calls and collecting a database of domestic phone records, the Bush administration is busy watching for evildoers.

Unfortunately, spying on those who pose a threat is not easily separated from spying on everyone else, and no one is watching the Bush administration with equal attentiveness. Despite lots of rhetoric, Congress has offered little to fulfill its duty to act as a check on the executive branch.

Today, six months after The New YorkTimes disclosed that the National Security Agency has been wiretapping international phone calls of U.S. residents without court orders, and one month after USA TODAY revealed that the NSA has been compiling a huge database of domestic phone records, Congress is poised for its first action.

<...>

By explicitly stating that the president might have such authority, Congress not only would fail to guard its constituents' privacy, it would also deepen the risk. Its actions could influence the court's thinking on the legality of the wiretaps. (An earlier version of the bill would have retroactively shielded officials who carried out the program from prosecution, raising the question: If the program is perfectly legal, as the administration insists, why would anyone need amnesty?)...Fireworks between Congress and the White House might light up headlines. But the public remains largely in the dark about government snooping.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2006-06-14-our-view_x.htm

Here's a NYT editorial from 2009:

Editorial

The Eavesdropping Continues

<...>

In a disturbing article in The Times on Wednesday, James Risen and Eric Lichtblau said that Congressional investigations suggest that the National Security Agency continues to routinely collect Americans’ telephone calls and e-mail messages — perhaps by the millions.

<...>

President George W. Bush started violating that law shortly after 9/11 when he authorized the N.S.A. to conduct domestic wiretapping without first getting the required warrant. When that program was exposed by The Times in late 2004, the Bush team began pressuring Congress to give retroactive legal cover to the eavesdropping operation and to the telecommunications companies that participated in it.

That finally happened in the heat of the 2008 campaign. Congress expanded FISA and gave the companies blanket immunity less than a day after the bill was introduced. We doubt if many lawmakers read the legislation. President Obama, who was still a senator at the time, voted for it, even though he had been passionately denouncing illegal wiretapping for months.

<...>

We do not believe that Mr. Obama is deliberately violating Americans’ rights as Mr. Bush did, and it is to his credit that the government acknowledged part of the problem in April. But this nation’s civil liberties are not predicated on trusting individuals to wield their powers honorably. They are founded on laws.

- more -

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/18/opinion/18thu1.html

We need less rhetoric and more action. If the President and Congress agree, have the debate and take action.

[longship]

125. ^^THIS^^

Have to support you, ProSense.

We have to make them change it by electing more people who see these things as outrageous. Who better to do that than the people who agree, but who are being so difficult in these forums on these very topics.

I am shocked by how impolite and nasty DU has become since this broke.

We're Democrats! Let's get together and solve the problem!

[JustAnotherGen]

219. Agreed

Nary a peep from my Representative on this. . .

[randome]

118. I voted FOR Obama, not AGAINST anyone else.

Just because the issues you mention were important to many does not automatically mean that's what everyone was thinking in the voting booth.

[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]

[aikoaiko]

120. What outrage?

[Hissyspit]

139. My mother yesterday:

A liberal Democrat who doesn't read DU said to me after she read a daily newspaper article on the NSA - I didn't say anything to her about the issue, she brought it up: "The next President is going to be a Republican if Obama doesn't stop screwing up. I voted for a Democrat to stop this stuff."

I did discuss the nuances of it with her then, and you can call it outrage or not call it outrage, but it is a real issue.

[aikoaiko]

171. I understand people's disappointment.

I wouldn't call that outrage, but as you say there is a negative reaction from some of Obama's base.

[Doctor_J]

178. funny, most of the apologists call it poutrage every time we

question one of Obama cave ins

[E_A_]

128. Disenchanted

In an interview on The Young Turks, Norm Chomsky questions whether Obama has a "moral center." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/01/noam-chomsky-obama_n_2599622.html

Great article, to me it sums up the entire thing in easy to understand terms.

The economy changed beginning in the 70's so that we now have a concentration of wealth in the hands of a small few.

Since money equals political power the entire country has shifted to the right. The Republicans today are unrecognizable, they are so crazy and extreme. He sees Obama as "basically what would have been called several decades ago, a moderate Republican,,,,,a kind of a mainstream centrist with some concerns for liberal ideas and conceptions, but not much in the way of principal or commitment."

He supported Obama in 2008 but with 'no illusions'. Chomsky makes a lot of sense to me.

I wish I'd had 'no illusions', I wouldn't have been so disappointed.

I believe the only real hope is to get the money out of politics.

I have to say that America is still doing awful things in other countries and here as well. I should have taken more notice when Bush and Cheney were not brought up on any charges.

But definitely Obama was, well, I guess the best we could get considering the unbelievable amount of money it takes to get elected....There is really no need for all the commercials etc., I mean, why not just use the internet? Do we really need to be 'sold' a bill of goods in order to decide on what policies we support...

I dunno, the whole thing is pretty depressing.....

[Malik Agar]

137. Power corrupts...

[rug]

144. He was bitten.

[E_A_]

154. LOL

He was bitten by one of the Undead, and now he is a Walker...

[Skeeter Barnes]

145. People expected better from Obama but they got more of the same.

[roundandroundwego]

157. How about them puppets?

Last edited Sat Jun 8, 2013, 08:49 PM - Edit history (2)

Dare I say what everyone knows to be true yet no one will openly admit? It is not like you haven't been told a gabizillion times before... and even though you have been told a gabizillion times before, nothing will probably change around here. Headinthesanditus will continue.

What will happen, is Democrats(who are now essentially puppeteered by Republicans), will spend the next 20 years repeatedly asking the same dumbass question over and over and over and over... "why is the Democrat acting like a Republican???" "Why is the Democrat acting like a Republican???" "Why is the Democrat acting like a Republican???"

We are outraged.. Shocked I say... this President isn't really a Democrat! How dare he...SHOCKED!!! This President isn't what I voted for... yadda, yadda, yadda... How could he allow the NSA to spy on Americans, yadda, yadda, yadda!!!!

The answer obviously is that the NSA and other groups have been spying on Americans for YEARS. It didn't start yesterday, it didn't start in 2008 under Obama. This creeping erosion of privacy and civil liberties began years ago. The appropriate time to have done something about it, was probably years ago. 9/11 sealed it. The Republicans who are now whining and bleating about Obama's abuses are the very same fucking idiots who used 9/11 to force the Patriot Act on America. Another coincidence of fortunate timing which the cowards in the media didn't examine.

Self-hating idiot Matt Drudge has about 30 links on his site bleating and whining about domestic spying under Obama. Of course Drudge is about 10 years late to the prom. He was for it under Bush and now the Republicans are using this latest in a string of trumped up outrages to go after Obama for something REPUBLICANS STARTED. Democrats of course have fallen into the the trap once again. They saw the trap set, and jumped right into.... obediently in fact. How did Obama not know that by continuing the lies and abuses of Republicans, covering them up, that eventually they would try to frame him up for things they were doing and which they instigated? He knew of course... but now these bastards have got him trapped, so what's a puppet president supposed to do???

Now, apparently the creepy creeping rot has gotten its roots into everything. Into your social media, cell phone, computers, Xbox, EVERYTHING. The technology never really seems to be all that good for stopping terror attacks is it? But it is great if you want to snoop on politicians and Americans and Muslim patsies so you can blackmail them or manuever them into things you want to blame them for.

How about everyone stop fixating their anger on puppets and figure out who the puppeteers are and getting those strings cut so elected representatives can get back to working for the people who voted them in???

Hard to have leaders working for the people when you have a massive international apparatus with no oversight devoted to snooping in everyone's business right? I mean, that's common sense. If you have dozens of corrupt agencies poking around in elected leaders business, you are NEVER going to have a leader working for the people. If you think there is some perfect leader out there who has committed no sin for which he can be compromised and therefore controlled, then YOU ARE A FOOL.

That politician is going to be blackmailed into doing the bidding of whoever holds that power to see and control all... he will be blackmailed or outright threatened. How hard is that to understand? And yet this constant bleating about "Oh, poor us, Obama can't seem to do what we want him to do?" The guy has a wife and kids, and is under constant threat by psychos which are protected by the media and entrenched power establishment... and yet people keep bleating and whining about why his hands are tied on so many issues??? When are YOU going to WAKE UP?

Obviously it would be great for someone, to be in control of blackmailed politicians that have no possibility of ever doing what the people asked them do to. How about instead of incessantly whining and bleating about how Obama, Bush, or Clinton or whoever isn't doing what you voted for them to do, why don't you fucking get to the bottom of WHY??? You think maybe now is the time to ask that question? Or maybe we just go another 30 years of this bullshit.. maybe the problem will just magically go away?

Maybe people should ask the cowardly American media to ask why the fuck their was a mass shooting in Santa Monica California at the same time Obama was there today???? You think the cowards in the media will do some real reporting? Ever heard of Operation Mockingbird? Yeah, exactly... so don't count on it. What a fucking joke. ALL OF IT. And you are trapped in it. And you still refuse to wake up.

[Rhiannon12866]

177. I think that folks here are upset because they hoped that Obama was a liberal

He's not; he's a centrist, same as both President and SoS Clinton. I voted for all three of them, since they're as close to progressives as we're going to get - yet.

[treestar]

161. Maybe they should have realized the government still remains in place?

God, what whiners. What pathetic blubbering victims of nothing. You can still rant insanely about it and no one is going to come and get you. You could even do it in public, not on the internet. Announcing your name, you could say all this stupid stuff and never go to jail.

People need to learn what it's like in other countries.

And they should not have made a saint/angel/God of Obama. They think these posts make them look cool and superior. They make them look pathetic for putting such insane faith in one politician in the U.S. in the 21st century. No President is your savior. The acts of all prior presidents still have some effect, even the earliest ones. It is shameful ignorance not to even try to find out what went on and goes on and jump into this whining victimhood. It looks stupid.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

180. Keep your substandard expectations for the United States to yourself

You may be happy with "better than Uganda" or "not as brutal as Savak", but I demand a little more. What you call whining and blubbering, I call having the spine and the moral fortitude to do what's right. Where do you stand, Treestar?

[DissidentVoice]

185. Why do I feel like scraping the Obama/Biden bumper sticker off my car?

I voted for him enthusiastically in 2008, semi-enthusiastically in 2012, mostly to keep Romney out.

What happened in the interim to dampen my enthusiasm?

1. He didn't close Guantanamo Bay, like he said he would.
2. He made no move to rescind the USA Patriot Act.
3. He did not push for single-payer health care, and caved to Max Baucus on the public option.

Don't get me wrong. I thank God we've had him instead of four years of McSame/Paylin or Rmoney/AynRandRyan.

However, I fear he's just handed the Republican Party the White House and maybe Congress in 2016...with all the effects on SCOTUS, foreign/domestic policy, etc.

I also fear that he's handed the Republicans provable "high crimes and misdemeanours" for impeachment...even though Bush/Cheney did far, far, far worse and they looked the other way.

If we look the other way, we are no better than the sycophantic GOP machine.

[nakocal]

186. If you want change, vote in the midterm elections

Okay all of you crying babies, how many of you stayed at home during the 2010 midterms an let the fucking tea party jackals win because you were mad at the pace of change. If you want President Obama to be more liberal, then give him a more liberal congress to work with. You all need to learn how the government works (that whole three branches thing). And sorry, an executive order is a poor way to do anything, it is not permanent and can be easily overturned by the next administration (who can make the situation much worse).

[Doctor_J]

212. A checklist of lies and propaganda memes

1. how many of you stayed at home during the 2010 midterms an let the fucking tea party jackals win

At DU, probably none

2. If you want President Obama to be more liberal, then give him a more liberal congress to work with

How? He had huge D majorities in 2009-2010 and still governed to the right of Reagan, adopted many of Bush's policies, and reneged on his promises wrt SP Health Care, ending the wars, closing Gitmo, ending sanctioned torture, supporting labor, and cutting SS benefits. How are we going to "give him a more liberal Congress:?

3. You all need to learn how the government works

Congrats. Your the one millionth poster of this stupid meme. We had all 3 branches for two years, and Obama pissed it away by becoming a Republican on Inauguration Day. We all saw how the government works in 2001-2008 - presidents can get what they want.

4. an executive order is a poor way to do anything

It's better than doing nothing, or worse, enacting Republican legislation.

You are a major part of the problem. No matter how far right Obama moves, no matter how many lies he gets caught in, no matter how many promises he breaks, you always find an excuse. When the indies don't show up at the polls next year, look in the mirror and take a good long look at the cause of the disaster.

[bvar22]

223. 2) "give him a more liberal congress to work with"

This one pisses me off more than the rest of the propaganda today.

WE TRIED to do exactly this in the Arkansas Democratic Primary, 2010,
by replacing DINO Anti-LABOR, Anti-healthCare Blanche Lincoln with a Democrat that would work with The President.

Guess what happened?
Our biggest enemy wasn't the Republicans,
or the Conservatives.
Turns out, our biggest obstruction was the Obama White House who pulled out ALL the stops to rescue Lincoln's Failing Primary Campaign.

We did everything right.
White House Resuces Blanche Lincoln's Failing Campaign in Democratic Primary

"So what did the Democratic Party establishment do when a Senator who allegedly impedes their agenda faced a primary challenger who would be more supportive of that agenda? They engaged in full-scale efforts to support Blanche Lincoln. Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure. Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests. The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln — a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just don’t have the votes for.

Ordinarily, when Party leaders support horrible incumbents in primaries, they use the “electability” excuse: this is a conservative state, the incumbent has the best chance to win, and the progressive challenger is out-of-step with voters. That excuse is clearly unavailable here. As Public Policy Polling explained yesterday, Lincoln has virtually no chance of winning in November against GOP challenger John Boozman. And while it would have also been difficult for Halter to beat Boozman, polls consistently showed that he had a better chance than Lincoln did. That’s unsurprising, given how much better non-Washington candidates are doing in this incumbent-hating climate than long-term Washington insiders. And it’s rather difficult to claim that Halter is out-of-step with Arkansas given that they elected him their Lt. Governor. Whatever the reasons Washington Democrats had for supporting the deeply unpopular Lincoln, it had nothing whatsoever to do with electability.

What happened in this race also gives the lie to the insufferable excuse we’ve been hearing for the last 18 months from countless Obama defenders: namely, if the Senate doesn’t have 60 votes to pass good legislation, it’s not Obama’s fault because he has no leverage over these conservative Senators. It was always obvious what an absurd joke that claim was; the very idea of The Impotent, Helpless President, presiding over a vast government and party apparatus, was laughable. But now, in light of Arkansas, nobody should ever be willing to utter that again with a straight face. Back when Lincoln was threatening to filibuster health care if it included a public option, the White House could obviously have said to her: if you don’t support a public option, not only will we not support your re-election bid, but we’ll support a primary challenger against you. Obama’s support for Lincoln did not merely help; it was arguably decisive, as The Washington Post documented today:"

<much more>

http://www.salon.com/2010/06/10/lincoln_6/

Repeating a critical piece of information:
Lincoln had NO CHANCE against the Republican in the General Election

Adding Insult to Injury,
a White House Spokesman ridiculed and Taunted Organized LABOR and the Grass Roots
for doing exactly what was asked of them.


Ed Schultz on White House insults to LABOR and the Grass Roots in the Arkansas Primary
http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/heather/ed-schultz-if-it-wasnt-labor-barack-obama-


Walking away from the Arkansas Democratic Primary,
the only a rational person could conclude that [i[the LAST thing this White House wants is a Congress that will work with him.

I was on the ground in Arkansas in 210,
and it was worse than the Salon Article describes.
As Pro-healthCare, ProUnion Lt Gov Bill Halter pulled ahead of Lincoln in the Primary,
we were all very excited.

THEN, President Obama's face appeared on the TV giving Lincoln an Oval Office Endorsement with a plea to all good Democrats to vote for her in the coming Primary
because she is helping him with his agenda!!!!

Remember, this is the woman who CROWED about being the one who killed the Public Option!!!

This played 24/7 in Arkansas the week before the Primary election,
and if that wasn't bad enough, they sent the Old Dog (Bill Clinton) back to Arkansas to ice the cake.
It was disgusting.

But as I typed this, I had an epiphany.
Obama was telling the truth when he said that Lincoln was helping him.
She was rewarded for her help perpetuating the myth that it was Congress blocking his agenda!

[Doctor_J]

228. Yep, and besides that, we are not going to get 65 (D) senators and 260 Reps in the near

future. So if you say nothing can get done without such a profile, you've given up. And no matter what the congressional make-up, a Dem president should fight for Dem principles. If (s)he loses that fight, so be it. but don't fight for the other team. If Obama had joined Grayson and Sanders and Brown and Boxer instead of the Repukes during 2009-2010, the party would have at least held its own in the midterms.

[Doctor_J]

229. I just read your post carefully

This is really, truly disgusting. I have often wondered since Inauguration 2009 if Obama really wanted to have a far right Congress, to give him cover for enacting a far right agenda. He did nothing of substance with the 2009-2010 heavily Dem congress, seemed to deliberately sabotage the mid-terms, and as soon as the new congress was seated in 2011 started talking and acting like a Bush republican. He's been outspokenly anti-labor (Duncan & Rhee, the Wisconsin debacle), silent on gender issues, and adopted republican ideology on the environment, workers rights, war, torture, intervention in overseas conflicts, education, health care, and on and on. I think his personal politics are much more in line with the 2011-2013 congress than the 2990-2010 congress.

[bvar22]

231. If the Arkansas Primary of 2010 were an anomaly,

I would be willing to overlook it as just another Fuck Up,
but Arkansas wasn't unique.

The pattern was repeated in Colorado, and in Pennsylvania 2010, where Bill Clinton and Obama fully endorsed and campaigned for REPUBLICAN Arlen Specter (who had merely changed the letter after his name) over a good loyal Pro-LABOR Democrat.
They used the excuse that Specter was more "electable,
but even THAT excuse hit the trash bin with their support for Lincoln in the Arkansas Democratic Primary.

You will KNOW them by their WORKS,
and their "works" in Democratic Party Primary Elections say that the Party Leadership would prefer a Congressional or Senate seat goes to a Pro-Business Republican than to a Pro-LABOR Democrat.

You would NOT believe how disturbing and contemptible it was to see President Obama sitting behind his desk in the Oval Office giving his official endorsement to the woman who killed the Public Option, while LABOR and the Grass Roots had successfully put in place a Democrat "who would help Obama's implement his Agenda".

and it played 24/7 during the week before the Democratic Primary.

[nakocal]

227. Sorry but this is false

DU is not the entire democratic party, in fact it represents a tiny part of the party.

About four months with a super-majority in the Senate (and that is only on paper). Single payer was blocked by Liebermann and Bacchus. Without 60 true votes in the Senate President Obama was lucky to get anything done.

An executive order can be overturned. Also with the wingnuts in the Judiciary, it can also be blocked. Legislation is the only way to really fix the problems.

So you are still part of the problem.

[YeahSureRight]

193. Many Voted for Pres Obama not once but twice mainly for change but Pres Obama

did not really want change because it was PBO who keeps the Bush appointees in place, it is PBO who keeps bring Pubs into his administration, it is PBO who gets rid of Liberals and Progressives from his administration as soon as fox and the GOP tell him too.

If anyone is giving it all to the Pubs in 14 and 16 it is PBO not the people who voted for him.

[Enrique]

198. misleading statistic

it makes it sound like 86% of McCain voters rated terrorism as the top issue, in fact, it was 7.7% (86% of 9%)

Voters who rated terrorism as the top national issue — just 9% of the electorate — favored McCain by greater than six-to-one (86% to 13%). But terrorism has faded in importance since 2004. In addition, Obama ran nearly even with McCain among the 70% of voters who said they are worried about another terrorist attack on the United States; 48% of these voters favored Obama, while 50% backed McCain.

[DCBob]

200. Anyone who thinks there is little difference between Obama and Bush are..

clueless, lying or both.

[GoneFishin]

203. Obama is clearly much smarter than Bush.

[flvegan]

213. Blue links of change!!

[Zoeisright]

217. Americans aren't outraged.

Way to overstate the issue. And you are being played. When repukes make gains in the House last year, we'll have this stupidity to blame for it.

[madrchsod]

220. lessons from the 60`s under johnson-nixon...

never talk on the phone and always remember in a large group there`s always a rat. hell one of my friends i knew i high school and ran with during my college days turned out to be a fbi informant.

the war on terror is another progression of the sophistication of spying on the citizens of the united states. get used to it and figure out who is who and what is what and work around it.

[Swede Atlanta]

221. People may be momentarily outraged but then......

they go back to their lives.....

Stopping for an over-priced Starbuck's coffee, watching Dancing with the Stars, attending a sports event, surfing some porn and eating a bucking of KFC.

If one thinks back to the times of our founding fathers they worked hard. Life was less assured (e.g. a year of crop failures could result in deaths, a wave of the flu could decimate a community). But when they had time to think about fundamental issues there were few distractions. They could consider such issues as taxation without representation, etc. without distraction.

Today, we are in sensory overload. Our ability to seriously consider and follow--through with anything is seriously challenged.

We should be outraged enough to march in the streets up to and including civil unrest, pounce (figuratively) on our elected leaders, rally, etc.

But those in control of us know if they just give us a cheap enough McFat Burger, cheapie threads at WalMart, cheap enough gas and overwhelm us with crap entertainment, we will remain submissive. .

[orpupilofnature57]

226. It would be naive to Believe the first African American...

Wasn't because he spoke like a man for " Change " implying Opposed to the policies and philosophies of ShrubCo, signing the NDAA he fortified what most of us voted for him to Squash it .

[roamer65]

230. McCain was and still is a goddamn warmongering lunatic.

That is why I plugged my nose and voted for Obama.

Nothing more than that as most of these clowns break their election promises anyway.