Greenwald: Vote Obama – If You Want a Centrist Republican for US President

[Karmadillo]

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/12/27-10

Vote Obama – If You Want a Centrist Republican for US President
Because Barack Obama has adopted so many core Republican beliefs, the US opposition race is a shambles.
by Glenn Greenwald

<edit>

In a desperate attempt to find someone less slithery and soulless (not to mention less Mormon), party members have lurched manically from one ludicrous candidate to the next, only to watch in horror as each wilted the moment they were subjected to scrutiny. Incessant pleas to the party's ostensibly more respectable conservatives to enter the race have been repeatedly rebuffed. Now, only Romney remains viable. Republican voters are thus slowly resigning themselves to marching behind a vacant, supremely malleable technocrat whom they plainly detest.

In fairness to the much-maligned GOP field, they face a formidable hurdle: how to credibly attack Obama when he has adopted so many of their party's defining beliefs. Depicting the other party's president as a radical menace is one of the chief requirements for a candidate seeking to convince his party to crown him as the chosen challenger. Because Obama has governed as a centrist Republican, these GOP candidates are able to attack him as a leftist radical only by moving so far to the right in their rhetoric and policy prescriptions that they fall over the cliff of mainstream acceptability, or even basic sanity.

<edit>

It is in the realm of foreign policy, terrorism and civil liberties where Republicans encounter an insurmountable roadblock. A staple of GOP politics has long been to accuse Democratic presidents of coddling America's enemies (both real and imagined), being afraid to use violence, and subordinating US security to international bodies and leftwing conceptions of civil liberties.

But how can a GOP candidate invoke this time-tested caricature when Obama has embraced the vast bulk of George Bush's terrorism policies; waged a war against government whistleblowers as part of a campaign of obsessive secrecy; led efforts to overturn a global ban on cluster bombs; extinguished the lives not only of accused terrorists but of huge numbers of innocent civilians with cluster bombs and drones in Muslim countries; engineered a covert war against Iran; tried to extend the Iraq war; ignored Congress and the constitution to prosecute an unauthorized war in Libya; adopted the defining Bush/Cheney policy of indefinite detention without trial for accused terrorists; and even claimed and exercised the power to assassinate US citizens far from any battlefield and without due process?

more....

[CakeGrrl]

1. And who is Greenwald endorsing? -nt

[frazzled]

4. He doesn't vote, himself

So I wonder why anyone would listen to his advice?

[Luminous Animal]

14. When he wrote his 1st book, he hadn't voted in a Presidential election.

He has voted for President since.

[frazzled]

28. So a grown man who has voted in one election?

He wrote that first book in 2006, when he was almost 40 years old. That leaves one election, 2008, that he might have voted in. Hardly a model citizen, doncha think.

[Luminous Animal]

59. I do poll watching for the Democratic Party in every election. It is dismaying but a fact of U.S.

electoral politics is that at least half of the population do not vote. And citizenship (model or otherwise) does not require us to vote.

[frazzled]

66. Correct, citizenship does not require us to vote.

But I believe that good citizenship does. Also, people who dispense advice about politics and politicians should at least have some skin in the game.

[Luminous Animal]

74. Actually, I know plenty of good citizens who don't vote.

Some are political activists, economic justice activists, civil rights activists. Some volunteer on a regular basis. Some work for public interest organizations. I personally urge them to go vote every election to get the hell to the polls! I consider all that they do expressions of good citizenship.

And every U.S. citizen has skin in the game (In fact, I go farther than that. I think legal residents should be able to vote - at least in local & state elections - no matter their citizenship status.) I think it is extremely fucked up that prisoners & parolees are often barred from voting.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

126. Why don't these activists vote?

Republicans- whose "base" votes religiously- would have a much harder time winning elections if people on our side didn't stay home on election day and essentially let them win. Do they ever wonder why so many regressives keep running for office and winning- usually making their jobs (and everybody else's lives) harder, not easier? It makes no sense to me whatsoever. Voting, particularly when relatively so few people actually do so in our country for one reason or another, seems like it would be a no-brainer, particularly among people whom tend to be more politically informed and better educated than your average person. What exactly do they think they are accomplishing by not voting?

[Luminous Animal]

136. Most vote in local elections but believe "the fix is in" on the

state & federal levels. Nothing I can say sways them.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

137. That's too bad

How do they think we're ever going to get rid of the GOP Tea Party from the House (or the many state legislatures they've captured)? What goes on there affects them just as much (and maybe even more) as what happens at the local level? Weird.

[zbdent]

72. Don't forget ... Limpballs didn't vote for his Lord and Savior, Ronald Reagan ... because

he hadn't registered ...

Now there's one dedicated political person ...

[Better Believe It]

95. His vote won't and hasn't determined who is elected President. Nor will yours.

[frazzled]

96. My vote indeed determines who is elected, and so does yours

If you don't believe that, you might as well go home and pack it up.

[Better Believe It]

105. So your single vote will determine who is elected President. Sounds like a really close election!

So when was the electoral college abolished?

I favor a popular vote for President but if one single vote were to decide the outcome you can be sure that the Supreme Court would once again pick the next President.

You see, their vote has much more power than your vote.

[frazzled]

113. Your theory is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Cede your vote and you deserve what you get.

[Bobbie Jo]

112. Stay Home!

Funny thing....

Just yesterday you had a RW troll ( subsequently banned ) cheering you on.

Coincidence? I think not.

Obvious agenda is obvious.

[mazzarro]

109. Greenwald has some valid points

Much as citizens should vote, that does not prohibit the expression of opinion by someone who does not. And that a person does not vote, it might be that makes it possible for that person to have a better and unadulterated view of the contemporary political events affecting the society.
In my view, I think that what Greenwald expressed in this article is quite a valid view of what is happening with the rethuglican party as well as the positioning of the Obama presidency. I would have loved for Obama to be a more activist liberal president but he has chosen to be a pragmatic, conservative democrat - more in the mode of a moderate rethug - unfortunately - IMHO.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

138. People don't need to vote to be able to speak out on things, sure

but voting in elections is another critical component to our power as citizens. Sure, we can speak out about things we don't like to our elected officials and HOPE that they will listen to us but we're not going to be able to talk a teabagger politician out of their insane beliefs and/or whatever junk legislation they want to push through into law. We need to be able to get rid of that teabagger politician and fight for people whom not only agree with us but can actually DO something about it too.

[Tarheel_Dem]

19. Gary Johnson, aka Mitt Romney. Glenn's working overtime for that Koch money.

[dsc]

80. that is flat out false

1st Mr. Johnson has taken $0 of Koch money and neither has Mr. Greenwald. Second, in the interview where he stated he would consider voting for Mr. Johnson he said if he had someone such as Feingold for VP. It is nothing short of a smear of Mr. Greenwald, to truncate that quote and make shit up about Koch.

[dsc]

89. put up or shut up

either provide a link to show that either Johnson or Greenwald have taken any Koch money. Oh and I would like a link where I have made shit up.

[Tarheel_Dem]

91. See ya in Help & Meta, mmmkay?

[Better Believe It]

97. I have to put you on ignore for engaging in personal attacks against DU'ers.

If you'd rather engage in trash talk rather than civil debate and discussion I suggest you find a trash talk board that encourages that sort of behavior.

Bye.

[Tarheel_Dem]

101. I won't tell you what to do with your advice. Didn't you claim to have me on "Ignore"?

Or did you slip up? How does that happen?

[jefferson_dem]

73. He said he's "keeping his eye on" former GOPer and now Libertarian Gary Johnson...

Given that alone, we should dismiss any smear he levies against the Democratic nominee. Yet, the amen chorus laps it up.

[MadHound]

2. Yep, the fact of the matter is that Obama is somewhere to the right of Eisenhower,

A sad statement that shows just how far both parties have moved to the right. Worse yet, some people actually consider him to be some sort of progressive or liberal, when the facts show plainly that he isn't. The only way he comes across as remotely liberal is when you compare him to the batshit crazy lunatics coming out of the Republican clown car.

[provis99]

64. Obama is somewhere to the right of George H. W. Bush.

G.H.W. Bush raised taxes on the rich, Obama reduced them.
but the people are getting what they want on the sinking USS Titanic.

[sad sally]

93. Too bad President Obama is so quick to use war as a negotiating tool, unlike Eisenhower

who knew first-hand the horrors of war. From Eisenhower's Farewell Address to the Nation, January 17, 1961

"Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war – as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years – I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.

Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road."

[Luminous Animal]

3. Point of information, Greenwald reported on Twitter that he did not write the headline.

[Inuca]

12. The headline?

Did he write the rest?

[Luminous Animal]

15. Of course he did.

[tridim]

5. Ignore all of his progressive legislation and you too can live in fantasy-land with Glenn

LMAO at "tried to extend the Iraq war". DERP.

[EFerrari]

16. Yes, those months of trying to renegotiate an extension of SOFA was

just a head fake.

[joshcryer]

60. To be fair, they were trying to leave training forces (with immunity)...

...and it simply was decided that if Iraq wanted future training forces they could negotiate those separately (and immunity clauses would be present) rather than renegotiate SOFA, since Iraqi's were against SOFA, and it would show a big sign of weakness for the Iraqi government to renegotiate SOFA.

This is in stark contrast to Bush who completely abandoned the military forces in the beginning, which was arguably the largest contributor to the protracted length of the war.

See: Libya, where said military forces and police were maintained and not absolved unilaterally.

I'm glad that Obama didn't press the training forces issue, as I'm sure if he was like Bush he would've done it. Certainly McCain wanted them to stay regardless. And I don't fault him for allowing the discussions to be made before the determination was made, as it would be irresponsible to not consider it at all, like Bush would've done.

[Luminous Animal]

61. It's amazing. This is information that was well reported and yet

people absolutely refuse to believe it.

[Enrique]

6. they have to lie about Obama to make him look extreme

their likely nominee is going to be the inventor of Obamacare, look at all the things they said about that legislation.

[Bolo Boffin]

7. Greenwald's defense of Ron Paul in the newsletters situation should be the clue

that he is no true friend to the liberal and progressive vote.

Why this wedge-issue-pushing asshole keeps getting reproduced here is beyond me.

[Tarheel_Dem]

22. +1

[DevonRex]

23. He defended Paul? OMG.

That's really scummy. You're right, he's no friend to us at all.

[msanthrope]

30. Oh yeah...here's a quote

"There are many reasons why the media is eager to disappear Ron Paul despite his being a viable candidate by every objective metric. Unlike the charismatic Perry and telegenic Bachmann, Paul bores the media with his earnest focus on substantive discussions. There’s also the notion that he’s too heterodox for the purist GOP primary base, though that was what was repeatedly said about McCain when his candidacy was declared dead.

But what makes the media most eager to disappear Paul is that he destroys the easy, conventional narrative — for slothful media figures and for Democratic loyalists alike. Aside from the truly disappeared former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson (more on him in a moment), Ron Paul is far and away the most anti-war, anti-Surveillance-State, anti-crony-capitalism, and anti-drug-war presidential candidate in either party. How can the conventional narrative of extremist/nationalistic/corporatist/racist/warmongering GOP v. the progressive/peaceful/anti-corporate/poor-and-minority-defending Democratic Party be reconciled with the fact that a candidate with those positions just virtually tied for first place among GOP base voters in Iowa? Not easily, and Paul is thus disappeared from existence. That the similarly anti-war, pro-civil-liberties, anti-drug-war Gary Johnson is not even allowed in media debates — despite being a twice-elected popular governor — highlights the same dynamic."

http://www.salon.com/2011/08/16/elections_9/

[Luminous Animal]

36. I've read and reread the article and I can find no defense of the newsletters anywhere.

[msanthrope]

65. You missed his palm off this week?

Note, Glenn did not direct readers to the blistering report on the racist newsletters in Salon--oh, no---

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/22/ron_paul_and_his_racist_newsletters/

Because that would have made him look like he had endorsed a white supremacist. No, instead, Glenn directed his readers to the apologia in another publication--wherein the blame for Ron Paul's racist newsletters is placed on Lew Rockwell, AND the racist newsletters aren't as bad as other things other candidates have done.....


"UPDATE: For a thoughtful, nuanced, very smart examination of the specific issue of Ron Paul and the newsletters, and more so, the general issue of Ron Paul’s candidacy, read this from The Atlantic‘s Conor Friedersdorf. It’s long, but well worth the time."

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/22/various_matters_15/singleton/


You gotta keep up with Glenn, if you are to defend him....I also highly recommend his take on the Bradley Manning gender identity disorder defense.

[Luminous Animal]

81. Maybe because Conor's piece was posted the day before and Alex's piece was posted

on the same day?

For what it is worth, I think Conor is grasping (though I agree with him that the newsletters are odious but I also believe that, unlike Conor, Paul, whether he wrote anything in the newsletters or not, needs to be hung with the words that were published under his name. I give Paul absolutely no quarter in this regard.) BUT, I also found the article worth reading. People, especially Democrats really need to grasp why young liberals are supporting Paul and Conor's article lays them out pretty clearly. Paul's campaign reminds of Reagan's when he was able to appeal to Democratic union members.

Oh yes and regards to Glenn's opinion on the Manning defense? This? This is your complaining about?

"Of course I hate seeing them blame his noble acts on a mental illness, and hate even more having gender issues characterized that way (though I am sure that being a 22-year-old with gender struggles in the middle of the Iraq war - in a military that bans you even from being openly gay - does produce real psychological distress). I would love for Manning to stand up in court and say: I did it and I should have done it - my duty as a soldier compelled it.

But it's not my preferences that should govern their strategy."

[Bolo Boffin]

92. "Of course I hate seeing them blame his noble acts on a mental illness..."

"It seems a shame," the Walrus said,
"To play them such a trick,
After we've brought them out so far,
And made them trot so quick!"
The Carpenter said nothing but
"The butter's spread too thick!"

"I weep for you," the Walrus said:
"I deeply sympathize."
With sobs and tears he sorted out
Those of the largest size,
Holding his pocket-handkerchief
Before his streaming eyes.

I don't know why I started thinking of this. Best to probably just skip over this post.

[dsc]

82. I have read the defense of the Bradley Manning defense strategy

and frankly he is correct. It isn't the lawyer's job to decide the politics of his defense strategy. It is the lawyers job to win the case or at least mitigate the loss of a case. It should be noted since you don't even provide a link, that Greenwald directly states he would prefer to see a defense of yes he did it but it needed done. But given the jury here he understands why the lawyers are trying this appeal to their bigotry.

[joshcryer]

38. Ron Paul as "anti-crony-capitalism"!

Jesus Christ!

[fascisthunter]

33. It's a good thing people generally ignore uber partsans who prop up certain politicians

no matter what...

[Number23]

100. You just won the thread. Sorry it's such a crappy little prize.

[SidDithers]

104. Well said...nt

Sid

[banned from Kos]

8. Fuck Greenwald - he is not worth rebutting.

I expect him to endorse Ron Paul any day.

[mckara]

11. I Concur!

Relatively speaking, President Obama is the most progressive candidate who can actually win the election. There is no joy in Mudville, but we're doing the best we can.

[girl gone mad]

85. "Fuck him" "fuck her" "fuck this" fuck that"..

Christ, you guys are pathetic.

[Whisp]

107. he has.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/100277632

he prefers the crazy fucked up Paul to Obama.

[JoePhilly]

9. Some one needs to send Glenn a life time supply of ...

?1292435568

[ProSense]

10. Did I say

Reflecting this difficulty for the GOP field is the fact that former Bush officials, including Dick Cheney, have taken to lavishing Obama with public praise for continuing his predecessor's once-controversial terrorism polices. In the last GOP foreign policy debate, the leading candidates found themselves issuing recommendations on the most contentious foreign policy question (Iran) that perfectly tracked what Obama is already doing, while issuing ringing endorsements of the president when asked about one of his most controversial civil liberties assaults (the due-process-free assassination of the American-Yemeni cleric Anwar Awlaki). Indeed, when it comes to the foreign policy and civil liberties values Democrats spent the Bush years claiming to defend, the only candidate in either party now touting them is the libertarian Ron Paul, who vehemently condemns Obama's policies of drone killings without oversight, covert wars, whistleblower persecutions, and civil liberties assaults in the name of terrorism.

...fuck Greenwald? I will happily cast my vote for Obama.

Ex-Aide: Ron Paul Foreign Policy is 'Sheer Lunacy'

Ron Paul is not having the best holiday season. First the media discovered racist, anti-Semitic newsletters that went out under Paul’s name in the 1970s, ‘80s and ‘90s. Then the New York Times did a story about the support Paul draws from white supremacists and anti-Semites.

Now there’s former Paul staffer Eric Dondero purporting to describe the ins and outs of Paul’s positions on everything from Israel (it shouldn’t exist) to Hitler (we shouldn’t have fought him) to 9/11 (U.S. authorities may have known about the attacks) to Afghanistan (we shouldn’t have invaded). He calls Paul’s foreign policy “sheer lunacy.”

Or, as the conservative Weekly Standard summarized in hits headline: “Ex-Aide Says Ron Paul Is a 9/11 Truther & Isolationist Who Thinks U.S. Shouldn't Have Fought Hitler.”

In his 2,100-word piece, posted at RightwingNews.com, Dondero says he held several campaign and Capitol Hill posts with Paul from 1987 to 2003. At his own website, LibertarianRepublican.net, he said he was revealing much of the information for the first time. “Much of what I have to say will not please the liberal media hacks. Though, the Ron Paul diehards will find much objectionable, as well,” Dondero wrote.

http://news.yahoo.com/ex-aide-ron-paul-foreign-policy-sheer-lunacy-144730256.html

[AtomicKitten]

13. Awesome. Lead the lemmings over the cliff.

This clown - who doesn't even live in the US btw - is a paid propagandist. Jane Hamsher, PUMA extraordinaire, has this guy on salary. By all means, vote your conscience; then you can pat yourselves on the back for your refusal to consider pragmatism. I hope that keeps you warm at night while the teabaggers show us all their version of the world according to them.

[Luminous Animal]

18. He can't live in the U.S. because the U.S. bars his partner from U.S. residency.

1) Hamsher is not a PUMA. Not one of her accusers has ever been able to offer any evidence that she is and the only evidence that I could find of endorsement was her public announcement that she was not going to endorse anyone during the 2008 primaries.

2) Greenwald is not on Hamsher's payroll. They co-owned a PAC that they've since disbanded.

3) Greenwald, in the article, does not endorse anybody; nor does he advocate voting for anyone.

[ProSense]

26. Greenwald

has his own issues, primarily going off the deep end and then offering lame-ass apologies.

I affirm my distaste for photographic leader-glorification, but I'll rescind my invocation of Leni Riefenstahl as too inflammatory & extreme

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/12/05/925827/-Glenn-Greenwald-Apologizes,-and--

[Luminous Animal]

41. "I affirm my distaste for photographic leader-glorification, but I'll rescind my invocation of Leni

Riefenstahl as too inflammatory & extreme"

So there you go. And his tweet makes him a PUMA how?

[Lord Helmet]

31. wrong, wrong, and wrong

[joshcryer]

44. Hamsher was a big Hillary shill during the primaries.

[Luminous Animal]

48. Show me. I once spent 2-3 hours looking for evidence that she supported Hillary and I could find

nothing except other people on boards like this making that claim. The only words that I could find that came straight from Hamsher was a public announcement on her blog that she was endorsing no one.

[joshcryer]

51. Sure:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=439&topic_id=2407101&mesg_id=2409427

[Luminous Animal]

67. And when I was doing my research, I found as many "pro-Obama/anti-Hillary" posts.

Hamsher critized all the campaigns and all the candidates for one reason or another an endorsed no one. (If anything, she seemed to lean more towards Edwards than anyone else.)

http://firedoglake.com/2008/04/18/hillary-clinton-attacks-moveon/

http://firedoglake.com/2007/12/10/hillary-clinton-joins-joe-lieberman-to-resurrect-the-culture-wars/

http://firedoglake.com/2007/10/25/hillary-clinton-a-bundle-of-telecom-moneyand-a-strange-silence/

http://firedoglake.com/2008/01/05/is-the-problem-with-the-clinton-campaign-mark-penn/

[joshcryer]

70. Read my post, I addressed the telecom and Lieberman posts. They're the only two.

Note the Lieberman post starts off defending Hillary. The other posts you link, one is a Penn bashing post (no criticism of Hillary for choosing Penn), and the other is after Hillary was clearly losing the primaries (I predicted that she would lose in March, and I still defended her because I saw that Obama was winning and the undue hatred for Hillary was unwarranted).

Please don't pretend these posts do not represent a Hillary shill, they do, they cannot be seen any other way unless you're intentionally trying to mislead people.

For every Obama bashing post during the primaries Hamsher defended Hillary. I should know, I quoted Hamsher during the primaries when I defended Hillary.

[Luminous Animal]

75. So, your a PUMA, eh?

You know. I spent 3 minutes looking for those today. I'm at work. There are plenty of others that I could have posted but I do not have the time.

[joshcryer]

77. What makes you think that?

I support Obama.

I merely defended Hillary during the primaries 1) because people were making shit up over their Obama savior figure and 2) Obama's proposals were to the right of Hillary. Yes, you heard that right, during the primaries Obama was to the right of Hillary.

[Bluenorthwest]

46. Uh, he does not reside in the US due to bigoted immigration laws. No matter what you think of

his opinions, his residence is not fair game. To use that as an attack mode is to discredit yourself.
I'd also like to suggest to the group that does that that they might want to ask their clique mates here, some of whom are not residents nor citizens, just folks in other countries with an interest, and that is fine. It is fine for ANYONE. Not just for straight folks.
I note that none of the OFA non residents bother to say that they are not residents when others attack gay people who are not residents.
It gets old. Play fair.

[cthulu2016]

17. Within that framework, I do want a Centrist Republican for US President

The label one hangs on Obama doesn't really change the nature of the choice.

To me he's like a Rockefeller or Eisenhower Republican, but that is not such a bad thing. Eisenhower wasn't really a bad guy.

In a choice against any modern republican the choice is clear, whatever labels one afixes.

[Kahuna]

25. Horror of all horrors! You sound....(gasp)..PRAGMATIC!!!...

[maximusveritas]

20. I should post this on some centrist GOP/Indepedent forums

This is a great endorsement for him. Thanks Glenn.

[NYC_SKP]

21. Umkay, Glenn. Whatever you say, Centrist Republican it is...

Given the alternatives.

....

[Kahuna]

29. LOL! I love this response!

[BeHereNow]

24. PAGING GLENN: And who is our alternative?

I mean seriously- who are the contenders?
None that I can see.
I will vote for Obama- there is no one else; who is even remotely
possible.
BHN

[Luminous Animal]

43. The article is about the crazy radical Republican field. It is not about

voting or not voting for Obama.

[russspeakeasy]

115. Looks like you and I are the only ones who read the post.

[Puregonzo1188]

125. There's been a string of cherrypicking Greenwald articles recently. People taking random paragraphs

out of context and people not reading the actual articles and overreacting.

Really very odd.

[russspeakeasy]

127. add the fact that there is some criticism of Mr. O. and a lot of people

get upset.

[Ohio Joe]

27. yeah... Vote for someone else and get...

A far right wing fundy nutjob. No thanks, I'll vote for President Obama.

[Luminous Animal]

47. Not once in the entire article does Greenwald advocate for a far right wing fundy

nutjob.

[Ohio Joe]

50. He does not have to

Eliminate Obama and you eliminate D's... All that is left are far right wing fundy nutjobs.

[Luminous Animal]

68. How, in anyone's reality, could Greenwald eliminate Obama?

[Ohio Joe]

78. I never said he could

The purpose of the article, IMO, seems to be to get D's not to vote for Obama as then they are voting for a repug. It is thinly veiled as Obama is responsible for pushing the repugs farther to the right when that has been happening for a long time. It strikes me as simple non-sense to blame the last... How many decades... on Obama. I find the lack of any specific alternative combined with the presentation of cheney as an Obama supporter and the pushing of Ron Paul to be a far from anything I want to be a part of. I will stick with voting for President Obama.

[FrenchieCat]

79. Greenwald only has to work on eliminating voters here and there.......

who will stay home thinking that's in their best interest,
until they realize that it ain't....but by then, the shit will
have hit not just their own personal fan.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

121. Vote for Obama.

There's no other choice.

How inspiring.

[Ohio Joe]

124. Your alternative?

[UnrepentantLiberal]

128. I know your point.

I'm just saying it's a very uninspiring and disappointing one.

[fascisthunter]

32. He is a Moderate Republican

and so are many of his most ardent supporters but they like calling themselves progressives and liberals for the sake of winning over the left.

[ProSense]

34. Actually,

"He is a Moderate Republican and so are many of his most ardent supporters but they like calling themselves progressives and liberals for the sake of winning over the left."

...his detractors are fake progressives, opportunists using whatever they can to justify their hate.

I mean, how the hell can anyone justify using a lunatic racist as justification for voting against Obama?

[Luminous Animal]

45. And who is advocating voting for a racist lunatic?

[ProSense]

56. Fake Progressives for Racists 2012! n/t

[fascisthunter]

116. lol... pathetic

you would know about opportunism.

[MjolnirTime]

37. His ardent supporters are the Democratic Party. Sorry you don't stand with us.

[fascisthunter]

39. yeah I know... unfortunately they are dems

but their views are very republican. ooops, I'm gonna get in trouble for being honest. Can't have that.

[Kahuna]

40. So, you're calling out at lease half of DU posters as republicans????

Seriously? Isn't that against the rules?

[great white snark]

49. And when Kuch announces his support for Obama will you call him a Repub?

And Grayson and Franken?

[FrenchieCat]

76. What gives you the right to label others, some who have been on this board as long or longer

than you?

Why is it that having a different opinion as to what Pres. Obama has done earn one a label from
some poster on the internet.

Uncompromising closed minds does not a progressive or a liberal make.....

[UnrepentantLiberal]

122. They're very forgiving "progressives",

Last edited Wed Dec 28, 2011, 03:31 PM - Edit history (1)

aren't they?

[MjolnirTime]

35. Greenwald is a toad.

[_ed_]

114. Thanks for your detailed, reasoned analysis

.

[fascisthunter]

42. Oh no Greenwald... you can't be honest here

shame on you...!

[spanone]

52. and don't if you want one of the following fucking idiots

Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
U.S. Representative from Minnesota

Michele Bachmann

Michele Bachmann, the three terms Minnesota Congresswoman, is the current chair of the Congressional Tea Party Caucus. The attractive Iowan has seen her fortune plummet in recent weeks following the entry of Texas Governor, Rick Perry, into the race. The resignation of deputy campaign manager, David Polyansky, and the redeployment of campaign manager Ed Rollins into a consulting role tell us that all is not well in the Bachmann camp. Her September poll numbers, hovering between 6-8%, is just a third of her post-Ames Straw Poll victory figures barely a month ago. Pundits have long cited the risks of Bachmann’s increasing tendency to move to the right, and it now appears that she may be holding her two top strategists responsible for the shift in her campaign’s fortunes.
Bachmann's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Speaker of the House

Newt Gingrich

After a 13-year absence from mainstream politics, Newton Leroy Gingrich has announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination. His campaign, which kicks off with 17-city swing, has unfortunately begun under a torrent of criticisms following his controversial statements on Medicare and a perceived attack of fellow Republican Paul Ryan. Nevertheless, Gingrich, a fighter and above all, a consummate politician, is expected to make a swift recovery and stamp his mark on the race.
Gingrich's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Governor of Utah and Ambassador to China

Jon Huntsman

The 51-year old former Governor of Utah officially announced his much-anticipated entry into the
presidential race, with the Statue of Liberty spectacularly serving as the backdrop. The highly rated and charismatic Republican technocrat is considered by many in Washington as one of most dangerous dark horses in the race, and is one of the few capable of unseating President Obama.
Huntsman's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Governor of New Mexico

Gary Johnson

The former Libertarian Republican Governor does not attend church, is pro-choice, anti-big government, pro-immigration, an outspoken critic of the war on drugs and favors legalizing marijuana. He led New Mexico for eight years, during which time the state saw no tax increase, and he vetoed over 750 separate pieces of legislation to keep the government from growing. However, his views on civil liberties, foreign policy and drugs may be difficult for many conservatives to reconcile with.
Johnson's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Political Consultant & Gay Rights Activist

Fred Karger

Fred Karger, one of the shrewdest Republican political operators of the past three decades, announced the formation of his 2012 Exploratory Committee on July 18, 2010, making him the first ever openly gay aspirant for the presidency. Despite being a lifelong Republican, the 61-year old Karger will be running on an independent ticket. His campaign was hit with a sucker punch when he was locked out of the Carolina Republican Party Presidential Debate of May 5, with the organizers citing his low poll numbers as the reason.
Karger's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate


Andy Martin

The self-professed People’s Attorney General and Internet Powerhouse is famously remembered as the source of the chain mail and online reports questioning the citizenship of President Obama and the claim that he was a Muslim. The 66-year old Martin filed his papers as a candidate for the next presidential election on Feb 8, and was quoted two weeks later saying, “Obama
plays for keeps. He plays rough, and that's the only way to beat him, and I'm the only one that is
tough enough to do that."
Martin's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate


Jimmy McMillan

The former mayoral, gubernatorial and senatorial candidate for the Rent Is Too Damn High Party announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination on December last year. Explaining his decision not to contest the Democratic nomination, a party he was formerly registered with, karate expert McMillan was quoted as saying "the rent is too damn high." The flamboyant Vietnam veteran also gave some words of advice to President Obama, “If you don’t do your job right, I am coming at you!"
McMillan's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Career Flight Attendant

Tom Miller

Tom Miller feels that the country is being destroyed from within chiefly through a series of failed fiscal and immigration policies; a state of affair brought forth by an entrenched political elite. Miller sees himself as a representative of the people, as envisioned by the Founding Fathers themselves, and offers a solution-based approach to tackle the multitude of issues facing the nation. Ultimately, he hopes to re-empower the American people around the concept of small government.
Miller's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
U.S. Representative from the State of Texas

Ron Paul

The former medical doctor officially announced his candidacy for the 2012 Republican Presidential nomination on May 13, 2011. The 75-year old Texas Congressman will once again center his campaign on the theme of liberty, human rights and financial market reforms. With his small but vocal pockets of supporters spread all over the country, the Libertarian leaning Republican is set to be one of the most controversial characters on the campaign trail.
Paul's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Current Governor of Texas

Rick Perry

After almost two years of uncertainty, Texas Governor Rick Perry’s wall of resistance has crumbled. Perry took advantage of the publicity generated by the Ames Straw Poll and announced his entry into the Republican nomination race in Charleston, South Carolina, with a confident declaration, "I full well believe I'm going to win". His candidacy is expected to reinvigorate the hitherto subdued Republican evangelical grassroots, and inject some excitement into the contest.
Perry's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Governor of Louisiana

Buddy Roemer

After being away from politics for the last two decades, former Louisiana Governor Buddy Roemer
announced on March this year the launch of his presidential exploratory committee. The 67-year old
former Democrat has cited campaign finance reforms as one of the bulwarks of his platform and has
imposed a $100 limit on disclosed contributions per individual for his potential run. At a Tea Party rally in May, he claims that the current system is “disastrous, it’s dysfunctional."
Roemer's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former Governor of Massachusetts

Mitt Romney

John McCain's defeat to Barack Obama in the 2008 presidential election signaled the reemergence of the former Massachusetts Governor as a serious contender, and clear favorite, for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination.

The Harvard man has been comfortably leading almost every poll since then. He was knocked off his perch for about two months by Texas Governor, Rick Perry, during the summer of 2011. However, he has since recovered and has once again returned to his seat at the top of the leader board. And unless Perry, Cain, Huntsman, Bachmann and company can pull something out of their collective hats, the liberal turned conservative turned moderate former venture capitalist may just walk through the primaries. While his ideology and personal beliefs may be subject to debate, his knack for business is beyond question – and his across the board appeal makes him a dangerous opponent for President Obama.
Romney's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Former US Senator from Pennsylvania

Rick Santorum

The former two-term senator from Pennsylvania officially announced his entry into the GOP Presidential nomination race on June 6, 2011, symbolically launching his campaign at the Somerset County Courthouse, located not far from the coal mine where his grandfather first worked after arriving from Italy. Despite his dismal poll numbers, Santorum is confident of gaining grounds on early favorite Mitt Romney and warns, "We are going to be in this race, and we're in it to win."
Santorum's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate


Matt Snyder

Matthew Bradley Snyder is a supporter of people, not parties. He believes in the passion that stirs the heart of the common man. It is not political ambition, but personal experience, that enflames that passion. A president should exude it, not emulate it. Snyder is a true representative of the people.
Snyder's profile, official website and positions on the issues



Declared 2012 Republican Presidential Candidate
Businessman

Vern Wuensche

Wuensche ran for President in 2008, garnering a tenth place finish in both the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries, despite spending only $36,000. In 100 days, the owner of Houston’s third oldest construction company, visited over 6,000 local businesses and churches in 242 towns in both states.

He believes that businesses survive and thrive chiefly through the caliber of those who runs them and thus, these executives are perfectly qualified for a public office shorn of proven management experience
Wuensche's profile, official website and positions on the issues

[russspeakeasy]

129. So, we're back to voting for the "less evil" ?

[great white snark]

53. Greenwald: read me if you like advice from a PUMA tool pathetic man.

We know Paul is your man.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

54. I see lots of people calling Glen Greenwald names, and getting on him for his Libertarian slant

I don't see anyone effectively countering his assertion that Obama is governing like a centerist Republican, nor will I, because he's correct. Just because the Republican field is such a bunch of hapless dimwits doesn't excuse the President for his own shortcomings.

[russspeakeasy]

131. Yup . Someone will send Glenn "the list". That ought to shut him up.

[elleng]

55. ...

[SidDithers]

57. Greenwald. LOL...

Fuck Glenn Greenwald.

Sid

[bvar22]

58. Nailed It Again

"Krugman also pointed out that even the policy Democratic loyalists point to as proof of the president's progressive bona fides – his healthcare plan, which mandates the purchase of policies from the private health insurance industry – was designed by the Heritage Foundation, one of the nation's most right-wing thinktanks, and was advocated by conservative ideologues for many years (it also happens to be the same plan Romney implemented when he was governor of Massachusetts and which Newt Gingrich once promoted, underscoring the difficulty for the GOP in drawing real contrasts with Obama).

How do you scorn a president as a far-left socialist when he has stuffed his administration with Wall Street executives, had his last campaign funded by them, governed as a "centrist Republican", and presided over booming corporate profits even while the rest of the nation suffered economically?"

K&R




You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green][center]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]

[FrenchieCat]

62. Nailling us to a cross.....is what Greenwald is recommending for the American people.....

Last edited Tue Dec 27, 2011, 09:24 PM - Edit history (1)

Greenwald must be somebody's savior, but he certainly has done little for most.

Guess Greenwald is willing to see us suffer as that doesn't appear to be a problem for him!
Wish we all had that kind of heart, or lackthereof.

To have so little compassion for the future of this country and its citizens while professing to care a lot
is a contradiction.....

In a way, I feel for Greenwald....that he would be so care-less in advocating for results that would hurt so many,
without him seemingly actually giving a damn.

Even if things got so bad (Greenwald's wish), a Revolution due to the peope rising up would not mean
that a Eutopia would spring up from it. In fact, I doubt that very much, as we would still be left with voters who
have the same mindset as they do now. You'd still have your libertarians, your conservatives, etc.....

But of course, he has every right to advocate for our destruction, as long as some of us have a right to acknowledge the suffering that his vision would bring in reality.

[ProSense]

63. Want

"Krugman also pointed out that even the policy Democratic loyalists point to as proof of the president's progressive bona fides – his healthcare plan, which mandates the purchase of policies from the private health insurance industry – was designed by the Heritage Foundation, one of the nation's most right-wing thinktanks, and was advocated by conservative ideologues for many years (it also happens to be the same plan Romney implemented when he was governor of Massachusetts and which Newt Gingrich once promoted, underscoring the difficulty for the GOP in drawing real contrasts with Obama).

...some more Krugman quotes:

All the facts we have suggest that health reform was the biggest move toward fiscal responsibility in a long, long time."

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/05/bending-the-curve/

Guys, this is a major program to aid lower- and lower-middle-income families. How is that not a big progressive victory?

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/26/numerical-notes-on-health-care-reform/

Health reform doesn’t work without a mandate...

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/naked-blackmail/

<...>

Unfortunately, Mr. Paul has maintained his consistency by ignoring reality, clinging to his ideology even as the facts have demonstrated that ideology’s wrongness. And, even more unfortunately, Paulist ideology now dominates a Republican Party that used to know better.

I’m not talking here about Mr. Paul’s antiwar views or his less well-known views on civil and reproductive rights, which would horrify liberals who think of him as a good guy. I’m talking, instead, about his views on economics.

Mr. Paul identifies himself as a believer in “Austrian” economics — a doctrine that it goes without saying rejects John Maynard Keynes but is almost equally vehement in rejecting the ideas of Milton Friedman. For Austrians see “fiat money,” money that is just printed without being backed by gold, as the root of all economic evil, which means that they fiercely oppose the kind of monetary expansion Friedman claimed could have prevented the Great Depression — and which was actually carried out by Ben Bernanke this time around.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/16/opinion/gop-monetary-madness.html

Krugman nailed it, and he obviously doesn't see eye to eye with Greenwald when it comes to the lunatic Paul.

[girl gone mad]

86. Dead to rights. n/t

[indepat]

69. Portrait rings more hard-core than centrist to these progressive

ears: tis ludicrous indeed hearing the RWers portraying this president as some far-out leftist considering how much of junior's RW policies and actions has been embraced.

[jefferson_dem]

71. Glenn Greenwald...

in Common Dreams...

Glenn Greenwald, who is on the payroll of the Libertarian Cato Institute and has expressed his support for (former Republican candidate) Gary Johnson, is still trying to grasp for relevance...by whining about Obama? What a toolbox.

[jpak]

83. Greenwald - a flaming bag of douche

yup

[eridani]

87. Those who wanted a progressive populist--

--should have started working on that in 1976.

[Octafish]

90. More USA PATRIOT Act. Less Justice.

As Bush, Cheney and their warmongering bankster cronies run free to stash the loot in Switzerland, fewer wonder: "Whatever happened to Don Siegelman?"

[BootinUp]

94. Vote Not Obama if you want Right Wing Nutball for President.

This in no way means I agree with Greenwalds characterization either.

[Better Believe It]

98. Perhaps Greenwald prefers and will vote for a Centrist Republican President.

[BootinUp]

99. Eisenhower isn't running this time. lol.

Get real.

[quinnox]

102. A good read

This guy Greenwald is impressive to say the least, seems to be a real liberal/progressive. I can relate, lol.

[slay]

103. Better than the right wing nutjobs the actual (R)'s are running

but certainly NOT the progressive we truly need right now.

*on edit - i think Greenwald is totally right in his analysis.

[hifiguy]

106. He is right, of course.

But the alternatives range from utterly unacceptable to barking-at-the-moon batshit insane.

So we are back to voting for the lesser of two evils. There aren't words for my disgust.

[Poll_Blind]

111. ^ This sums up my opinion completely, as well. nt

PB

[randome]

108. And if you want to vote for a solidly progressive Democrat, vote for...

...hmm, there doesn't appear to be anyone running on that platform.

[russspeakeasy]

132. That platform has been removed.

Please move to the right.

[randome]

133. You mean it's no longer the Democratic Party's platform.

That doesn't mean someone else can't take up the banner. But so far, no one has.

[russspeakeasy]

134. Exactly.

[Wind Dancer]

110. K & R!

Excellent article by Greenwald. It's hard to dispute anything written in that article.

[fascisthunter]

117. that's why people here are attacking him personally instead

classic reaction

[Edweird]

118. I'd say that's pretty accurate.

[blindpig]

119. This paragraph is absolutely fuckin' true.

In fairness to the much-maligned GOP field, they face a formidable hurdle: how to credibly attack Obama when he has adopted so many of their party's defining beliefs. Depicting the other party's president as a radical menace is one of the chief requirements for a candidate seeking to convince his party to crown him as the chosen challenger. Because Obama has governed as a centrist Republican, these GOP candidates are able to attack him as a leftist radical only by moving so far to the right in their rhetoric and policy prescriptions that they fall over the cliff of mainstream acceptability, or even basic sanity.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

120. I vote for progressives.

Not conservatives or moderates.

[libodem]

123. Sad but true

Best Republican-acting President evah, not that I don't luv the guy.

[joeybee12]

130. Yup, and he doesn't even mention the environmental disaster Obama has been...

KNR

[T S Justly]

135. K&R (nt)