You know how we're exhorted here to vote for Obama, even if we have reservations?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

I've never liked that pressure move, that line of reasoning, that attempt to shame people into accepting the lesser of two evils, and I still feel that way to a large degree.

But we just hit defcon 2, and I'm all in now. I still don't like some of Obama's policy planks, and I'll still complain about those when I choose to, but my reservations pale in comparison with the ideas expressed by Republican wasters of life and limb, who went on television today and found 20 different ways to tell the uninsured to die in the streets.

-Mitch McConnell: this millionaire wants you to die, and his replacement plan can be found in the blank whitespace at the end of this post.

-Sarah Palin: this guttermouthed methtrash piece of garbage called the President of the United states a tool...a tool of the poor, no less.

-Paul Ryan: The GOP's budgetmaster-sans-calculator just anointed himself as the Theist-in-Chief, saying you need to die, because god said so.

-Bobby Jindal: someone quit beating the shit out of this little bastard for his lunch money long enough that he had time to say he doesn't care about the rule of law. Oh, and citizens of Louisiana: die.

-Scott Walker: he already knows he's above the law, now he's just flaunting it. Live in Wisconsin? Get cancer and die.

-Rick Scott: this felonious multimillionaire from the rancid heart of the insurance-care industry isn't going to do shit for you, Floridians--except to watch you get sick, at which point it will be easier for him to lecture you about personal responsibility.

-Rand Paul: this pile of garbage with tight curls styles himself a constitutional scholar, at least when the highest court in the land takes a decision he doesn't like. Residents of Kentucky, it's double bonus days with Senator Paul. He'll have your head stomped, so that he can watch you die, with no insurance.

My new Facebook policy: scorched earth.
My new Twitter policy (already posted): if you don't like politics, please unfollow now. Scorched earth.

My not-so-new 'bagger policy: you're subhuman garbage, and will be treated as such.

Thank you.

(edited to get rid of some stridency in the 1st para. My fight is not with big Obama fans, and I don't want to derail the conversation with my own words in the OP. Pls read original if interested).

[Make7]

1. Prior to this they were arguing in good faith on policy grounds. ( n/t )

[DisgustipatedinCA]

4. Disagree that ALL were arguing in good faith, but I won't contest the point in this thread

I meant to provide a background to my thinking--where I was, where I am now, and what got me here. To argue the merits of this background material would be to detract from what actually has me white hot angry at the Republican party right now. Thank you.

[russspeakeasy]

2. Nicely done. Thanks for the post.

[progressivebydesign]

3. Thank you for "getting it." truly....

Every time I see another post here about someone who isn't going to vote for Obama or 'has friends" who won't, because he didn't hit on their particular interests this term, I want to scream. So I REALLY appreciate your thoughtful post!!

I wonder about those people.. so HOW is sitting around doing nothing, which ensures Romney will win, going to help you ever get what is important to you? It's like I just want to link to Romney's video clip over and over "first thing I'd do is get rid of Planned Parenthood." And while the progressive purists may think that sitting it out is the answer, it's absolutely unfair and morally wrong to subject your fellow citizens to the corporate-centric policies that will hurt them.

I didn't expect President Obama to be progressive. He has a huge constituency of all types of Democrats, and he has the media and the republicans who keep him from enacting more progressive policies (but he's done a TON more than I expected he could!)

BUT.. what I do know that is if President Obama is not progressive enough for some people, you need to get him BACK in office.. because the next Democratic President will be more progressive, and it will be.. well.. progressively progressive. But we can't do jack shit with a republican in the white house, congress, senate, and governorships. Remember, when Bill and Hillary tried to get health care going a decade or so ago, they were squashed.. and now we have a the reform. It takes time.. but we will absolutely go backwards if people don't stop this apathetic posturing and purist mentality, we will have Romney!!

Keep reminding your friends... I can't even understand why anyone would think that Romney is going to be more progressive. We cannot, absolutely cannot, let Romney win... it will be a referendum on the failed policies that nearly destroyed America during Bush's years (and frankly, there is no way in Hell we're going to let Koch and Rove and their billions BUY the election this time! I want them to lose, and waste all that money.)

[patrice]

5. It was NO accident in '08 that Palin is a SECESSIONIST. They hired BHO & planned to take him down

Last edited Sun Jul 1, 2012, 11:52 PM - Edit history (1)

at the same time, once he served his purpose: to take the blame for what they KNEW for a decade or more was headed in our direction, the Derivative Crash of '08 and also for him to take the blame for THEIR WARS.

THAT kind of money does not mess around with the nice. 9/11/01. & The murder of appx. 5K Americans, maiming physically & psychologically of about 30K more, the murders of about 100K Iraqis, and creating 3-4 million refugees about half of whom are orphans - all pretty much prove what they WILL do to get what they want.

[randome]

6. Phrases like 'sub human garbage' are guaranteed to harden our enemies.

We need to recognize Reality: they will never go away. The best we can do is to keep highlighting their gaffes and insensitivity to the people they are supposed to serve. They are reeling now. We need to not let up but also not to descend to their level.

Fight this on their grounds and we end up with an eternal stalemate. There are other emotional responses we can bring to bear on the struggle.

Fighting fire with fire only gets everyone burned.

[hfojvt]

9. thank you

but get ready for the "scorched earth"

[woo me with science]

7. I have no problem with people exhorting others to vote for Obama.

Just look at the alternative.

What I have a problem with is people namecalling and telling others to shut up and not criticize right-wing, corporate, neocon, and police state POLICIES coming out of this administration.

We have a problem of corporate money in our party, too, and terrible policies will not change without pressure from all of us. Especially during an election year, when we have the most leverage, it is our responsibility to exert pressure on our party to treat what is happening to the poor and the middle class as the emergency it is.

When two planes crashed into the WTC on 9/11, it was considered a national emergency. Three thousand people died, the nation was outraged, wars were started, and our entire nation was thrust into a new way of living, because of this national tragedy.

Compare the loss of 3000 to what is happening now. Over a million American students are homeless now. We have the second-highest child poverty rate of all the developed nations; only ROMANIA is worse. Forty percent of our wealth has been looted. People who were comfortably middle class 15 years ago are living in cars on the street. Meanwhile, the corporations are sucking in record profits.

Where is the commensurate alarm about THIS emergency? Where is the outrage? Where is the President standing up and pounding his fist on the podium and saying that it is absolutely unacceptable, in a country with the wealth that America has, for ANY person to have to worry about food or shelter? Where are the vigils and the speeches and the national days of alarm and attention to this, and the exhortations for a SERIOUS, immediate response? Why do we not get a response AT LEAST as URGENT and VEHEMENT as the response to 9/11?

Why?

No, we get corporate platitudes about the need for "shared sacrifice," austerity, and budget cutting, and admonitions to be patient and not be such a "purist." We get more drone wars. We get our Secretary of Defense admonishing us about how we can't cut military spending. We get a President *starting out* debt ceiling negotiations by offering up social spending and giving speeches advocating austerity. We get billions of dollars in new police state infrastructure and surveillance centers. We don't get any sense of alarm about *what is happening to Americans.*

This is a bigger emergency than 9/11. Where is the outrage?

EVERY Democrat should be speaking out and pushing our politicians to change the national narrative, not telling others to shut up. Every American should be speaking out and DEMANDING better.

[MannyGoldstein]

8. Well stated, thanks.

All we want is for Obama and the Democrats to fight as hard for working Americans as they fight for bankers and for re-election.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

10. I agree with most everything you've said here.

There's no doubt my OP could have been worded more eloquently, more in line with what you've said. But for me personally, watching these slavering jackals of the GOP make their plans to destroy something that really will help millions of people has caused me to reprioritize. Keeping this very flawed law on the books (in hopes that it will be improved over time) is now my highest political priority. I didn't become a centrist overnight, and I haven't forgotten about all of the areas in which I think the President has failed or has not been forceful enough. But I do need him to win in November, because Republican plans are coming into sharp focus, and this paints an ugly, destructive picture. Thank you.

[hfojvt]

12. Is Romania even a developed nation?

Of course, I met a lovely Hungarian girl in my very own laundromat. She said that Hungary has no laudromats. Which sorta boggled my mind. If they are poorer than us, then why wouldn't they have laundromats, which are places for poor people to do laundry?

[woo me with science]

14. I recall a post someone made when those rankings came out.

Someone here posted that Romania hadn't previously been included on the list of developed nations at all, and they speculated that it had been added so that the US would not have the embarrassment of being dead last. I don't know if that post was accurate or not.

[TheWraith]

13. Everything you just said is wrong.

And frankly it completely undercuts your mouthing tepid support for reelecting Obama, when you continue spreading debunked lies like cutting social spending--which was protected from ANY cuts under Obama's plan, even small ones--or continuing to push the fact-free propaganda meme that Obama's policies are secretly right wing because he hasn't dragged everyone who works on Wall Street out and shot them in the street while ushering in a socialist utopia.

[Fumesucker]

29. ...

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/15/prosecutions-for-bank-fraud-fall-sharply/

Federal prosecutions for financial institution fraud have tumbled over the last decade, despite the recent troubles in the banking sector, according to a new analysis of Justice Department data by the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse (TRAC) at Syracuse University.

[sabrina 1]

15. Good post!

Yeah the 'shut up and vote' contingency has always scared me. Mindless loyalty will do nothing to improve the status quo. Makes you wonder what are the goals of those who do this?

[hay rick]

18. Take that, ROMANIA!

Terrific post. The media's hyped-on-steroids outrage over 9-11 provides the perfect contrast to the indifference displayed concerning the decline of living standards for the majority of Americans.

Where is the MSM on this story? Licking their master's boots.

[joshcryer]

20. You get exactly what you voted for.

[EFerrari]

23. Paul Krugman said essentially the same thing at the Commonwealh Club.

Yes, this is an emergency. And it will likely get worse before better.

[SammyWinstonJack]

33. ...

[jwirr]

11. It has always kind of like being in a war where you are not advancing but you are still trying to

hold the line. Many of us disagree with the President in one way or another but we want to keep this mess from going further into the ditch. And there is no doubt that the gop will take it there deliberately. Having voted the first time for JFK I have seen the need for this many times and after winning have turned right around and begun to fight my own party to get them to do what I wanted. If we are lucky President Obama will end up with a true majority in both houses and will turn out to be what we wanted in the first place. At the very least he will
get to noninate better SCOTUS than the gop.

Politics is not simple but instead it is very complicated.

[Honeycombe8]

16. Well, this IS a Democratic forum. It tends to attract, you know, Democrats.

Other than that, I'm on board with your post. I am ready to stand behind Obama to get him re-elected, full throttle, and then push him after he's re-elected, to get taxes increased for the millionaires, single payer, environmental strengthening, alternative energy.

[Ruby the Liberal]

17. Nice rant!

[GarroHorus]

19. I stopped reading after the title.

Fuck reading any more than that.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

25. Do you find that responding in threads you haven't read works well for you?

Honestly, it's an approach I hadn't considered.

[GarroHorus]

34. When the title is complete stupidity that warrants nothing but disdain, yes. n/t

[Marrah_G]

21. He has my vote

It is because the alternative is too revolting.

He also has it despite those who try to pressure others or shame others. I regularly remind myself that they are people on a message board and it's best to just ignore their behavior.

I'm an unapologetic socialist.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

27. Thanks, Marrah_G. n/t

[joshcryer]

22. I have no problem with who people vote for nor do I coerce anyone to vote for Obama.

I merely reserve the right to call people lying hypocrites if they are here and don't support Obama and trash him despite being one of the most consistent hardest working Presidents in my lifetime.

The rest of your post, of course, goes without saying.

But for every Rand Paul bashing post here or Rick Scott bashing post here (outside of Politics 2012) there are 5 Obama detracting posts here.

So spare me the faux outrage.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

24. Exactly what false outrage are you asking to be spared from

You're not clear, and I would appreciate knowing what it is you're talking about.

[joshcryer]

30. I don't find the "bagger policy" convincing.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

35. Thanks for the clarification, I guess

My feelings about teabaggers aren't in dispute, and aren't subject to review by you, but again, thanks for responding.

[sabrina 1]

37. Didn't you just tell me recently that you had no respect for President Obama?

[joshcryer]

38. I don't go around detracting from Obama on a message board dedicated to Democrats.

edit: and I said I had a low opinion, not that I didn't respect.

[sabrina 1]

40. I haven't seen anyone detracting from Obama. I have seen people

disagree with some of his policies. I have not seen a single comment that has attacked the President personally. And if we can't discuss policies on a political forum, especially a Democratic Forum, what exactly are we doing here?

[joshcryer]

41. I suppose you missed that one poster who got PPR'd then for posting right wing sources...

...with a "left wing" "policy discussion" slant to it.

[sabrina 1]

42. I missed nothing.

It raises a question though. That poster mostly used left wing or mainstream sources for years.

I have seen posters here use right wing sources and nothing happened to them. Why is that? What does that say about CS? It's okay to use right wing sources depending on who likes you or who does not?

But your comment claimed that people here personally attack the president. I have never seen anyone do that.

[joshcryer]

43. So you "haven't seen anyone detracting from Obama" but you "missed nothing."

I think it was established that right wing sources were valid if we were bashing them, but not if we were supporting and praising the right wingers. In the end the poster was using known racists and outright vile sources. It just goes to show that for people to source their allegations they have to increasingly use vile, really horrible sources to do so.

I didn't say anyone here personally attacked the president. Detracting is a bit different from that, it means they disagree. But when your disagreements start to follow the Republican / right wing narrative, it becomes quite suspicious indeed.

[sabrina 1]

44. I will repeat, as you seem to not have read my comment.

I have seen criticism of policies, which is not the same thing as 'detracting from' a person. Unless you cannot separate the two of course, which I would expect most people here could do.

Nor have I seen anyone 'following the Republican/Right wing narrative' not intentionally, although anyone supporting Mandated Insurance, which Obama did not but McCain and Romney did, IS following the Republican/Right wing narrative.

Edited to add, the right wing sources I am referring to were NOT used to bash them, they were used to bash OWS, filled with lies and fundy attacks on women. But as I said, some 'rightwing sources' are more equal than others.

[kentuck]

26. We're glad you got rid of the stridency.

Good post!

[SidDithers]

28. "lesser of two evils"...

is a shit statement.

Sid

[joshcryer]

31. The lesser of two evils is perfectly valid for the privileged.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

36. Thank you, Sidney, and a hearty Happy Canada Day to you!

[Thinkingabout]

32. John huntsman was the best of the GOP

And he did not get enough delegated. While Obama may not be perfect but on his worst day he is much better than any repub I can think of

[Sirveri]

39. If there is no threat to his base how to we stop his rightward slide?

When he was running he was basically saying he would stop and undo a lot of the Bush admin damages. Close Gitmo, stop the privacy invasions, regulate wall street, restore habeus corpus, etc... Instead we got what we got, so what's to make him think twice if we're always just willing to sit back and take it, at what point do both sides become so anti-thetical to liberal ideals that we just say enough and actually start to walk away?