Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

JDPriestly

(57,936 posts)
56. But the list of things that could have been accomplished within the administration without
Wed May 1, 2013, 12:51 PM
May 2013

Congress is long and quite troubling.

Banking could have been set straight had the Obama administration been willing to replace the top bankers the way he did those who were corrupting and destroying our auto industry. Banking could also have been set straight if Obama had taken a few of the worst in the banking and mortgage industry to court rather than just making money deals with them. Bankers pay their debts with other people's money. Making them pay fines does not cause them to think about what they have done right and wrong. What if we made drug dealers pay fines rather than send them to jail? What do you think the drug dealers would do? Why, sell more drugs of course. Bankers are not going to react any differently. Faced with huge fines, bankers will just try to think of even more risky schemes to make the money to pay the fines. The Obama administration is dealing with banks so as to perpetuate the fraud, not to end it.

I am hearing more and more often that the regulations needed to enforce Dodd/Frank and reform the financial industry at least to the extent that bill requires have not been agreed upon or set in place, much less implemented. That is really bad news.

We are still in Afghanistan. And we have paid Karzai all kinds of money. How is that supposed to help us end that war and handle the Taliban? Again, we are encouraging Karzai and Afghanistan to do more of whatever they were rewarded for with the money we have already given them. And that whatever they were rewarded for does not seem to have improved the situation in Afghanistan. That is a failed policy of rewarding conduct that harms us not conduct that helps us.

Now that we are officially out of Iraq, whatever happened to the Green Zone? Did we just abandon our huge investment there? Or are we really still there? I would like to know whether we dismantled the Green Zone? Is there a report on this out there? Did I just miss it?

And why has it taken so long to implement the ACA?

I'm sorry, but Obama has been too ready to just move slowly on things that should have gone very quickly.

Obama's relationship with Congress is bad because he wasn't in Congress very long and doesn't really understand how it works. Also, Obama has surrounded himself at the White House with a lot of smart guys who are mostly interested in themselves. He has only a very small number of long-term friends who will support him through thick or thin.

What is more, it appears from the press that Obama is closer to the foes of Democrats like Boehner and Pete Peterson, the head of GE, etc. than with those who support Democratic values like Elizabeth Warren, Grayson, Sherrod Brown, Sanders, Marcy Kaptur, Maxine Waters, Xavier Becerra, etc. Why don't we see Obama working with these truly liberal members of Congress? Why does he spend so much of his time working with conservatives? It's like he punishes his friends and those on the left by spending less time with them than with the Boehner/McConnell bunch.

Obama seems to think that to get along with people you have to avoid offending them. That is sometimes true, but often not. Also, even if, from the point of view of tastes and similar personalities, you don't get along with the people who are on your side, in Obama's case, with those in Congress who are going to vote for his bills for sure or at the outer reach of your side (like very progressive politicians are for Obama), you need to be really good to them and to show your good relationship with them for all the world to see. You want to reward loyalty with attention and the opportunity to get good press. Obama seems to reward his foes with time especially press time more than his real friends.

It isn't enough to get close to your enemies, to be buddy-buddy with them, if you don't scare them just a bit. Obama is very good at flattering his political enemies, being nice to them, but he doesn't appear to be willing to really get in their faces and encourage his allies, those who oppose his enemies to really get out on the limb to support Obama's policies.

Obama is too low-key to deal with a lot of the people in Congress who are ambitious and looking for opportunities to grandstand. Obama, himself, grandstands the Republican fools. Obama should, instead, be giving people to the left of him more opportunities to make news and shine. He opens himself up to attack and makes sure that the attacks against him get as much press as possible by constantly trying to compromise with Republicans.

He should get as close to Democrats as possible, make sure everyone knows he is close to Democrats, the more to the left the better, and then invite the Republicans to enjoy some of his attention and bask in his (Obama's) popularity. Only when the press and public are reminded of how much clout, how much backing from progressive Democrats, from all Democrats, Obama really has, how popular he is with Democrats, will he be able to negotiate from a position of strength with the Republicans.

Obama is a great campaigner, but he doesn't know how to negotiate or how to use his friends and those to the left of him as support.

The Republicans are in the news all the time because Obama puts them there. That is a huge mistake.

BUT...GERRYMANDERING! WE CAN'T! MineralMan May 2013 #1
We need to get smart and as devious as the GOP. kelliekat44 May 2013 #61
Yes. DEVIOUS. We have to start fighting the way THEY do. calimary May 2013 #68
BUT BLUE DOGS! THEY'RE THE SAME AS REPUBLICANS!!!1! MineralMan May 2013 #2
The only true way to fix it madokie May 2013 #3
+1000 MineralMan May 2013 #5
In a perfect world - yes. Unfortunately, I don't even avebury May 2013 #59
BUT MY DISTRICT!!1! IT'S A LOCK FOR THE REPUBLICAN! MineralMan May 2013 #4
They said that about my district in 2012 RockaFowler May 2013 #34
+100 MineralMan May 2013 #69
Then run someone as a Rpublican and primary the current office holder. At least make him face a kelliekat44 May 2013 #62
80-20. Then the 20% extremes in the nation are rendered obsolete. graham4anything May 2013 #6
Moving toward that is a great idea. MineralMan May 2013 #10
98% of "Our" Problems fredamae May 2013 #7
Problem -- Harry Reid and Senate Super Iridium May 2013 #14
I don't agree with pressing blame in this case....it achieves nothing. What's done is done. Sheepshank May 2013 #17
I'm sorry you feel that way fredamae May 2013 #21
Certainly sounded that way Fredmae Sheepshank May 2013 #24
There is no "walk-back" fredamae May 2013 #30
oh alrighty then Sheepshank May 2013 #31
At the very least fredamae May 2013 #32
It is interesting that you billh58 May 2013 #44
How did I "bash" PBO? fredamae May 2013 #47
When you presume billh58 May 2013 #66
I await your response fredamae May 2013 #72
You can't make deals with someone in an alternate universe. cheyanne May 2013 #8
Public approval ratings for those who voted against MineralMan May 2013 #9
Each of the People below can be defeated the next MineralMan May 2013 #11
Handing anything to the GOP, anything at any time by flaking out...is so not a viable option. Sheepshank May 2013 #12
Thanks! You're right. MineralMan May 2013 #13
I'm finding solace in a "handshake" between "friends" Plucketeer May 2013 #15
Because he caves at every turn or proposes bad positions on point May 2013 #16
I'm tired of many things. One of those is being silent. MineralMan May 2013 #18
But the list of things that could have been accomplished within the administration without JDPriestly May 2013 #56
BULL!!! Sheepshank May 2013 #20
Yep we need to start thinking 2014 flamingdem May 2013 #19
Not just thinking. The process of selecting candidates MineralMan May 2013 #23
True, and the organizing seems better now flamingdem May 2013 #28
He's not working for us poor elderly people? L0oniX May 2013 #22
As one of those, I don't think he is not working for us. MineralMan May 2013 #25
I thought he had a majority in the house a while back. So what would be the dif now? L0oniX May 2013 #27
So...just how long did Obama have that majority? Sheepshank May 2013 #33
13 Weeks. And a Lot got done n/t fredamae May 2013 #55
...and because not enough Democrats showed up in 2010, the result thus being the GOP takeover. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #26
^^^This^^^ riqster May 2013 #76
No such thing happened on the West Coast. Oregon set midterm turnout records in 2010 Bluenorthwest May 2013 #80
Then explain to me why Russ Feingold lost? Your theory doesn't hold up in all instances. Liberal_Stalwart71 May 2013 #81
I thought it was strange how close Jamaal510 May 2013 #114
I fully expect to have to fight OFA in primaries zipplewrath May 2013 #29
I see. Well, OK. MineralMan May 2013 #38
Two things, MadHound May 2013 #35
Then I guess I shouldn't count on you for the GOTV effort? MineralMan May 2013 #37
Oh, I will vote, I will donate money, I will probably even work for a campaign or two. MadHound May 2013 #42
I would guess you would pick "other." Skidmore May 2013 #49
Well, that is really up to the Democratic party and its candidate now, isn't it? MadHound May 2013 #50
So who or which party has worked hard to earn your vote? Sheepshank May 2013 #67
LOL! MadHound May 2013 #70
Nope...you are barking up the wrong tree...my insinations are in your own mind Sheepshank May 2013 #73
I doubt we'll ever get an answer to that question. MineralMan May 2013 #71
I know we won't get the answer to that question now... SidDithers May 2013 #116
Uff da! That's shocking. nt MineralMan May 2013 #117
The counter-argument to legitimately argued concerns is not "GOTV." Hissyspit May 2013 #100
GOTV 2014! ananda May 2013 #36
He is starring in a movie as Daniel Day Lewis? Rex May 2013 #39
Thanks for this MM!! Wisconsin is a prime example of why we have to fix this!!! hue May 2013 #40
And that's duplicated in many places. MineralMan May 2013 #41
WHY IS EVERYONE SHOUTING??! IS THE SKY FALLING? chknltl May 2013 #43
I AGREE 200% kjackson227 May 2013 #45
Thanks! MineralMan May 2013 #46
That's right If the 2nd Amendment stands then so should the simple majority to pass a bill No 2/3 bs judesedit May 2013 #48
Thank you! hedgehog May 2013 #51
You're very welcome! MineralMan May 2013 #52
I LIKE TYPING IN ALL CAPS!!! Javaman May 2013 #53
You cannot fix shit! This will continue until we take campaign money out of the picture and fund Dustlawyer May 2013 #54
GOTV = whatchamacallit May 2013 #82
It went right over their heads Dustlawyer sorefeet May 2013 #96
Finally, someone who gets it! They cannot see the forest through the trees! Dustlawyer May 2013 #109
Not Mentioned Nearly Enough DallasNE May 2013 #57
Then, explain how Minnesota regained control of MineralMan May 2013 #63
That's Not What I Said DallasNE May 2013 #74
Money is one thing. I don't have money. MineralMan May 2013 #75
Because he did not pressure Harry Reid to kill the fillibuster. Or, bring it as an issue to grahamhgreen May 2013 #58
Which superpower does Obama use on Reid? JoePhilly May 2013 #77
1) Offer Lieberman a cabinet post (or, use your intel to figure out what he wants and then get it) grahamhgreen May 2013 #98
1) Which cabinet post do you as President offer Lieberman? JoePhilly May 2013 #103
Not buying it. Obama is a skilled political operative who can figure out how to manipulate one grahamhgreen May 2013 #115
Because killing the filibuster would get bills through the House? jeff47 May 2013 #94
OK, true that. grahamhgreen May 2013 #99
So our President is an "asshole" because he has "cut SS"? tridim May 2013 #106
Count Me titanicdave May 2013 #60
I think Job ONE is to get more Democrats elected. ESPECIALLY at the state level. calimary May 2013 #64
Minnesota did that in 2012. Democrats regained control MineralMan May 2013 #65
Because he's a closet moose scratcher. Ikonoklast May 2013 #78
Frustrating libodem May 2013 #79
I am with you about fighting tooth and nail in 2014 and I will once again be manning the phones rhett o rick May 2013 #83
Thanks for continuing your efforts! MineralMan May 2013 #85
Who says he isn't? Jamie Dimon seems happy enough. raouldukelives May 2013 #84
Now you've done it. You just went right ahead and cut through the bullshit. n/t pa28 May 2013 #87
Because of attitudes like this. Your loaded question is very anti-Obama. Coyotl May 2013 #86
Maybe you should read past the subject line. I don't think the OP is 'anti Obama'. randome May 2013 #88
Read the post. MineralMan May 2013 #89
LOLOL Skittles May 2013 #91
I understand what the implied rhetorical assumption is. Coyotl May 2013 #97
He's going to get the Social Security cuts done. As soon as the Repubs stop blocking him. AnotherMcIntosh May 2013 #90
I'm onboard Indyfan53 May 2013 #92
The vast majority of betrayals on this list woo me with science May 2013 #93
He had 60 senators and a large House majority in 2009-2010 Doctor_J May 2013 #95
We had 59 democrats, not 60. Indyfan53 May 2013 #107
yeah, yeah Doctor_J May 2013 #112
Then, what do we do when the republicans filibuster? Indyfan53 May 2013 #113
oh fuck it Sheepshank May 2013 #110
The only real way to move forward and address our challenges is to remove the spicegal May 2013 #101
Obama has accomplished a great deal. Laelth May 2013 #102
Attention gays, women & the poor... Everything the Pres has done for you was really done for TPTB! tridim May 2013 #108
K&R treestar May 2013 #104
Why doesn't he want to get the right things done? nt LWolf May 2013 #105
Yes, that MUST be what it is. hughee99 May 2013 #111
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»WHY CAN'T PRESIDENT OBAMA...»Reply #56