President Obama is a....

[kentuck]

Poll question: President Obama is a....

[Scurrilous]

1. Fascist!!1!

:thumbsup:

[Number23]

65. I was gonna vote "leprechaun" but it wasn't an option for some reason...

[aquart]

2. Spaghetti.

[tjwash]

3. poopy headed meanie that makes baby-marx cry :(

nt

[ZombieHorde]

26. Funny, I am still laughing. Baby-Marx! nt

[brettdale]

4. A democrat

hes hoping for a great two years where he stands up to the BS.

[Individualist]

5. New Democrat

by his own admission.

[Cant trust em]

6. Democratic corporatist. nt

[EmeraldCityGrl]

7. Narcissist.

[bigtree]

8. couple of your choices can be credibly conflated

can't choose from conflicting choices

[kentuck]

9. Not even one you like?

Hmmmmmm...

[bigtree]

10. hmmm, yourself. You're not one of those are you?

I'd choose Democrat and pragmatist.

[kentuck]

15. I would choose...

conservative Democratic pragmatist.

[bigtree]

22. what day of the week?

:7

[kentuck]

23. Today.

What day were you thinking of??

[bigtree]

30. tomorrow

[kentuck]

32. It depends...

if the facts on the ground change. Reality seems to have changed with this President.

[bigtree]

34. reality doesn't change

just our perception of it

[kentuck]

35. My perception has changed.

Has yours not changed? Still the same? My definition of a "pragmatist" has changed. Now, I believe it depends on your basic political philosophy. If you are more conservative, then you might think differently about taxcuts than if you are a progressive? Perhaps?

[bigtree]

36. I think that you can be concerned, yet ill-informed about the political process

. . . that regulates the tax rates, benefits, and incentives. The loss of a tax break, for instance, might not occur in the mind of those affected as a positive step in the direction of some dubious, unsupported, future economic policy. I think most wage earners would just score it as an income loss at the hands of the federal government.

I'm bullish on government. I have a basic philosophy of involvement and vigilance. I owe that to the myriads of negative interests and influences which show up every day to collect our tax dollars. It remains a challenge to effect progressive changes, but, there isn't any productive alternative or effective substitute to continuing to work to build coalitions within our political system to advance our ideals into action or law.

[kentuck]

37. Do you think adding $1 trillion to the debt...?

would have any impact on the Treasuries market?

Do you think this will actually help the economy grow and help the President's re-election?

Or do you think this will help the middle-class in the short term and their futures will not be affected in a negative way?

What role do taxes play in government? Can you be bullish on taxcuts and government at the same time?

What do you mean by "some dubious, unsupported, future economic policy"?

[bigtree]

38. you assume money saved would go to support some sort of net deficit reduction

. . . I'm assuming?

From what I see, the aim of the tax effort is to circulate money into the 'economy' to spur some sort of growth. It's another short-term/stop-gap measure which is the only type of economic policy our politicians seem to be able to agree on.

The future of the economy of the 'middle-class' isn't going to have any advantage of any long-term legislative remedies for a while. The President will propose and Congress will posture until they run out of cover.

I'm bullish on our government, but not necessarily based on one policy decision the legislature makes or the other. I'm bullish on the political process.

[kentuck]

42. I believe that making an attempt to lower the deficit might...

have a more positive impact on the economy than another trilion dollars spent in the manner spent.

Personally, I think the best stimulus would be a government jobs program, rather than taxcuts or unemployment checks. I think it has been proven that taxcuts do not necessarily stimulate the economy. This is not 1961 when tax rates were 90%. There is a law of diminishing returns, in regards to taxcuts, in my opinion.

If they were to couple the expiration of the Bush tax cuts with the withdrawal of troops from the MidEast, it would do more for our economy than about anything so far mentioned by Obama or his minions.

By the way, deficit reduction, just like in 1992, is the hot political issue of the moment.

[bigtree]

45. that's a good example

. . . of what I meant by a 'unsupported economic policy'. A government jobs program is a dubious prospect, given the coming reign of the republican-led House.

Boehner will attempt to highlight deficit reduction with some sort of spending reduction plan. We can include his upper-income tax cuts at the head of any list he might come up with.

I'm not arguing the tax scheme makes perfect sense as a stimulus effort, but that will be one of its effects. It would be naive to think the administration and others aren't pursuing the bill as a means to introduce more money into the economy. I don't think you can find another 'supported' legislative vehicle for doing that, on this scale, in this lame-duck Congress; and certainly not in the next one.

[kentuck]

47. To dream the impossible dream, I guess?

I have a tough time understanding "crisis". When you are hungry and unemployed and homeless, it is a crisis. But there's no use to talk about them because the Repubs will never agree to help them and we can never reach a compromise, so therefore, we just settle for what we can get. Whatever they want to give us. We have no power. If it is not possible to get, no need to fight for it. I'm a dreamer, I suppose?

[bigtree]

49. what does the republican opposition do?

. . . they organize. Although, they're genuinely divided between one phony argument in the legislature and another opportunistic one among republican candidates right now.

Democrats are mostly divided on tactics. It doesn't stand to reason that President Obama wouldn't sign almost every Democratic oriented bill our legislators could manage. A lot of folks are looking for ways to subvert the political process to expedite their agenda that they've failed to enact. The prescription offered for success is a 'fight', but romanticized schemes to jawbone the republicans into submission are as unlikely to occur as they are unlikely to move obstinate legislators.

I am very sympathetic with the impatience with our democratic system. The political process has been rigged to advantage the moneyed. Every action is designed to discourage you from cutting in on all of that. Every action is to deflect you; weaken your resolve to vigilance; divide your coalition and push you away from participating. It's a privileged game and you're not really invited.

That doesn't mean, though, that you actually need to be invited in. It's your government; as much as it belongs to anyone else. Step right in, but, don't forget to bring as large a posse as you can manage to advantage your 'fight' for the things you want. The prospect for success has never been a guarantee - it's just a promise. It's a hell of one, though.

[kentuck]

50. I agree with you...

I am not yet ready to surrender.

[pnwmom]

11. Interesting. This tell us more about DUers than Obama.

The term "corporatist" is practically unknown outside the Nader/Duer crowd.

[kentuck]

12. Isn't that like all polls??

Even those by Gallup?

[pnwmom]

14. Certainly it's often true. n/t

[NorthCarolina]

16. What??? Sorry, I don't believe that. Linky? nt

[tpsbmam]

44. Have fun reading.

Corporatist Google news:

http://www.google.com/#q=corporatist&hl=en&prmd=ivn&source=univ&tbs=nws:1&tbo=u&ei=kHgFTfWfKMH_lgfGy4CDCA&sa=X&oi=news_group&ct=title&resnum=11&sqi=2&ved=0CHwQqAIwCg&fp=32e303ce7dee4776

Google search:

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&expIds=17259,27030,27585,28066&sugexp=ldymls&xhr=t&q=corporatist&cp=11&qe=Y29ycG9yYXRpc3Q&qesig=MIDHEDNz33s4iImk3akIVg&pkc=AFgZ2tnPXxs4B78GsbWqrZxGx_WCDjA5M1SO74DDdO2cE0Y_CXSayUnocxnbnpSFPVyVjrY_Bhl__AaKAOYiwuZHnUm9rF6YpQ&pf=p&sclient=psy&aq=0&aqi=&aql=&oq=corporatist&gs_rfai=&pbx=1&fp=e5fd06862a1d57a1


I note that Ron Paul followers know the term -- he accurately asserted that Obama isn't a socialist, he's a corporatist. Among other places he's said it, this speech was at the Southern Republican Leadership Conference.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSaQ7WPd_LM

No, DUers and Naderites aren't the only ones who know the term...or agree with it when it comes to Obama.

[nxylas]

13. I voted for compromiser

There are a few things in his record, like the appointment of Elizabeth Warren, that prevented me from voting Corporatist, though I was leaning that way.

[flvegan]

17. witch.

He turned me into a newt.

[Scurrilous]

18. Hope you get better.

:thumbsup:

[yourout]

19. Almost everything he has signed has had a loophole or function to benefit the rich......

[scarletwoman]

20. Other - he's a "New" Democrat neoliberal aligned with the interests of the wealthy elite.

I'm old enough to remember real Democrats, and Obama is no Democrat.

[Iggo]

21. HELLCAT!!!!

HELLCAT!!!

HELLCAT!!!

[NoodleyAppendage]

24. DISAPPOINTMENT.

Pure and simple. We were sold a load of bullsh*t in 2008.

J

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

54. TruDat !

[golddigger]

25. I haven't the vaguest idea.

[one_voice]

27. An alien...

he can't produce a long form bc cuz he's from another planet.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. By his own admission... blue dog

[reformist2]

29. I went with pragmatist, because I think he's too liberal at heart to be a corporatist.

[Laelth]

31. Flypaper. Happy to unrec. n/t

-Laelth

[MineralMan]

33. Other: A President, faced with serious opposition from his own

party that may give that seat to a Republican in 2012. Very sad, indeed.

[Tesha]

46. And why do we in the party oppose him? Do you ever wonder? (NT)

[MineralMan]

48. What's this we stuff? I'm also a Democrat, and I support him.

I'm an active Democrat, too - a precinct chairperson and an active campaigner. Don't count only people who agree with you as Democrats. There are many, many Democrats like me out there, too. Even a majority of Democrats, actually.

You can only speak for yourself, not for other Democrats. Thanks.

[Morning Dew]

39. Doll.

In a Rossum Corporation sense, of course.

[Vickers]

40. Unrec for being completely unhelpful. n/t

[kentuck]

43. I apologize for not being sufficiently supportive...

in destroying our middle class and the Democratic Party.

[Vickers]

55. Sarcasm is not your strong suit. Nor is misplaced martyrdom. n/t

[kentuck]

56. n/t

.

[TheWatcher]

59. How many times have I told you kentuck.

You've got to learn to lick those Boots if you want to be one of the Cool Kids.

Five Fingers, Winston!

:crazy:

[Occam Bandage]

41. "Pragmatist" "Democrat" and "Corporatist" are all correct. nt

[Amaya]

51. a one- termer

nt

[BlueIris]

52. Puppet.

If we're lucky, we'll get to see at least one of the hands that moves him before this show is over. Which it will be soon.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[DeadEyeDyck]

57. K&R

trying

[Douglas Carpenter]

58. a reasonably decent enough man who is overpowered by a global economic system

that is far more powerful now than it was in the 90's when Bill Clinton was making similar compromises or sellouts if you will.

In the 60's and early 70's capitalism was already extremely powerful, but it was counterbalanced to a significantly greater degree than it is now by powerful unions and other progressive forces and the relative inability of corporate power to break the power of unions by outsourcing to third world economies. Also with the cold war and as awful as the Soviet Union and its allies were - they created a global philosophic counter balance to unrestrained capital power as as well as the need to demonstrate to the world that capitalism offered more to working class people than command economy bureaucratic collectivism.

We now live in a single economic system world where there is no longer any philosophic counterbalance or any need for capitalism to demonstrate its relative progressivism and capital is as mobile as the click of a button on a laptop.

Having said this, following the market meltdown of September/October 2008 and with the election mandate of November 2008 - Mr. Obama had a unique opportunity to create a new paradigm. But unfortunately he did not cease the day. But to be honest, I did not expect him or any other mainstream politician to cease that unique opportunity. They are simply way too much part of the system.

[MellowDem]

60. Wow, DU has no idea what corporatism is...

It has nothing to do with "corporations".

[TeaBagsAreForCups]

66. Uhhhh, yes we do.

"In contemporary usage, "corporatism" is often used as a term to describe politics dominated by the interests of business corporations (Corporatocracy)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism

"Corporatocracy, in social theories that focus on conflicts and opposing interests within society, denotes a system of government that serves the interest of, and may be run by, corporations and involves ties between government and business. Where corporations, conglomerates, and/or government entities with private components, control the direction and governance of a country, including carrying out economic planning notwithstanding the 'free market' label"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatocracy

"Corporatism - Definition
The term corporatism has different meanings in different contexts. Most notably, the historical usage of the term is not the same as its modern usage. ....Historically, corporatism or corporativism (Italian corporativismo) is a political system in which legislative power is given to corporations that represent economic, industrial, and professional groups. Unlike pluralism, in which many groups must compete for control of the state, in corporatism, certain unelected bodies take a critical role in the decision-making process. This original meaning was not connected with the specific notion of a business corporation, being a rather more general reference to any incorporated body. The word "corporatism" is derived from the Latin word for body, corpus. ...Today, corporatism or neo-corporatism is used in reference to tendencies in politics for legislators and administrations to be influenced or dominated by the interests of business enterprises ..."

http://www.wordiq.com/definition/Corporatism

"Fascism should rightly be called Corporatism, as it is the merger of corporate and government power." Benito Mussolini"

http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/05/corporatism_comes_to_america.html


.... Terms, concepts, and classifications do evolve and morph over time - most critically in terms of common usage and in the mind of the body politic.

(edit for style and emphasis.)

[harun]

68. +1, of course we do.

[MellowDem]

70. In the mind of the body politic....

what does corporatism mean? I would posit that they have no idea overall. Just because a very small number on the left, and not in any way a "body politic", have mistaken the meaning of the word does not change the meaning of the word. The confusion is still there, as many liberals use corporatism in its flawed meaning as proof of fascism, when fascism did not have to do with the flawed meaning of corporatism.

Also, there is a correct meaning for the term that liberals are searching for, corporatocracy. Using the wrong term will ony confuse the issue, while using a new term that does not have multipile meanings is a better alternative. New theories and meanings generally need new terms. Using terms that are associated with fascism that has really nothing to do with the new idea is a bad idea, to say the least.

[Rex]

61. He is a corporate man and a democratic leader.

Looks to be about right.

[niceypoo]

62. Reagan Democrat

[Imagevision]

63. Barack O’Bilderberg... (to those who get it)

[Capitalocracy]

64. My answer starts with a D

but it's not Democrat...

[mmonk]

67. Reagan disciple when it comes to economics and foreign policy.

Except he won't cut and run like Reagan did in Lebanon.

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rucky]

71. Pragmatist above all else.

Not to say some pragmatism isn't a good thing - it is. But not when it's above ALL else.

[meow mix]

72. its against DU rules for me to finish your sentence. sorry.

i dont want the pizza