who won a second term in 2012.

Did I say: Third Way sucks?

I should have: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1969770

Since the Democratic Party was the party of the racist south back then.

However, by the 1930s, the GOP had given up largely on really strong civil rights advocacy. In fact, many African Americans switched parities under FDR. However, even with that, the 1968 voting rights bill saw a higher percentage of GOP senators supporting it then Dems.

Just saying.

But I am sure somebody will...entertaining...

And you are right and wrong.

Yes, it's shifted, but the definitions have not.

You have claimed to have taken poli sci, teach did a lousy job.

...not a liberal or a progressive...

Center left to left... Dif more liberal then Bill Clinton.

But I am liking Mr Obama's change to strength and steadfastness.

I am hoping that it continues - it has to for America to progress.

I think he is acting more liberal now to placate voters like you, in order to get a grand bargain. That's what he is after I think.

The mix is the political battle. However, I think Medicare and SS are on the table. They have to be if you are talking thise numbera.I also think the President wants the debt ceiling off the table as a political issue.

"I think Medicare and SS are on the table. They have to be if you are talking thise numbera."

You're starting to sound like Boehner with an accent? WTH is that?

No they don't: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021969595

That said, the gOP is giving 1.2 trillion in tax increases at most. That leaves most of the other stuff to come from sending cuts. The only place to cut is entitlements and Defense, really.

"That said, the gOP is giving 1.2 trillion in tax increases at most. That leaves most of the other stuff to come from sending cuts. The only place to cut is entitlements and Defense, really."

...negotiating with your fantasy and deal with the facts:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021969595

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021967183

Sniker... {and all sorts of face thingys}

..must be to strengthen it.

No real Democrat would *ever* harm Social Security or Medicare. And if Democrats
in the House and Senate and a President *ever* harms these programs - that means
the Democratic party is no longer.

I guess the definitions of liberal and progressive are subjective to the individual...

But there is a whole range of liberal, which is left of center. Ranging from just left of center, to mid-left, to far left (which is progressive). Same thing for conservatives. Tea partiers being far right, who don't regard moderate Republicans, like Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, as conservative, since they are not far right.

But Obama is, IMO, a certifiable liberal. Pro-gay rights, pro choice, pro-social program safety net, pro community programs, pro public school system, etc. All liberal positions. But he is not an activist. That's not his job. His job is to govern everyone and get bills enacted and handle emergencies, working with everyone from the far left to the far right.

I'm a liberal, but not a progressive. Progressives hate some of my moderate positions. But tea partiers regard me as a flaming wacko liberal who supports that muslim Hussein who was born in Kenya and wants to redistribute wealth.

The good thing about the Democratic Party is that it is a big tent that accepts more of a variety of positions than the other party. I do not consider myself a Democrat, though. I don't like the corruption of both parties.

Perhaps not in the past..

Thanks to Republican fraudcasting, we now have a false center that is way to the right of where it would be without Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, etc.

I am a right winger in Norway. But we ain't in Norway.

The polital center of the country used to be to the left, economically. However, times change and we ain't living in 1940.

"I am a right winger in Norway. But we ain't in Norway."

Do you wish you were?

the darkness is falling for a certain poster if he doesn't wise up. Just a word to the wise.

This is not meant as an accusation. I accept that your views somehow became part of the big tent but I don't think that they are democratic, left, or even liberal (neoliberal certainly, but I consider neoliberlaism to be a conservative ideology.)

and let the Nixicons do wheelies on the WH lawn. I don't see the the comparison at all.

Ike ended active fighting in the Korean War.

2-4 million deaths in Korea, most civilian, and every major city destroyed vs. a few hundred civilian death a year with drones. Let's take Pakistan for example:



There's no comparison at all and to claim that Obama is to the right of Ike is perverse.

And it has to stop.

Truman had a hand in flattening Korea too.

took office Jan. 20, 1953, and signed the peace treaty at Panmunjom on July 27. So you have point.

http://www.authentichistory.com/1946-1960/2-korea/1-timeline/index.html

Note though that doesn't make the poster's claims legit, it just means Truman also had a terrible foreign policy.

the Republicans of the '30's were isolationists and anti-New Deal believers in laissez-faire economics.

In the 30's to 90's, BOTH major parties had a large umbrella, ranging from conservative to liberal. Nelson Rockefeller, R, for example, was liberal; George Wallace, D, was not.

You are right that the spectrum has shifted strongly to the right, after the collapse of the former Soviet Union, along with changes in China.

There was an absolutely wider degree of thoughts within the party. However, I think it is wrong to suggest that in economic policy the Democratic Party wasn't distent from the GOP.

How can gibberish (the OP) be a "true" statement.

The OP is fantasizing about cuts to Medicare and Social Security benefits (http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021969825#post21), and trying to link his own right-wing identity to the President.

After a series of right-leaning post, it comes down to this: Cast President Obama as a 1930s Republican, but we "ain't living in the 1930s."

Both left the US in dire straits as republicans tend to do. Can we please put this thoroughly anti-Democratic meme to rest or is this thread going to keep bobbing to the top all day with little whispers from Monsieur 3rd Way?

at some level, it's not really possible to say what's in obama's heart, or what would be in obama's heart if the political environment were different. had he been elected president in 1932, with conservative thought thoroughly trounced and discredited, and a public screaming for government help, would he have really acted like just another republican of that era?

i don't think obama is really a stark raving liberal, but i'm willing to bet that if the "center" were further to the left, so would obama.

at the end of the day, all you can really tell is which direction he's pulling us. obama is pulling us to the left, not the right, so all we can tell for certain is that he's to the left of today's center. he's savvy enough to know that if he started screaming for fdr-style spending, he wouldn't get anywhere these days.

it's a tricky game, taking a president out of the context of his presidency.

Maggie Thatcher, when asked what she considered her greatest political achievement: "New labour"...

And people can effect shifts.

He is quite engaged with the rest of the world and sees the US as a member of a larger community of nations.

From the 1920's to the 1960's republicans opposed all of our peaceful multilateral commitments - membership in the League of Nations, and later the United Nations, and forming the International Trade Organization. Obama favors international solutions to international problems which often means working through the United Nations from which republicans want us to withdraw.

Some differences, but the continuum has shifted right.

Blame the media. Propaganda works.

Be careful stating the case that neither party fights to fix the media propaganda here, however.