I don't even know what "raise up" means. Can you clarify?

Ever hear of the crawfish theory? The idea is that if you get a bucket full of live crawfish, none will get out of the bucket, because if a crawfish starts climbing out, the rest hold him back, drag him down.

"Keep away from people who try to belittle your ambitions. Small people always do that, but the really great make you feel that you too, can become great." - Mark Twain

What I don't understand is how you can be loyal to a principle. That's a little cold.

but I'm all for staying positive about the President.
And not turning on him.. it doesn't help anybody.

You must know yourself before you can reach out to others without gile, but you can't stop there...

Thank you, Vote for Peace!

. . . aren't you, 'disgusted,' 'disappointed,' 'outraged,' 'saddened,' etc.?

NO effin; way! Don't try and distract folks here with your optimism. Every time you praise Obama, you make a DUer cry!

Get back on the bandwagon!

Obama=bad!

Obama=bad!

before the true believers realize we're getting fucked?

. . . go start another vanity thread; one about how traumatized you are by the WH's toothless budget guidance to Congress. Trying to project your cynicism and angst onto this poster's perfectly reasonable expression of satisfaction in the President is just weird and suspiciously spammy.

I get it.

Obama=bad!

Obama=bad!

Sappy little self-serving insults masquerading as concern . . . I understand that you won't be voting for the President anymore. Pity.

Obama didn't become bad until he punted on the Bush tax cuts.

He had a chance to redeem himself in December of 2012, but punted on it again.

It's not that Obama=bad.

It is that "making 85% of the Bush tax cuts permanent" = bad.

I would have expected many people to agree with the above statement, and yet some Obama supporters want to spin it that since Obama did it, it must be good.

Well some other people feel that since Obama did something really bad, that Obama betrayed us.

The OP is all happy about marriage inequality, which is fine, but I cannot celebrate that when I am still pissed off about economic inequality and the way this President keeps screwing the working class and throwing money at the rich.

This "toothless budget guidance" is another perfect example. What is Obama's guidance? He suggests to Congress "let's come together in a bi-partisan way to screw the working class".

Well even if nothing comes from it, the statement itself is a major betrayal.

It's like the working class helped to elect a guy as fire chief and he goes before the city council and proposes "let's burn down the section of town where the poor people live".

Who wouldn't love that?

. . . of one initiative or the other. I don't imagine you've had many posters who agreed with the tax deal who said their reason was Obama-love, or something like that. Just suggesting that . . .

It's hard to express without seeming self-serving and open a debate about my personal views (which could go on for days), but I've repeatedly expressed strong disagreement with the president over several important issues. Among them: military (the entirety of his policy, personnel, and record of actions ordered in office), education (basically Bush's cynical policy of blaming teachers for the after-effects of budget shortfalls), his initial, inexcusable stand on marriage equality, his furtherance and deepening of the intelligence industry's subversion of our privacy rights . . .

I just don't choose to wear these on my sleeve or make myself available for piling on threads or tongue-clucking.

Thing is, you can't agree with this president here without risking being accused of 'hero-worship' or having some conservative agenda to match the worst of posters' complaints about some policy or the other.

In my opinion, there's good and bad in this administration and presidency. Funny, though, how so many folks seek to deny others their positive impressions with over-the-top criticisms of expressions of support. It's not just about disagreeing here for some, it's about putting the president in his place -and his supporters, as well. (my own impression). 'He CAN"T be liked by you UNLESS you actually support and agree with the worst we say he's done.'

I'm obviously rejecting characterizations like, corporatist, warmonger, homophobe, or whatever. Sometimes I think he's just plain wrong (like this latest ridiculous attempt to cozy up to republicans). Yet, I still like and respect him as a human and as a president.

I make no apologies for not feeling 'betrayed' by a doa budget proposal, even though I think even talking about cutting SS is lame-brained and completely unnecessary.

It's just my personal observation that people are much more complex than most criticisms of their views would suggest. We can 'like' President Obama and believe he is a good person who sincerely cares about the plights and successes of average Americans, and still disagree strongly with some of his policies.

nor do I see how it even matters

"we can like President Obama and believe he is a good person who sincerely cares about the plights and successes of average Americans"

that last part would seem to fly in the face of his policies. He gave $1.3 trillion in tax cuts to the top 5% and $111 billion to the bottom 20% because he cares about the plight of average Americans?

Isn't that the position of the average Republican voter? I mean, Bush always claimed to care about the plight of average Americans, and so does almost every Republican politician. Why don't we believe them?

Because their actions show that their words are lies.

So I also make no apologies for feeling betrayed by a politician of any party who says "I care about the plight of average Americans" and the proposes, even PROPOSES whether it is DOA or not the proposal itself is a huge betrayal, maybe even the key betrayal, policies which screw average Americans. Proposing is about 90% of the battle. With this Congress, I do not expect Obama to win, but it would be nice if he would at least fight on our side. If we could all rally to support one of Obama's proposals instead of always seeing proposals coming from the White House that we are fired up to oppose.

. . . it's just not credible to point to that tax deal and negate the rest. Arguing it, though, against your pov is useless. You see that deal as paramount. I don't think the record adds up that way. For instance, I don't believe we are 'always seeing proposals coming from the White House that we are fired up to oppose.'

I just don't, and I think that pov is more informed by a mindset against this administration than an objective one. The tax deal is paramount to you. I think that's absurd. I can't think of a better word. But it obviously shapes your opinion of the man.

Conversely, I see the economic record differently. That shapes my own impression. You likely (evidently) think that's just as absurd.

Btw, Congress sets the parameters of these budget deals and it's obvious that the President is going to accept whatever they will bear or can manage. This WH advisory role has been nothing more than an amplifier of legislators' Democratic agenda, with a few contrary measures thrown in. This is not a President who feels he can direct Congress where they don't want to go, and legislators haven't been shy about openly opposing him where they are politically vulnerable.

You can knock him for timidness, but it's not as if he's setting their agenda; even on this controversial SS proposal. I haven't heard that he's pushing Democrats to support it, and I don't expect him to. They have their own elections to win, he doesn't. They are free to ignore whatever is politically unsavory from the WH and even posture against it.

'Proposing' is 90% of the sum of what the president is capable of. Yet, it's the 10% that's his signature that makes him relevant at all in the budget debate. You can be sure he'll be ready with pens in hand if Democrats manage to pass a budget out of both houses (republicans can't).

I bet they don't add up to $1.3 trillion.

"The tax deal is paramount"

Seems like a huge betrayal to me. Is inequality really not a problem in our country? Did we really work to elect Obama so we could keep the Bush tax cuts?

Pushing for gay rights.
Pushing for gun control.
Covering pre-existing medical conditions.
Covering contraception.
Expanding Medicaid coverage.
Pushing for equitable taxation.
Pushing for immigration reform.
Violence Against Women Act.
Lily Ledbetter Act.

Obama is not perfect but he has done some amazing things.

while kissing republican ass on the most important issues.

He's good guy but a weak president. He will not lead us to your promise land, he'll take you back to the days before the New Deal.

He throws us a bone only when we put enormous pressure on him. For example, he was for DOMA and for Don't Ask Don't Tell until the gay community started withholding campaign contributions for his re-election. Then he started "evolving" very quickly.

He will go down in history as the first black president, and that's about all he will be remembered for.

But he probably won't care. He will get his millions for protecting Wall Street.

The HRC (Human Rights Campaign) and others.

Also, according to WAPO, one in every six of his bundlers is gay.

But, in reality, he needed no pushing. When he first ran for the Illinois Senate in the 1990s, he signed a questionnaire saying he strongly supported same gender marriage.

So, when his position "evolved" as he was running for reelection in 2012, it evolved straight back to the 1990s.

was one of Obama's campaign promises in 2008, a position he never wavered from after being elected.

He has also done more for gay/lesbian rights than any other president.

"He will get his millions for protecting Wall Street."

That is a rather serious charge, i.e. that the President will be paid off, in the millions, by Wall Streeters.

You wouldn't happen to have any FACTS to back up that assertion, would you?

And please note I asked for FACTS, not your personal rhetoric on the topic.

Please proceed, FuzzyRabbit ...

that support your assertion that Obama "will get his millions from protecting Wall Street."

Got any of those handy?

You have stated that &quot Obama) will get his millions for protecting Wall Street."

Where are the facts to back up that very serious charge?

It's very simple. Either you have those facts - in which case you can post them here. OR you have no such facts, or anything remotely resembling a fact, in which case you can admit you're a lying shit-disturber.

So which one is it?

Or is this a case of eats, shoots, leaves?

Rah, rah, sis boom bah!

A black president.

A president that supports marriage equality.

Two very mind-blowing things. If you has asked anyone in 2007 if either of those things would happen in our lifetimes...

. . . why would anyone posting here question this?

'eats, shoots, leaves?'

..."giant kid's park" tee hee!

I'm by no means rabid, but I laughed out loud too.

I could right a completely opposite book that argues language and writing should be evolving and fluid like art

or, is the writer putting us on?

The author is rabid, but in a humorous way.

And no, the author is not putting anyone on, you might try reading the book before you dismiss it for its non-evolutionary approach to language.

. . . I'm not 'dismissing' anything. If I want to read the damn book I will, but I didn't think I need to to find out if the author's humor made the book satire, or if it was a serious defense of language. That's more than a fair question. It ALWAYS has to be a confrontation here . . . sick.

(and) you're obviously so wrapped up in your need to criticize me that you failed to recognize that I misspelled the word and left out the punctuation to be humorous . . . all of that completely NOT directed to YOU at all!

WTF?

anger management issues. You should address them.

. . .but that was what you intended. Normal conversations don't begin with the accusatory nonsense. Check your goddamn self.

against gays. When Pres O came out in support of gays' civil rights, a lot blacks began to support it.

not taking a strong stand -- from the beginning -- on marriage equality. Frame it from a civil rights perspective; frame it from a "who-gives-a-shit-who-anyone-marries" perspective -- just SOMETHING. I live in NC where sanctity-of-marriage dumbasses (of all colors) voted to amend the state constitution banning "gay marriage." Reverend Barbour and the NC NAACP worked hard to defeat the amendment, but it passed 61% to 39%. Disgusting!

sucks big-time.

Why should the average Social Security recipient who lives right on the margins of the poverty line welcome the CPI? That's crazy.

This is beginning to feel a lot like when Clinton shoved NAFTA down our throats.

Sorry not feeling the love.

GOP uses the economy as hostage. Pres O uses SSI and Medicare as a bargaining chip, yep, the horror. Meanwhile it puts the GOP in the short run into a dilemma and exposes them, meanwhile, my opinion only, saving SSI and Medicare. Oh my.

can see why you like him.

I will never never never give up.

attitude, Capn. So freshing.

You have every right to. On the flip side of that, I don't like being accused of hating him when I don't like what he's doing. If DU would go by both those standards we could dissipate some of this heat and just talk policy.

We don't have to agree on everything to stand in solidarity. Solidarity is what I am really asking for here - and my skin is thick enough for the barbs!

Sorry. Had to say it.

...although she might understand if I left for the president

And I'm glad that he is within the bounds of liberal on cultural issues.

The problem, over and over, is that the Democratic Party isn't on the side of working people, and not just since Obama has been in office.

Cultural issues are not enough when so many are struggling. This is an economic situation 40 years in the making and I was hoping that President Obama could and would break the mold that Clinton used when he was in office.

We live in a nation in which the mentally ill are left out in the streets to fend for themselves.

What kind of first world nation acts like that toward the sick? What kind of first world nation goes after the elderly?

The United States is the only first world nation that acts like it's a banana republic.

The US has more than enough resources to take care of its poor and elderly. It's time to end this penny foolish/pound foolish debate and make sure that everyone who needs and wants assistance can get it.

and . he . is .

I would like to see one of the haters have a go at only one day of what the President has to face. The accusations of his corporate stoogeism and all that pile of smelly against him, makes me admire him even more. Titanium with a soft heart.

Seems we really need your voice around here.

I always liked the president. I supported Hillary in the primary and as soon as she dropped out I put up an Obama sign and started to campaign for him. I will always love him and think he has done great things. I will however very respectfully speak up when i think he is wrong. These SS cuts are wrong and he needs to move on from them.

I thought the progressives were the emo ones, shouldn't we be the ones making political decisions based on emotions such as love?

... send MORE US Jobs Overseas with MORE Free Trade!

...dismantle the New Deal faster than Republicans!

...kill even MORE innocent civilians in MORE foreign countries with Drone Attacks!

...collect even MORE intelligence on American citizens without warrants!

...persecute even MORE Whistle Blowers than Bush!

....expand the American Corporate/Military Empire while the elderly and vulnerable Americans eat Austerity Peas!

....impose Austerity on the Working Class while the RICH reap treasures beyond anyone's imagination 10 years ago!

...put even MORE Pot Smokers in jail while War Criminals and Billionaire Wall Street Fraudsters roam free!

...force Americans to eat GMO foods without their knowledge!

....force every American to BUY junk ("Bronze&quot Health Insurance from For Profit Corporations!

Come on , EVERYBODY!
Lets PULL TOGETHER!!!!

And Dems are gonna take the house back and keep the senate! Austerity, nope. You are making me stronger.

I refuse to play in the bubble.

*yourock*


Obama...not so much.

And welcome to DU!

If posts like this have a forum, won't the general discussion forum start to lean toward the haters, the trolls, and the nattering naybobs of negativism? Just sayin...

By reacting I am falling into their trap. My poorly stated point is that if one wants to be willing to discuss Pres Obama's policies then this is the place. But if one is going to be offended at any and all criticisms, then maybe this isnt the place.

"Nabobs" (had to do it!).

I'm a supporter from way back, but I'm not sure what just happened (and all the doomsayers please don't answer that, I heard you, and I'm waiting for the dust to settle).

Hekate

Don't like messing with SSI or Medicare and other safety nets. The other side is just plain nuts and refuse to even care about America and its people. The opposite side cares about profit, power and total control. Sometimes you have side with them in-order to defeat them. The current GOP party is losing ground but they are rich and they at this point in time control the corporate media and congress but not the people although voter tampering is happening and will be used to insure their "not" victories. In my opinion, you can't deal with people who think that are right no matter what.

GOP party is at war with themselves. Dems are not.

I give him a C. Bush got an F. Bernie Sandrrs would be better.

A. Black. President. Supports. Marriage. Equality. All Good.

B. Black. President. Supports. Marriage. Equality. Does Not Support Social Security or Veterans' Benefits or Programs for the Poor.

Didn't give a shit when after 2001 huh. Nor the Vietnam war huh. Read the history books that have not been altered.

Of course, all relationships are mendable, but only if new and distinct action is taken.

He's still just as hard to figure out, but several things are clear - he has lied, he doesn't appear to care for the average person or else just doesn't know better, and he is not trustworthy. He also appears to be a horrible negotiator, a ridiculous people-pleaser, I don't know what else to say.

But love him? Doubt that that's ever going to happen again, and if so, only after huge, huge role reversals from his current positions and state of affairs.

.. has to work both ways. Throwing my retirement income into the gambling pot DOESN'T qualify. Paint some more lipstick on that pig.

when so many are being pushed under.

Almost every time I see the President and First Lady together in the White House it hits me square in the face how amazing it is to have them there.

I do appreciate the historic-ness of it all, so much. I am proud, so very proud!

I think having a Democrat in office and then having him re elected - AND knowing the mood of the country and that it is only going to get more Democratic leaning as 2016 approaches - has given me the freedom to really think about things though.

It's not OK that he put SS on the table. A lot of things are Not Ok anymore. The country is ready to move forward, progress! He needs to BE a Democrat. Democrats don't do what he is doing, CapnSteve.

I think the veil of excuses is gone for the Democratic Party and they need to step up to the plate and take responsibility. Otherwise the green party will start to look very appealing...just saying.

Is self-described moderate Republicant.

have to come and shit all over this one. But nooooo, it couldn't possibly be indicative of some sort of ulterior motives! No, it's perfectly natural and human to despise a man so much that you absolutely SEETHE at the thought of others showing him some support. So you take every opportunity you can to criticize him, even in one of a handful of threads that try to support him amongst a sea of non-ceasing criticism.

The fact that your OP was even necessary shows how completely psychotic this place has become. After reading DU and seeing some of the content littering the greatest page recently, it is no wonder to me WHATSOEVER that barely 20% of Americans identify as or with liberals.