-Laelth

Our government is controlled by Wall Street and the 1%, and that's that. They will let us bitch and moan, but heaven help anyone who tries to actually do something. e.g. Occupy. They are crushed.

He's up on stage all the time. He can at least tell us the truth.

I just think there are other forces pulling the levers...call them "dark forces" in mockery if you want, but the 1% gets what the 1% wants, even if it hurts the country. There is plenty of evidence of that.

So why do we bother to vote?

Thanks.

that Frank wrote, he almost lost me at the sub-title ... Who is "we" and no "we" didn't.

with anti-war sentiments jumping right to the front.

First of all let's get this out of the way -- I'm not a hater and recognize the political realities Obama had to deal with. I also recognize his accomplishments and, most of all, that we are immeasurably better off under an Obama presidency than we would have been under either a McCain or a Romney presidency.

Having said that, I did not support Obama in '08 because I felt he was naive. I didn't think he could implement the sweeping changes he was talking about making. No way, I thought, the McConnells and Boehners of the world would allow him to take any kind of significant steps toward leveling the playing field, to starting us on the road toward economic and social justice. I didn't think he had a snowball's chance in hell of getting anything meaningful done even when the Dems held majorities in both houses, too many Blue Dogs to contend with.

Boy, was I off base.

He didn't even TRY to implement the sweeping changes he was promising. After 30 years of Reaganomics and right center (or hard right) politics, I hoped against hope that I was wrong, that our time had finally come.

Then he made his back room deal with Big Pharma. And didn't even propose single player. No way the country was ready for it, no way it would have been enacted, but you propose it, goddammit, and let the thugs shoot it down. You at least get it into the national debate, get the populace at least superficially aware that such a system exists and is viable so that it's easier to get it done 5, 10 or 20 years down the road. Hell, at least you can negotiate down to a public option or, at the very worst, a Medicare buy-in.

IMO, health care "reform" was a fiasco.

And then he puts Social Security on the table WHEN IT WASN'T EVEN BEING SOUGHT BY THE OTHER SIDE.

Who taught this guy negotiating skills? Neville Chamberlain?

I haven't even scratched the surface in an attempt to make my point -- I thought he was naive in thinking he could fundamentally change Washington, change the rigged system. I was wrong. He wasn't an inept radical. He just wasn't a radical, period.

So much for our time has come.

Maybe it will in '16. But it won't if we nominate/elect Hillary. It'll be more of the same. The only chance we have of seeing economic and social justice in our time is a Sanders or Warren presidency. Anybody else = more of the same.

And regarding SS, Dems should be running on expanding it. Let the R's campaign against that.

Welcome to DU!

There's work to be done for the 2014 election.

Or are we all going to sit this mid-term election out too like in 2010 — a big part of the reason Obama couldn't get done the very things being complained about?

From the OP it sounds like nothing was accomplished at all . . . and if we're truthful, we know that is not the case.

The ACA anyone? It certainly has helped me.

Go online today and find out where and what you can do to help Democrats from the democratic wing of the party get elected in 2014 and stop complaining about Obama when you really should be complaining just as much about unprecedented repug obstructionism.

Time to tell the whole story, not just the "Obama didn't fix my issue" story.

Or you can look at it as part of "Tell the whole story." Each needs the other but they are both pick one from column A or one from column B. "Change we can believe in." Really?

or start working for 2014.

All the Obama haters, btw, can google a list of the administration's accomplishments just as easily as I can instead of staying mired in "oh, woe is me, he didn't get everything done I wanted". But since you won't, here's just 10 of them:

Passed the ACA healthcare law
Passed the Stimulus
Passed Wall Street Reform
Ended the War in Iraq
Began Drawdown of War in Afghanistan
Eliminated Osama bin laden
Turned Around U.S. Auto Industry
Recapitalized Banks
Repealed “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell
Toppled Moammar Gaddafi

And the repug obstructionism is a part of "the whole story". How could it not be?

Now tell me one president that was able to get every campaign promise done.

Not possible, is it?

It is something one has to do for himself anyway.

Change is structural, you are conflating "accomplishments" with "change we can believe in." So be it, let the accomplishments comfort you. I'm still looking.

Last edited Sun Mar 16, 2014, 06:06 PM - Edit history (2)

2014 is here. How many posts are we going to continue arguing about Obama grievances? Been there,done that too, too many times over the past 5+ years.

The complaining must be put aside to work on saving the Senate and maybe gaining seats in the house.

No more sitting out the mid-terms like in 2010 — we all know where that got us.

Are we going to work to elect real blue dems or sit on the sidelines complaining and let the repugs take the House and the Senate?

That is my point.

Because we have personality cults that scream bloody murder every time anyone disagrees with or criticizes whoever the focus is.

That kind of thing will fly for authoritarian Republicans, but once you start that Dear Leader shit a large segment of the left and the middle is going to pull away from you.

I've phonebanked for Dems, and I have to wonder how the "Brook no criticism" crowd handles people that are undecided. If they handle it the way they usually do, they tell the person on the other end of the line to get fucked because they never loved Him anyway and hang up on them.

"We want your votes and your money and then you can shut the fuck up." isn't a particularly motivating sentiment. Especially when it comes from the top down.

and the attitude you described is not tolerated by field operatives. I've worked on the '08, '10 and '12 campaigns and have never seen that kind of rudeness displayed by any co-volunteer that I've worked with.

You want people to come out to vote, you don't want to alienate them. There is training for beginning phone bankers and it doesn't include telling people to "get fucked."

First of all, people can do more than one thing in their lives.

Second of all, critical analysis is not simply "bitching and moaning".

Thirdly, you seem to be of the same "look forward" mindset that has caused Obama to allow the same bs to continue on as if there was nothing wrong with it.

We needed change and we got almost none of it. Obama squandered away his mandate and momentum by not being critical, by looking forward. We've had enough of that mentality, it doesn't change anything.

It's 2014. Mid-terms are coming. There have been countless treads on here complaining about Obama. Enough! In this election year we kinda need to concentrate on getting real, blue dems (not blue dog dems) elected and not continually rehash what the President didn't get done.

If you call that "looking forward" so be it, but there is an extremely important election THIS YEAR that we should put work in on — maybe pick up some seats in the House, hope to hell we work hard enough so we don't LOSE THE SENATE, for God's sake. As they say, elections have consequences, and a back turnout in 2014 can have devastating consequences in 2016 if we don't GOTV.

In 2010 (Harry Reed over "Second Amendment Remedy" Sharon Angle) and 2012, I worked to get dems elected nationally and in my state. I don't want to see a repeat of 2010 where many Obama complainers sat out the election and the repug obstructionist strengthened their hold on the House.

Where do these constant Obama complaint threads get us? IMO they just might, with the periodic repetition of them, influence others to sit out the mid-terms.

Maybe that's even the reason for them.

I myself don't have time for them.

Maybe if we look at the mistakes Obama makes/has made we can change them and get the base - that he ignores - riled up and enthusiastic again. I don't think middle of the road policies are going to get people excited to vote and by accepting everything being done right now without speaking out about it that's what you are accepting. And that's just not enough to get people out to vote.

You can't just ignore things and expect those who feel let down to get on the bus. It just won't work.

You can do better by complaining to the WH about their messaging if you want to get people excited to vote. Tell them to start talking about increasing SS. Tell them to get a decent message about the ACA so Dems can run on that as a positive, not run on it as something they are going to "fix". Tell them to assure the people that they are going to regulate banksters. Tell them to tell the people they will make sure net neutrality does not fail. And make sure they actually do these things and more.

It's not our fault if people are less than enthusiastic to vote. It's the elected Dems' fault for not standing up for the people and for conducting business as usual when they promised change.

Plus, as I said, you seem to think people can only do one thing at a time. People who post valid criticism here are also activists. As it is you are on here complaining about other people complaining. I don't think that's helping your cause.

and inject those issues you speak of into the campaign?

The dem field operations in your state need volunteers. Are you going to be one of them?

There's quite a bit more to do than posting complaints about the WH on DU.

I see a lot of people who don't like to hear criticism ask people that question. It's basically just a way to deflect from discussing the issue.

Or do you really think one can't do more than post on DU? If that were the case then you're not doing anything either.

Have you?

And the issues you keep talking about have been discussed and rehashed here over and over for 4 plus years. And I've added my own comments to them as well. However, with the 2014 elections just months away IMO it's time to stop talking about what shoulda been and coulda been if only he'd have done . . .

What good does that do now? Quite frankly, we should be looking to new candidates in 2014 and a new. electable presidential candidate for 2016.

And if you call that deflecting, that's ok. I call it working for something that's doable and practical and while pining about lost opportunities.

There are no do-overs no matter how much you may want them, in life or politics.

I'm calling the question of asking the person you are debating what they are doing about it deflecting.

The fact of the matter is that on DU all we do is discuss, presumably issues. Stopping that discussion to ask someone what they are doing IRL to help the cause is deflecting from the discussion at hand to level a sort of accusation at the person.

As I said, you seem to think that criticizing policy on DU is a waste of time that should be spent out on the field - implying that people can't do both - yet here you are posting on DU. So clearly you know people can do both since you say you do both. So why would you ask that question when it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand?

The only reasons can be to deflect or to accuse.

everyone wanted on DU. We've been aware of this for quite a while now, and have posted and discussed it over and over and over. He's a middle of the road, not really progressive dem. We all know that by now.

And we all know that these Obama complaint posts are not new here.

So what do you say, shall we go on and on discussing it for say . . . another year, 2 years, 3 years, maybe 4 even, after he's out of office? Will that be enough discussion?

There are better things to do to help the Democratic Party.

What's the point of NOT discussing it?

What's the point of helping a Dem party that is centrist and corporatist?

What's wrong with helping them get elected but the ones that are real Dems, not corporatists? If we want the election of Dems to make a difference, we have to elect different Dems. Not discussing the failings of the current elected Dems will just ensure more of the same.

...pointing out that it was completely predictable -- and was, in fact, predicted.

The "block everything" strategy simply builds on the tactics they developed during the Clinton administration. They weren't exactly hiding their intent.

bound to be a billionaire too.

Through the years it had been revealing with obvious profiteering with all the intentions to swindle the public. As many here in this blog have characterized, the Bush administration has been more than a political aberration, what went on during those years as war crimes, economic crime wildly with mercenaries without regret. An incredible time for history suggests those countries that play that game only suffer in rebellion.

My perception is President Obama does not want to be blamed for any down turn. Knowing, the one percenters, would with malice and fore thought destroy American prestige, as exampled by the America's governance and policymaking Congress in what they did for our credit rating. To be able to have that confidence complicit with Wall St showed the punishment they could deliver. Also this new trade agreement is flushing out world complicity that is a moment that will unbalance all economies. If there was a real free market there would be no need of a trade agreement. Put tariffs where and when needed.

Our judicial and financial Institutions ostentatiously in dressed up theater with open arrogance in the help of mainstream media and the Congress displayed to America what can be considered greed and pedantry in the best of the excessive power the one percent has.

The moment is descending into a state that can see saw either way into the narrow power of a few financial CEO’s or through creative banking that can develop a reverse mortgage concept of a different kind that is the advantage to the tax payer where it should be. How much does it take to realize it is John Doe at the kitchen table; that economy that makes the billionaires more money besides giving to a stable economy.

Well played, for the 1 Percent, including Paul Begala.

Meanwhile, the 99 Percent got played, including me.

It is very hard to be a middle aged person born in CANADA to a US Parent,. That Canadian born just finds out this year that they had to file US tax returns all their life , even though they never lived or worked in the USA. In order to renounce US citizen ship one must file 6 years of taxes and report all their bank accouts, 6 years, and list all their assets including their house and pay a 30 percent exit tax on all their assets. Plus pay a vulture tax lawyer plus may have to penalties that will wipe out all they own and saved all their life. Plus be considered a traitor for renouncing. Some Senators like Levin and Schoomer want to bar this person from ever entering the USA Again.

The USA is the only country beside Eritrea that considers all persons with American connections , including green card holders , obligated to file US Taxes for LIFE.

FATCA now as of July 1st coming makes all banks around the world report to the IRS any suspected American person that has any account with them. President Obama signed the Hire Act in 2010 and FATCA was inserted in it. I have a feeling he did not know anything about FATCA other than it was to catch tax evaders.

Imagine Putin demanding the Russians around the world, now living as dual citizens in other countries have to have their bank accounts reported to Russia
Americans are renouncing in droves. They are school teachers, cops, nurses, doctors, stay at home moms. 98 percent not at all rich.none would owe US taxes because they make way below the point to pay.
Many will never return as snowbirds . They will go to other warm climste countries to vacation.

I once loved Obama. I danced for joy on his election, as did many other Canadians. He is a good man but he is not his own man. Too many people own him.
I do not like how he protects the banks, Wall Street , NSA and CIA.
He has hurt many american persons around the world. Most people do not know about this law. When they find out what it is , they say it is too crazy to believe.

I did not know about this until I read it in a few postings on DU. Only the Pritzkers and the Romneys of the world get to hide in offshore accounts. Taking it out of the backs of little people is SOP these days.

Go to isaacbrocksociety.com

As a hopefully soon-to-be expat, this information is helpful. Disappointing-not surprising-but helpful.

Whom I consider TOPS.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2666416

eom

Obama will certainly be in the history books as the first African American president, a great achievement for the country as a whole. But I do think the legacy of his presidency will fade rather quickly once out of office. Bush and Reagan will be remembered long after for the terrible harm they did. And FDR and Roosevelt for their epic battles. But there are many presidents who did not live up to the moment. We NEEDED change and that is why we voted for it twice. The majority of the people know our economy, health care, education, infrastructure, unemployment, &c. need to be fixed NOW. If going into the job he thought the Republicans would make it easy, then he was at best a fool. If he and his administration had no plan for dealing with the batshit crazies, then they are incompetent. But honestly, I have never seen the Democrats fight and lose: I see them surrender or fold before the fight has even begun. When Obama has the will, he wins. The Republicans are so inbred and in disarray right now, he could have blown them over with a puff and gotten so many things done. But his laissez-faire style is not what was needed at this time.

and not just about working hard. Moving up in life is about outsmarting the competition.

So pucker up... There's a lot of asses to kiss!

"Why should Americans compete on the level if what we’re trying to win is admission to a fraternity of thieves?"

You're completely re-writing history. They did let a bank go bankrupt. Remember Bear Stearns? That almost destroyed the economy. And when the Banksters gave out those bonuses, Obama went ape-shit! He demanded that all future bail-outs stipulated no bonuses.

As for schools, what's wrong with recognizing high-performing teachers? I had some teachers that were better than others, and I wished that their techniques were adopted by other teachers. The best way to measure a teacher's performance is to note how much better or worse their students are doing. Standardized tests are far from perfect - but teachers have yet to come up with a better method.

Let's put the blame where it belongs. On the 1%.

That falls on Obama.

The banks are now bigger than they were before the bailouts. They are more profitable than before the bailouts. Something has gone terribly wrong. Obama was supposed to change things. He didn't really even try.

but the meat is still very much missing

And at the time, the "they" was BushCo.

A full understanding requires motive, intent, and viable options.

I intend this as a straightforward question.

Spells out the bitter disappointment of Obama's presidency. And now the Party Bosses want us to vote for more of the same in Hillary. Oh, the fanboys/girls aren't going to like this article one bit.

.... When people talk about opportunity nowadays, they’re often not trying to refine the debate over inequality, they’re trying to negate it. The social function of mobility-talk is usually to excuse inequality, not to change it; to persuade us that the system we have now is fair and even natural—or that it can be made so with a few more charter schools or student loans or something. Because everyone has a chance at making it into the One Percent, this version of “opportunity” tells us, there’s nothing wrong with letting the One Percent hog every dish at the banquet.