Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Cenk Uygur: The Problem With Elena Kagan Is Barack Obama

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:20 PM
Original message
Cenk Uygur: The Problem With Elena Kagan Is Barack Obama
The Problem With Elena Kagan Is Barack Obama

<...>

My guess is that at some future date this article will be misinterpreted to say that I argued against Elena Kagan. Except for executive power (where I am as progressive as anyone in the country), I am a judicial moderate. Kagan might wind up being exactly my kind of justice. And so far, Sonia Sotomayor has been great - and Obama picked her (which some will argue is evidence to "trust" him again). My point isn't that Kagan is terrible or can't do the job. My point isn't that Obama secretly wants to pick a conservative (or a progressive, as his defenders would claim). My point is that Obama has no intention of burning up political capital (according to his perception) by publicly standing up and fighting for for his own so-called side and will defer to the center or right-wing given any opportunity to do so. And this is another example of that.

Elena Kagan - safe, no record, never challenged power in any meaningful way, never stood up for progressive ideology, beloved by the establishment in Washington - the perfect Obama candidate. I'm tired of it. The ball is down against our own goal line and the guy thinks he just scored a touchdown.

He is never going to throw the ball down the field. If you like two yard pick-ups by a running-back going straight up the middle, you'll love Obama. It's the Eddie George presidency. What he doesn't seem to get is that the other side is eventually going to get the ball back and then it won't seem like a major accomplishment that we went from our own two-yard line to our own twelve-yard line. It'll be viewed as a tremendous disappointment.

I wonder why anyone would get that impression. Otherwise, what's the point if "Kagan might wind up being exactly my kind of justice"?



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:27 PM
Response to Original message
1. LOL! now he stepped in my arena when he decided to go with a football analogy
Edited on Mon May-10-10 05:47 PM by NJmaverick
the idea of grinding it out can be very successful as you burn up the clock and don't give the other side a chance to catch up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tkmorris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:45 PM
Response to Reply #1
8. Trouble is there is no clock
Eventually you either have to be daring enough to pick up yards or punt it back to the other team.

I see his point. Not saying I entirely agree with it, but I DO see it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #8
11. Yeah, because November 2 will never come.
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Capitalocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #11
19. Elections aren't the goal, they're just part of the game.
The goal is change. We win when we actually change something for the better. If we get more Democrats in government but they act like Republicans, we still lose. And about the clock analogy, in terms of number of Democrats vs. number of Republicans, sure, we're ahead, but in terms of the change we need in our society, we're way far behind. The last thing we need is to run around in circles fighting to keep things the way they are. We need to push forward hard.

K&R for the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NJmaverick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:49 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. You don't understand the idea of grinding it out. You take all the time you need to slowly and
methodically move down the field and score. It takes forever by the time the other team gets the ball they are usually demoralized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izquierdista Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 06:09 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Us or them?
The only ones grinding it out have been the haves and the have-mores, who have steadily eroded the average worker's pay since about 1980.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #1
26. A or B?
We agree that the right wing is going to go nuts trying to paint Kagan as a radical leftist/socialist/communist, etc. And we know the mainstream media likes to parrot stupid right wing talking points and make it "conventional wisdom". Here are two responses:

A)-The left praises the choice of Kagan, saying she's excellent and a slam-dunk on the court.
B)-The left criticizes the choice of Kagan, saying she might be conservative and not progressive.

Forgot your personal opinion for a moment and answer this question from a politics/media perspective. Is A or B more helpful in refuting (or confirming) the right wing/MSM talking points about Kagan? Is A or B more helpful in getting Kagan in place on the court in light of the political climate in our (corporatist and conservative) Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
20score Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:17 PM
Response to Reply #26
34. Good point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
donco Donating Member (717 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
31. Dude should watch some
early Packers games.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #1
61. 3.6 average yards per carry throughout ihis career isn't anything
to sneeze at.

He made 522 first downs. How many of those were short yardage gains.

Plus he averaged 8.3 yards per reception. Coming out of the backfield that's pretty good.

All in all a good, steady career that was hampered by injury.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 06:39 PM
Response to Reply #1
69. Your "arena"? You mean you watch football on the teevee?
Like a billion other people?

Cenk's actually played. Middle linebacker. How 'bout you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:29 PM
Response to Original message
2. The perfect trifecta of asshattery
Edited on Mon May-10-10 05:32 PM by WeDidIt
Greenwald writes endless articles followed by Hamsher on MSNBC. I was wondering when the trifecta of asshattery would be completed by Uygar.

When will Greenwald's heir apparent, Lord Privy Douchenozzle Sirota weigh in? Stay tuned, the asshattery has just begun!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:42 PM
Response to Reply #2
28. A or B?
We agree that the right wing is going to go nuts trying to paint Kagan as a radical leftist/socialist/communist, etc. And we know the mainstream media likes to parrot stupid right wing talking points and make it "conventional wisdom". Here are two responses:

A)-The left praises the choice of Kagan, saying she's excellent and a slam-dunk on the court.
B)-The left criticizes the choice of Kagan, saying she might be conservative and not progressive.

Forgot your personal opinion for a moment and answer this question from a politics/media perspective. Is A or B more helpful in refuting (or confirming) the right wing/MSM talking points about Kagan? Is A or B more helpful in getting Kagan in place on the court in light of the political climate in our (corporatist and conservative) Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:21 PM
Response to Reply #28
35. C)
All of the above.

The asshats serve a purpose when they are asshats.

I believe Elena Kagan is getting precisely the reception amongst the liberalati that the administration desired. Meanwhile, the more acceptable elements of the left can support her and point out the more radical element's dislike of her as a reason to not worry about her being too liberal for the court.

That doesn't change the facts, though. Lord High Douchenozzle Greenwald and his court of liberaller than thou holy people are still asshats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. Asshats = People Who Don't Uncritically Support Every Choice Of This Administration?
Edited on Mon May-10-10 08:32 PM by ihavenobias
True haters only criticize, true lovers never criticize.

I have no interest in being part of either of those groups. The only reasonable option is to praise at times AND criticize at times based on the facts at hand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #36
46. Asshats - people who do nothing but criticize regardless
Greenwald, Hamsher, Sirota, Uygur

all asshats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:45 PM
Response to Reply #46
49. Nothing but criticize?
I can't speak for the others, but Cenk defends Obama against right wing attacks on a regular basis. And he's praised him on (for example) foreign policy, certain cabinet appointments, etc.

To be fair maybe you don't watch the show, but if that's the case, I encourage you not to make incorrect assumptions about it. And you need to differentiate between irrational criticism and substantive criticism.

I agree, Asshats do nothing but criticize regardless. Other Asshats do nothing but praise regardless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. I have yet to see what you describe
All I have ever seen from Uygur is asshattery in the extreme.

I refuse to watch his piece of shit show. I haven't seen it since he went off the deep end.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #50
51. That's awesome.
Well of course you "have yet to see" what I describe since you "refuse to watch his piece of shit show".

Hilarious!

PS---People have made similar charges in the past leading me to post link after link after link to YouTube clips clearly showing Cenk supporting Obama and beating back right wing attacks. After that they shut-up and pretend like it never happened, so that the next time Cenk criticizes Obama they can make the absurd claim that he's a closet teabagger, etc. And I thought it was only the right that was immune to facts?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #51
59. FACTS only count when it's capitalized.
:silly:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 07:01 AM
Response to Reply #51
66. Why waste the time
Life's too short. Uygyur was an asshat through several shows and I stopped watching.

I've no time for asshats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:33 PM
Response to Original message
3. Once again Cenk Uygur is correct.
We're truly blessed to have both him and Greenwald who are courageous enough to speak truth to power. All the name-calling and degradations seemingly do no hinder their persistence and determination. Bless them! :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DJ13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:36 PM
Response to Original message
4. In his way, he's right
Obama plays it too safe most of the time, and our country really needs bold leadership right now to counter the errors of the previous 30 years worth of Presidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
paulk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. +1
That's my biggest problem with Obama, too.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moondust Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:29 PM
Response to Reply #4
23. +2
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OhioChick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
29. +3 n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
30. + 4
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
32. "In his way"
he makes no sense:

"Kagan might wind up being exactly my kind of justice. And so far, Sonia Sotomayor has been great - and Obama picked her (which some will argue is evidence to "trust" him again). My point isn't that Kagan is terrible or can't do the job. "

Maybe Cenk should try bold statements that aren't contradictory.

Cenk's point seems to be: So what if Obama achieves the right outcomes, he isn't doing it my way, the politically stupid way and expending political capital when it isn't necessary.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Forkboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:14 AM
Response to Reply #4
60. Boldness is political suicide. Which in turn leads to all our deaths.
Welcome to the 21st Century. Sleep tight!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 07:20 PM
Response to Reply #60
72. Bold leadership is political suicide!
That is a stunningly.....sissified concept
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Richard Steele Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:40 PM
Response to Original message
5. That's a wonderful analogy for the most disappointing presidency of my lifetime. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:42 PM
Response to Original message
6. The Problem With Elena Kagan is the same problem that we had with Sotomayor.
It's the same problem behind Health Care Reform.

It's the same problem behind all those tax raises.

It's the same problem behind the Nobel Prize.

It's the same problem behind the birth certificate.

It's the same problem behind those Greek columns.

It's the same problem behind that Reverend Wright.

It's the same problem behind paling around with terrorists.

It's the same problem behind the general election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:44 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Summed up in three syllables...
Obama

That's the only problem people have.

Obama could cure cancer and some would complain because it wasn't a liberal enough solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:46 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. i was thinking three different syllables.
But yeah, that'll do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:47 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Well, I would have gone there
but it might have got me banned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #6
27. A or B?
We agree that the right wing is going to go nuts trying to paint Kagan as a radical leftist/socialist/communist, etc. And we know the mainstream media likes to parrot stupid right wing talking points and make it "conventional wisdom". Here are two responses:

A)-The left praises the choice of Kagan, saying she's excellent and a slam-dunk on the court.
B)-The left criticizes the choice of Kagan, saying she might be conservative and not progressive.

Forgot your personal opinion for a moment and answer this question from a politics/media perspective. Is A or B more helpful in refuting (or confirming) the right wing/MSM talking points about Kagan? Is A or B more helpful in getting Kagan in place on the court in light of the political climate in our (corporatist and conservative) Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WillyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:45 PM
Response to Original message
9. Big K & R !!!
:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
13. BARACK OBAMA IS TEH PROBLEM!
:rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scubadude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 06:20 PM
Response to Original message
17. Cenk is wrong in one thing,
Edited on Mon May-10-10 06:20 PM by scubadude
he implies that Obama is a liberal as in old time liberal.

If you cut the field in half, you don't have as far to go. That is what the Republicans have done, dragged the liberal goal post to the 50 yard line, and largely we buy it. Obama is what liberal has become.

Scuba



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #17
52. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:21 PM
Response to Reply #52
53. What a vile post. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theFrankFactor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:41 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. I meant every word.
Edited on Mon May-10-10 11:43 PM by theFrankFactor
I wish I had a copy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #54
55. Not enough memory in the small mind? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theFrankFactor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:51 PM
Response to Reply #55
56. Why don't you tell me why you THINK I'm wrong? Use that BIG brain of yours
Why don't you tell me why you THINK I'm wrong? Use that BIG brain of yours
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 11:56 PM
Response to Reply #56
57. You need an explanation as to why something characterized as "vile" is wrong? n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
theFrankFactor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:10 AM
Response to Reply #57
58. No, The Substance of the Post-Genius!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scubadude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:36 PM
Response to Reply #58
68. Wow, I missed the whole thing.
I expect something to do with Obamabots though. Not sure. Sorry if that isn't correct.

Well anyway, we need a fighter to drag the goalpoast to the left, being centrist or liberal light is marginally helpful at best IMHO. Of course I'm old enough to know what liberalism was back in the day when it was strong and hadn't been diluted by years of concerted attack from the right wing media and Republicans.

Scuba
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jgraz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 06:53 PM
Response to Reply #68
70. Me too. I hate it when I miss Frank's vile posts.
They're the best part of DU. :D

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scubadude Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 10:28 PM
Response to Reply #70
74. I don't even know who "Frank" is...
Edited on Wed May-12-10 10:34 PM by scubadude
I guess I'm not as active as I once was, or perhaps I automatically filter out nonsense.

I can't say I will be looking for his posts either. I amuse myself other ways.

O.K. I looked. Apparently this "Frank" fellow is a "progressive". I don't think Frank was a "progressive", at least in the Zappa sense. He was a "Liberal". Seems this "Frank" is afraid of "Liberalism", and I mean every word of it.

Hmmmm, kind of like today's 40's are yesterday's 30's, or todays Obamabots are yesterdays Bushbots...

Scuba
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinnie From Indy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
18. Cenk is correct
The same small gang that perpetually attacks Greenwald, Cenk, Turley or anyone else that speaks truth to power have no thoughtful arguments to offer - only name calling. President Obama has shown a stunning propensity to turn his back on the progressive left and Candidate Obama at almost every turn.

I, for one, would welcome a debate between Candidate Obama and President Obama on issues like health care , accountability, indefinite detention, endless war, Guantanamo, Wall Street regulation etc. Maybe someday Jon Stewart will do the split screen of both Obamas and let them debate with sound bites.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fortune Donating Member (43 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
20. Cenk didn't say that
Edited on Mon May-10-10 07:25 PM by fortune
Even in the part you bolded. But paraphrasing is a great way to put words in other people's mouth. Want to simplify a four paragraph comment? Paraphrase!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:25 PM
Response to Reply #20
22. Wait,
someone is impersonating Cenk on Daily Kos?


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:24 PM
Response to Original message
21. lol FDL was on MSNBC today

Her exact words were - "the record on Kagan is blank, we don't know what her personal views are and you can't take her positions when she was SG because she was a lawyer acting for a client."

When asked why she was against her she couldn't cite anything specifically.

Same with Cenk.

Now she has worked with Obama for a year and Obama knows exactly what her personal thinking is but fortunately she doesn't have hundreds of decisions that the conservatives pick apart.

Nevertheless people like FDL are absolutely against it even if they aren't sure why.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:40 PM
Response to Reply #21
25. A or B?
We agree that the right wing is going to go nuts trying to paint Kagan as a radical leftist/socialist/communist, etc. And we know the mainstream media likes to parrot stupid right wing talking points and make it "conventional wisdom". Here are two responses:

A)-The left praises the choice of Kagan, saying she's excellent and a slam-dunk on the court.
B)-The left criticizes the choice of Kagan, saying she might be conservative and not progressive.

Forgot your personal opinion for a moment and answer this question from a politics/media perspective. Is A or B more helpful in refuting (or confirming) the right wing/MSM talking points about Kagan? Is A or B more helpful in getting Kagan in place on the court in light of the political climate in our (corporatist and conservative) Congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mmonk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 06:22 AM
Response to Reply #21
65. IMO, if you work against the principles of due process, you won't uphold them
when called upon. An unneeded risk.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
24. Obama knows how to get things done and keep on moving towards progress,
while others know how to find a fight....although they have no idea of how to win it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
38. Way to rationalize!
Gotta hand it to you- you're awfully nimble at it (and you'd have to be).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rudy23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
33. The Eddie George analogy was good. Jamarcus Russell would also be apt. Great arm...
looked great before he turned pro.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
37. Damn- do you even realize what you just posted?
Edited on Mon May-10-10 08:43 PM by depakid
:rofl:

Herein lies the major problem that many have identified (over and over- on issue after issue):

Obama has no intention of burning up political capital (according to his perception) by publicly standing up and fighting for for his own so-called side and will defer to the center or right-wing given any opportunity to do so. And this is another example of that.


You find that to be an admirable and effective quality in these times?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #37
39. "Herein lies the major problem that many have identified (over and over- on issue after issue):"
Obama has no intention of burning up political capital (according to his perception) by publicly standing up and fighting for for his own so-called side and will defer to the center or right-wing given any opportunity to do so. And this is another example of that.

He was deferring to the RW on Kagan?

Here's the problem, stupid commentary:

"Kagan might wind up being exactly my kind of justice. And so far, Sonia Sotomayor has been great - and Obama picked her (which some will argue is evidence to "trust" him again). My point isn't that Kagan is terrible or can't do the job. "

Maybe Cenk should try bold statements that aren't contradictory.

Cenk's point seems to be: So what if Obama achieves the right outcomes, he isn't doing it my way, the politically stupid way and expending political capital when it isn't necessary.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #39
41. The right wing's heaped praise on Kagan- LOL
Edited on Mon May-10-10 09:02 PM by depakid
Cenk is also telling you that (if you'd listen) that Kagan may prove to be a "judicial moderate" (whatever that is) but she might also be, according to some gushing commentators "the next Earl Warren." And maybe she will.

Then again, need I remind people what President Eisenhower thought of that appointment in his later years....

Bottom line- in searching high and low for "Obama bolstering things" -you posted a piece that (rather astutely) sums up and exposes his hamartia (i.e. tragic flaw).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #41
42. The RW is filled with
morons and suckers.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #37
40. the problem with Obama is that he will avoid confrontation at all costs.
unless by "confrontation" you mean actual wars.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:00 PM
Response to Original message
43. Supreme Court Justice Tom DeLay. Justice Chuck Norris. Chief Justice Glenn Beck.
Edited on Mon May-10-10 10:02 PM by troubledamerican
The "Not A Judge/Lawyer" Precedent Is The Problem -- The GOP Will Use It Forever Now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #43
44. errr Kagan is a lawyer who clerked for federal judges
Edited on Mon May-10-10 10:13 PM by depakid
and there have been quite number of our most brilliant Justices who never sat on a bench.

William O Douglas, Louis Brandies and Earl Warren, to name a few.

Curio: Douglas replaced Bradeis- and Stevens replaced Douglas. Kagan is now in line for that seat.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
troubledamerican Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Correction noted. I heard that she wasn't a lawyer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:24 PM
Response to Reply #45
48. There have been non-lawyers who've sat on State Supreme Courts- but never the USSC
Not that there wouldn't be the rare (exceedingly rare) individual who would nevertheless be capable and qualified.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 10:23 PM
Response to Original message
47. I hear ya for sure!
K & R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ultracase24 Donating Member (72 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
62. this sums it up nicely
"Elena Kagan - safe, no record, never challenged power in any meaningful way, never stood up for progressive ideology, beloved by the establishment in Washington"

Tells me and many others a lot about what kind of SC pick she would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spiritual_gunfighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 12:33 AM
Response to Original message
63. You were piling on Cenk
when he was railing against the Obama administration, but I guess he is a credible source for you when it benefits your argument.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Turborama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 03:45 AM
Response to Original message
64. K&R
I'm learning a lot from the article and the responses to it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
baldguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 11:57 AM
Response to Original message
67. Cenk is correct, as usual.
Liberals should take their blinders off and realize once & for all that Obama is not, never has been & never will be a liberal. Just as Obama should realize that nobody on the other side will ever support any of his policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 06:54 PM
Response to Original message
71. Did you read what you posted? It is a devastating critique of Obama!
And I meant the entire diary by Cenk Uygur.

Bush picked arguably the two most conservative judges in the country to fill his Supreme Court vacancies. He easily shoved it down the throat of the Democrats. What has been Obama's response - let me pick a centrist!

He can't help himself. He loves establishment players. Look at nearly all of his appointments. Rahm Emanuel, Tim Geithner, Ben Bernanke. These are the pillars of the establishment. What kind of change is this? He nominated for the head of the Fed the same exact guy who helped destroy our economy for George W. Bush. He can't help himself. He is a politician through and through, and he desperately wants the approval of those around him. And those around him now are the power players in Washington.

So, we get the blank slate of Elena Kagan, with almost no record to speak of, except her affinity for executive power. Joy. Could she turn into a lion of progressivism? Sure. But why do we have to hope against hope on that? Why can't we get a progressive Justice if we elected a progressive president? Because the ugly truth is that we didn't elect a progressive president.

Obama (and Rahm Emanuel) are going to love it if progressives attack Kagan. They will brandish that as a signal that they are soooo centrist. They will crow to their Washington reporter friends that they are being attacked from the left and brag about how much credibility that gives them. And when they win this nomination (non)fight, they will declare victory again, as if they accomplished some major objective. No one loves beating up progressives and winning easy battles in DC more than this administration.

My guess is that at some future date this article will be misinterpreted to say that I argued against Elena Kagan. Except for executive power (where I am as progressive as anyone in the country), I am a judicial moderate. Kagan might wind up being exactly my kind of justice. And so far, Sonia Sotomayor has been great - and Obama picked her (which some will argue is evidence to "trust" him again). My point isn't that Kagan is terrible or can't do the job. My point isn't that Obama secretly wants to pick a conservative (or a progressive, as his defenders would claim). My point is that Obama has no intention of burning up political capital (according to his perception) by publicly standing up and fighting for for his own so-called side and will defer to the center or right-wing given any opportunity to do so. And this is another example of that.

Elena Kagan - safe, no record, never challenged power in any meaningful way, never stood up for progressive ideology, beloved by the establishment in Washington - the perfect Obama candidate. I'm tired of it. The ball is down against our own goal line and the guy thinks he just scored a touchdown.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/5/10/865283/-The-Problem-With-Elena-Kagan-Is-Barack-Obama
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pleah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-12-10 04:04 PM
Response to Original message
73. I tired of it, too. He wasn't elected to go "straight up the middle".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 04:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC