A lesson the Obama administration NEVER EVER seems to learn when it comes to "negotiating" with

Republicons. Try to figure out who is Lucy and who is Charlie Brown...

Now I'm starting to think that we're Charlie Brown and Lucy represents all the Democratic office holders and party officials who kept telling us how things would be different if they had control of Congress & the White House.

I learned that lesson with Clinton.

There is the option of a progressive primary challenge, if for no other reason than to push this administration into taking the positions it SHOULD take.

You've got to let go of the bogus "lesser evil" thing. We don't have to settle for what the Beltway gives, dude.

And it's not as if triangulation has ever actually given us good policies on a practical level.

We have 2010 to worry about. I think we would see a much more progressive agenda being passed with Obama's support if we had a progressive Senate. Obviously, having a Democratic Senate does not equal having a progressive one. So, I don't see putting all the focus on Obama as being very productive right now.

In any case, I wasn't arguing that we should settle. I was simply pointing out that there's another way to view the game illustrated in the comic and maybe it's one that works in favor of passing a more progressive agenda.

Maybe Obama is doing his best to discourage people from giving him a more Republican Congress. Maybe that's what a lot of progressives should be working on right now. We view the problem differently. I don't think the main obstacle for progressives is "triangulation" by Obama. The main obstacle is the US Senate and that's where we should be aiming the guns right now.

is turnout. Turnout requires giving the base a reason to feel that voting is a positive activity, rather than a purely defensive one.
The Republicans never diss their base or act as if it doesn't exist.

I agree that the Senate is a huge problem, but, to me, the biggest obstacle to getting a more progressive one(let alone keeping it AS progressive as it is now, which isn't all that progressive)is making those on the bottom feel that they have a stake in the choice.

The burbs will always vote against us, no matter what. So will those who want people with nothing to "know their place". Therefore, any effort to try to appeal to those groups is pointless.

And I'm sorry, but your "vote for Lucy" crack sounded like code for "oh, so you want Palin in '12", which is the line DLC'ers on this board use to try to silence all progressive dissent.

Where are all of those Nebraska progressives and why did they stay home in 2008? I guess they showed us.

If by "the base" you mean liberals,and I think you do, Obama polls higher with liberals than any other group.

I can relate.

Lucy the ball.

Why is the current administration given a free pass as "too naive" and "trusts too much" when we insisted that foolish moves by the previous administration were PURE EVIL? :shrug:

HOLD THEM ALL ACCOUNTABLE.

ed for sp

n/t.

Face reality.

Super Super Arrogance.

Here you are getting all your news from secondary and tertiary sources and yeah, you think Obama doesn't see that Republicans aren't negotiating in good faith. And we all know for a fact what goes on behind the scenes on the Hill right?

super arrogant and super naive.

Obama's 2008 election opponents learned the hard way. Obama's no dummy, no pushover and he's not blind. He is smarter than or as smart as his critics (mostly smarter) so if YOU see it, HE sees it.

most of the time.

Yippee for bi-partisanship!

I don't think it's really set in yet with most people. The corporate business model has completely replaced old style politics and statesmanship - worldwide. There may be an appearance of government, but there are only deals and deal-makers now.

Case in point: The CEO of America Inc. has negotiated a tax-exempt $20B Escrow fund to be set up for BP to use as it wishes for "reparation" in exchange for government non-interference with business decisions and oil salvage operations in the Gulf.

We're seeing the new style of governance that is not governance. The government is a consortium of corporate interests. Procedurally, negotiating with the so-called "opposition" is what one does in the post-Neocon reality. Too bad the Dems seem to suck at it.