To begin with, I don’t appreciate the terms “Liberal” and “Progressive” being co-opted by any sub-group. Especially by those who are anti-Obama and imply that if you support Obama then you are not a “true” Liberal. One thing that I have always believed separated Liberals and Progressives from Conservatives was tolerance for different ideas.

Which brings me to another point: NO ONE is telling those who are anti-Obama to STFU and “fall in line” when one of us points out the consequences of working against him. Like it or not, Democracy is messy. It is far from perfect or ideal. But, it is much better than the alternatives. Which often means that we have to choose the best alternative - because no choice is “perfect”.

Which brings me to yet another point: There is a difference between “constructive criticism” and “bashing”. Yes, Obama asked us to “hold his feet to the fire”, and we should. There is plenty of room for legitimate criticism with ANY President, and Obama is no exception. However, most of the “criticism” I have seen here on DU has been based on twisted facts (spin), pure speculation taken to extremes, and outright lies. These are Karl Rove techniques. Actually, they date before Rove, but he mastered the art. But it seems that some so-called Progressives have adopted his techniques to achieve their own agendas.

Some examples: “Rahm called Progressives retarded!” No! During a “brainstorming session” some members suggested that they run commercials against Democrats that didn’t “fall into line” (basically, a STFU strategy). When presented to Rahm as a potential strategy, he proclaimed “That’s Retarded!” Somehow, his criticism of the strategy (which is obviously self-destructive) became a criticism of Progressives. Another example; “Obama wants to destroy Social Security!” This is especially heinous. Obama has repeatedly said exactly the opposite, and he recognizes that there are some “adjustments” that should be made, but he has repeatedly said that it should not impact benefits. But the “Obashers” constantly twist his words to stir up shit. He does look for a “bi-partisan” solution, and I could criticize him for that as I don’t believe that Republicans have any solutions outside of their own Corporate-mandated take-over of the safety-net. But the problem here is NOT Obama, but Republicans.

I am a Six-Sigma Black Belt. And I despise the twisting of stats and the “spin” for which the Republican Party is famous. But I hate hypocrisy even more. So, when I see Liberals and Progressives using the same techniques that they have decried for so long, I will not hesitate to call out their hypocrisy and I will treat them with even more disdain than I do their Republican counterparts.

What really “chaps my ass” is when the same people who criticized Bush for over-exerting his power, criticize Obama for NOT doing the same thing to assert their own private agenda.

Let me reiterate one point: THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BASHING AND CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.

Oh, and since I know that some will question my Liberal/Progressiveness based on their own personal “loyalty tests“, let me give you my most recent score from PoliticalCompass.org:

Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.38

That put’s me pretty close to Gandhi. So, yes, I am a Liberal.

As a final statement, I would like to quote John Lennon from “Revolution“:
‘But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao,
Nobody’s gonna listen to you anyhow!’

Some people don't want to be faced with the three big unpleasant political realities.

One: that not everybody feels the way you do, and that doesn't make them a teabagger, whether that's independents or pro-Obama liberals.

Two: that not supporting Democrats is the same thing as supporting Republicans. There is no magical middle path.

Three: that even under the best situation, you can never have everything you want.

The neoconservative Kristol/Atwater/Gingrich/Reagan framing of Conservatism vs. Liberalism not only polarized the country, it enabled the radicalization of both political extremes. Both extremes have bought into the "with us, or against us" mentality, which is why no elected politician will ever be able to fulfill the unreasonable and unattainable wishes of either extreme.

Thankfully, the extremist Teabaggers and Firebaggers are not the majority -- yet.

You just made my blood run cold at the very THOUGHT of either of these groups being the majority. scared:

Although America being America, there will be a Tea Bagger majority LONG before there will ever be a Green Tea Bagger majority because the number of people who consider themselves "conservative" versus "liberal" is more than 2 to 1. Another truth that is always overlooked here.

...or to you being referred to as the dreaded new dirty word: "Third Way/DLC Dem" who must be exterminated.





anyway, K/R and Good Luck!

But we have to try, don't we?

:hi:

by posting misinformation about Obama?

Eventually, they do enable Republicans whether they think so or not. But I don't think that is the main point - although it absolutlty plays a part.

To me the bottom line is Factual Information. The people who enable Republicans are the same ones who twist Factual Information, and vice versa.

and when proven wrong, do they apologize like adults or scurry off to law low until the next Big Brazen FAlse Story comes out.

It's happened so many times, I've lost count.

and stilll.....
the big one lately, no one has provided any kind of quote from obama, any proof, that he is going to 'cut' SS. nada.

but it's still used like a fucking mantra here.

to cut SS, even though the facts demonstrate otherwise.

And, I have no more problem with the term "firebagger" than I have with "teabagger". If you're using KKKarl Rove techniques, then you are just as guilty and deserve just as much derision.

And that you take control of your own life. If you depend on any President to control your future, then you have surrendered control of your life.

Those of us with a little more experience recognize what we can control and what we can't. We continue to try to change what we can, but we also recognize what battles are not worth fighting.

Yes, I reccommend you learn the term "enabler", because it does not mean what you think it does.

If as you say everything is just rosy, Obama should be at over eighty percent approval.. :shrug: It isn't just Right Wingers that are giving Obama poor approval numbers...

There's nothing in the OP that indicates to me that johnaries thinks everything is rosy.

I'm not going to try to explain to you what he is saying because he's already said it and you didn't understand it the first time.

No, everything is not "rosy". I have some serious concerns. But, I don't feel "allowed" to voice those concerns because of all the "bashing" that is prevalent here on DU. Obama has not lived up to many of my expectations, but he has accomplished many Progressive agendas that I did not think were possible.

He did not have a magic wand, but he accomplished quite a bit without one.

And to anyone who expected everything to be "rosy" simply because Obama was elected - GROW THE FUCK UP!

"My words are easy to understand, but difficult to live." - Dao De Jing.

Check Gallup.

that the President and the Neolib/DLC types choose to paint themselves with. The media says Obama is a liberal, Obama says he's a liberal, and the Obama supporter is obviously going to take on that mantle as well.

Furthermore, I'd say that its not so much what the President is doing as what he's allowing to happen. He may not be an active participant in a lot of these shenanigans, but he's certainly allowing them to go on unchecked.

But I will point out that you got the Beatles' lyrics wrong:

...as everything else in the OP.

I do not know of one Obama supporter (cheer leader, sycophant) who is against constructive criticism.

I'm a strong Obama supporter. And I do have criticisms. But to be honest, given the attacks he faces here on DU, my complaints would be very weak duplications of multiple OPs that are far more angry and vitriolic.

Obama is not perfect. He is also no more a Republican mole, than he is a Kenyan Muslim socialist commine facist basing his larger plan on Stalin, MAO, and Hitler.

Just this week-end, I had an old high school friend email me (and a bunch of our old friends) in which he said that Obama "spits on the Constitution" and "wants to destroy this nation".

Honestly ... given those 2 points ... its tough to tell whether this old friend of mine is from the far right or far left.

My old friend did clear this up, by claiming that Obama wanted the US to become the Soviet Union.

The point is that the extreme view of Obama are both wrong.

Basically, he's damned if he does, and damned if he doesn't.

:eyes:

Typical RW technique. It simply means that I understand how to interpret statistics and how to "sniff out" when statistics are being used illogically. But, then, you would know that if you didn't simply jump to conclusions in an effort to disclaim something you disagreed with.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Six_Sigma

I am still not impressed though if such certification makes one a defender of Reaganomics.

Well then I stand corrected :)

Please continue to show your ignorance. Google is your friend. In the meantime, your ignorance just continues to make my point for me.

shows how little I know about statistics and martial arts.

BUT, the point I was tryimg to make is the old adage "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics!" But, statistics can be useful if you learn how to use them. And I was trained in recognizing how to tell the difference between useless and useful statistics.

It really has nothing to do with Martial Arts, outside of the "common sense" that's involved.

You know: Martial Arts; "how do you avoid being hit?" "Don't be there!" Six Sigma; "Doc, it hurts when I do this!" "Then don't do that!".

it was "don't blame the employee, blame the process". My training was very progressive. But my point here is that we had to be able to recognize when stats showed the REAL situation vs when stats showed what you wanted to see.

and could tell the difference between BS stats and stats that were applicable.

Can you make the same claim?

...and he never would have thought of brilliant ideas like The Retreat to Move Forward had it not been for his blackbeltedness.

:thumbsdown:

Simply posting an icon tells me that you have an opinion but nothing to support it. You are entitled to your own opinion. However, This is a discussion board - if you post an opinion then you are required to support it. OR, at least to admit that it is an "opionion"

I just found what you wrote to the poster about asking about the black-belt
uncalled for. I read your whole OP and was wondering what a black-belt had
to do with anything.

I felt they were using Chuck Norris as a reference as someone that
used martial arts.

a distraction from the main points.

Six Sigma has several different designations, which include Green Belt, Black Belt, Champion, and Stake-holder. I was trained as a Six Sigma Black Belt which meant I was trained extensively in statistics and the proper way to apply stats. I never considered the "Chuck Norris" (whom I personally despise) connection.

but instead you made an empty complaint about me

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1784804#1785958

I cannot say that I am all that impressed by your demonstrated skills.

People are not really jumping to conclusions here. Most people know what a black belt is - it is a martial arts term. Most people, myself included, have never heard of six sigma. You might consider explaining what it is, instead of attacking people as dishonest because they don't know your esoteric terms.

Let's forget that I ever mentioned that I was a 6-Sigma Black Belt. I agree, the terms may confuse some people. But why would you be so paranoid to think that the post is about you? I don't even know you!

I said "you made an empty complaint about me"

and then I linked to said complaint.

My statement was about your link, not this particular OP.

May seem to be off topic, but you mentioned your credentials as something that enable you to sniff out spin.

Yet when I did a quick search of my own journal entries, there you were defending Obama administration spin and attacking me as somebody who did not even READ his own link. Your political compass score puts you to the left of me, so why would you then be a supporter of trickle-down Reaganomics?

I suspect that even skilled people can have blind spots. A person cannot spot untruths, unless they have a knowledge base. Once again, I have a clear example from today's Daily Howler

Fasman writes this "And I am willing to concede that life may well have been better for Mr Boehner, and for many other white, Christian heterosexual Americans back then (although I wonder what chance a 60-year-old Catholic son of a bartender from Reading, Ohio would have had at becoming Speaker of the House in 1949)."

and I cannot see how false that is, because I don't know about John McCormack either.

"Here at THE HOWLER, we looked up the bio of Boston’s own, Speaker John McCormack. It’s true—McCormack didn’t become speaker of the House until 1962. But he was House majority leader as early as 1940 ..."
http://www.dailyhowler.com/

Myself, I get deeper into the weeds of tax policy and Reaganomics, because I obsess about it.

said in a previous post. It is entirely possible that I may have misunderstood your position and you may have misunderstood mine.

For instance, for some reason you seem to feel that I support Trickle-Down economics. Actually, nothing could be farther from the truth. And, if I may, the fact that whatever I was talking about could be interpreted as "trickle-down" would trigger a response from me such as you describe.

I feel that you and I actually agree on many things, although our terminology and approach may be different.

And then start slinging insults when non mathematicians don't get it..

:eyes:

and I never heard of it. I just looked it up after he acted like it had nothing to do with martial arts. It's not a term I heard even in graduate school. I suspect it has more to do with the business world than the mathematical or statistics world, but I din't read much of the wiki page about it either.

Typical.

but one typically cannot cover everything in a reply post, or TL/DR (too long, didn't read) comes into play

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/162

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/163

But I would also say that it is usually not a good idea to say "no one is saying ..." because you can usually be sure that some people are saying exactly that even if you personally never have, nor have never noticed it.

Even though you have a Jets icon and I have a Titans icon?!

:hug:

It's interesting that you project your own interpretations upon other's postings.

It's a cliche about using obscure references..

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/inside_baseball

(idiomatic, US) Matters of interest only to insiders.  

But you dragged it into the discussion anyway.

Edited to put in word left out.

I didn't think so.

I mean other than in making you look like a complete twit?

You throw out a massive red herring and then complain about the smell.

Well said. :applause:

I'd like to know why you are not upset with Obama. That seems irrational to me. What would it take for you to actually oppose Obama?

For me, he crossed the Rubicon when he punted on the Bush tax cuts, and it has been downhill ever since. Not that he can do much with a Republican House, but he seems to keep letting them define the debate. Instead of fighting their spin, he advances it.

extending the Bush tax cuts? For one thing, Obama always wanted to extend the tax cuts for the middle- and poor-classes. He only wanted to end them for the rich. Because he gave up the extension for the rich, he also gained extensions for the middle and poor, but he also gained extensions for the unemployed.

He gave a little, but gained a lot! That's one hell of a negotiator!

Have you ever been involved in negotiations? Monday Morning Quarterbacking is easy....

I don't have to be an NFL quarterback myself to be able to criticixe one that flips the ball right to a blitzing linebacker and then cheers as the linebacker runs for a TD.

provide a little more info as to why you think he gave up more than he accomplished.

http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxcompromise2010.pdf

Showing that the "compromise" position was much closer to what Republicans wanted than it was to what Obama wanted, and what Obama wanted ALREADY was a compromise as far as I am concerned.

thing I do know is we all have to come together for 2012. No president is ever perfect, I gave that up eons ago, and I've lived through some that were a hell of a lot worse than Obama ever could be.

He ain't perfect.

He has been a lot better than the people who bash the living heck out of him.

Even if he were not a good president, and he most assuredly has been a good president, he is a million times better than what the GOP will bring to the table.

*Offering up Medicare and Social Security for 650 BILLION in cuts, and giving public speeches about the benefits of cutting them

*Expansion of the wars to new countries and increase of the war budget

*Policies to corporatize our schools, while stigmatizing our public school teachers.

*An "evolving" view of marriage equality

*The extension of tax cuts to billionaires

*Support for massive cuts to spending without any new revenue

*Supply side tax proposals

*Exerting political pressure for legal settlement to halt investigations into banking corruption and to offer banks immunity

*Probably supporting an environmentally devastating pipeline from Canada to Texas



Wow, that really is a broad definition of "progressive."
:wow:

:thumbsup:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

instead of engaging in debate, just insult the left and punt.

Thanks for proving my point.

I am interested in infiltration, though - specifically, identifying and stopping infiltration of Republican values and policies into the Democratic Party. Have you seen my posts about corporate, Third Way Democrats? In fact, the last one below talks specifically about their nagging problem with the definition of the word, "progressive":


The Democratic Party has been infiltrated
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1660734

The goals of Third Way Democrats, in their own words:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1757952

Third Way Democrats already saying Super Congress must cut Social Security and Medicare
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1638366

Third Way Democrats face a very difficult messaging problem
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1717174



www.thirdway.org

attempt, at least in my opinion. Even if I am tilting at windmills.

Links please. I'm a fire breathing liberal as progressive as they come who will be supporting and working for those down tickets Democrats in the 2012 election. My vote is mine... not yours nor any political parties. It's mine.

So links please. Your first 3 paragraphs raise three individual claims. I'd appreciate it if you'd provide links to those claims, thanks.

Your fourth paragraph contains direct quotes. Cites/links again, please. Thanks.

"Obashers" is yours. That must be the "disdain" you refer to. At the risk of seeming a Pollyanna, what do you hope to accomplish with this thread? It appears designed as flame-bait to me when you call DU members names, and then state your intent to "treat them with more disdain than I do their republican counterparts".

Link once more to "the same people who criticized Bush for over-exerting his power, criticize Obama for NOT doing the same thing to assert their own private agenda." I'd like to see this too, thanks.

I'd appreciate a thoughtful response, one of the same non-violent, peaceful kind of dialogue Ghandi conducted in his lifetime.

I do understand your frustration... politics can be nasty. But I do hope you'll not take your anger out on me, but rather reply with the cites and links I've not unreasonably asked for. My thanks yet again,

Melinda

asking for links and stuff.

You just ruined a perfectly good, unfounded rant.
:(

johnaries (1000+ posts) Mon Aug-29-11 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #23
60. In what way? I am open to honest discussion.
Simply posting an icon tells me that you have an opinion but nothing to support it. You are entitled to your own opinion. However, This is a discussion board - if you post an opinion then you are required to support it. OR, at least to admit that it is an "opionion"

I am a P3: Proud Pragmatic Progressive.


--------------

johnaries posts ^^t^h^i^s^^ a full hour plus after I posited my query to him.

Oh, the irony, the irony!! Was I maybe, like - too polite? :rofl:


btw - I love that you're organic and sustainable; the planet, all who enjoy your food, and like-minded folk(s) thank you!! :grouphug:





*edited cuz I dunt spell so gud sumtims

Unfortunately, there are simply too many links for me to post. My response is simply "democraticunderground.com"

And I am happy to claim the term "Obashers", I think that it aptly sums up people that seem consumed with "bashing Obama".

No, Melinda, I won't take out any anger on you. I only ask that we have a reasonable discussion: Without you taking anger out on me.

As far as "links", I will refer you to the many posts here of Obama Accomplisments that have been derisively referred to as "the list".

I refer you to my response to bvar above.

If you wish me (and apparently others) to take your allegations seriously, than please provide proof via a link.

I am but a member looking to see for myself who is writing and posting the things you allege. If I see they are true, it will affect my opinion on a great many more things.

And afterall - c'mon - this is your thread - not mine.


Edited to add your own words to another poster in this thread:

"Simply posting an icon tells me that you have an opinion but nothing to support it. You are entitled to your own opinion. However, This is a discussion board - if you post an opinion then you are required to support it

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1840091#1840687

I am at a disadvantage because I am on dial-up and my response is going to be slower. But I am also at an advantage because I have the FACTS on my side.

So, how do you want to do this?

I've plenty of time. And please know that I do appreciate your taking the time to post the links. I sincerely do.

in light of so many "i hate you" debates, I really appreciate a serious and honest debate with references. I may not change your mind, and yo may not change my mind, but I do appreciate an honest debate.

Honestly.

I'll bbl tonight. Thanks again. :)

Unfortunately, I will be going to bed soon and so may not able to finish this conversation in a single night. But I hope we can finish it eventually. There have been many lists published here on DU describing many of Obama's accomplisments. The most popular of which is http://wtfhasobamadonesofar.com/1/

Although that site is dated and doesn't include many later accomplishments, it's still the favorite of many simply because of it's sense of humor. Regardless, it became the basis of "the list" of Obama accomplishments which many people choose to ignore.

On the other hand there is a counter-list of "dissappointments":

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1819853

However, Politifact scores Obama at

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/

And so I did. ;) I'm thoroughly perusing em too, pen in hand, lol. I'll be at a desk job for the next two days (today is yet Tuesday in CA), and so I'll be better able to read/think/respond this coming week. I can tell you that I honestly haven't enjoyed any of it so far. x( Have a good evening, I'll be back!

Melinda

"One thing that I have always believed separated Liberals and Progressives from Conservatives was tolerance for different ideas."

This is so mind-bendingly beside the point it's crazy. Liberals are not tolerant of conservative modes of governing. That is what makes them liberals.

Barack Obama is a moderate conservative president and that is why he earns the ire of died-in-the-wool progressives. He coyly misrepresented himself as the liberal alternative to the status quo, third way Democratic establishment when in fact he was exactly that all along. As for your other claims, you spin the same BS that's been used to excuse his conservative leanings on these issues before, so there's no need to rehash them.

You said it better than I could have.

I did not know it was important that you approve any disapproval.

"Obama is the greatest president ever. He's doing everything humanly possible. He is being realistic. Hrs hamstrung. He is a liberal. He will protect Soc. Sec. He can't be expected to close Gitmo. He really wanted a public option."

Would you require data* to back up those comments, too?

*No twisted facts, spin, or outright lies, per you

admin the most Progressive agenda has been promoted since FDR. This proof has been presented several times and then denigrated as "the list".

As for your short list:

First of all, I never said Obama was the "greatest President ever". That is an example of the "spin" that I spoke about before. And, yes, he really wanted a Public Option but it was killed by Liebermann. And he issued an XO to close GITMO, but it was de-funded by NIMBYs in Congress.

Thank you. This is EXACTLY what I'm talking about.

As far as the insurance bill debacle. Liebermann was not alone to blame, Obama never put up a fight for the public option and was content to sell us out to the insurance companies without even a whimper of protest.

For whatever it's worth, I approve.

Try being unemployed for a year or three and get back to us, I think you might have radicalized a bit by then.

So, I need to be unemployed, gay, black, hispanic, a union member, a teacher, and a polar bear to understand what it REALLY means to be a Liberal?

Someone should have told me that 30 years ago. I would've just joined up with the GOP then. BTW...I'm none of the above. I'm just a white woman. I was (technically still am) a single mother who raised her son on her own. But...damnit...I was never on welfare. Does that disqualify me?

I can't figure out why a friend of mine is still a Republican. He's been unemployed for over 2 years.

A sense of vulnerability if you will.

But, I can assure you I've been through some very, very lean times. My son (when he was little) and I went through periods of living on rice and potatoes. Whether or not I have been unemployed and/or homeless doesn't mean I can't fight for or protect the rights and lifestyles of those that are. It doesn't dull my compassion or resolve in improving the lives of all people.

I'm sure you've heard it all before and will undoubtedly hear it again, but it will improve...eventually. I can't promise when or how. I just know every time I've been on the edge of giving up (and almost giving up my only child) something happens. It may just be a change of attitude, or a lucky break.

Good luck and don't lose faith in yourself.

It's not faith in myself I've lost so much as it is faith in our system and our leaders, I honestly think very few of them give the slightest damn about anyone not in the upper one percent.

Our political system was set up for failure, imo. Not intentionally, of course. I believe the framers had the best intentions, and they obviously weren't fortune tellers, but our country has grown, expanded and progressed while our politics have remained stagnant. It ties the hands of those that truly care and gives too much power to those who don't. One of our most recent and obvious failures...Citizens United. I like to believe that the founding fathers would punch the Supreme Court in the face.

I gave a couple of friends of mine some advice that may help. They had been out of work for awhile and were just spiraling out. There are no big cities close by, so jobs are scarce and low wage. One was ready to move back to CA, which was depressing her even further. I suggested they both start doing some volunteer work to get them back into a routine. One ended up getting a paying job with a local charity thrift store and was promoted to manager about 6 months ago. The other ended up becoming a nanny for a rich hippie couple that she had met while cleaning up a creek for (I believe) the Sierra Club. They're offering to pay for her to take classes on child development. Hilarious when you know that she doesn't want or like kids. She does love her job, though. She's going on vacation with them in October. There is a miner disclaimer. They're both in their early 30s.

It's fine to be pissed off at our politicians and their feet dragging. Just make sure your anger doesn't fester.

Republican is that the Dem has the capacity to empathize with those less fortunate. And to think.

Your friend is probably still a Republican because he thinks if a Repub were in the WH a job would trickle down to him from Reagan in Heaven. His current plight is because there is a Dem in the WH, is my guess.

He oddly enough seems less irritated by our President than he is by the teapers. Though he doesn't have much compassion or empathy for "strangers", he's a very kind man and wonderful dad. I think the real reason he's still a Republican is just his upbringing and past military service. We've had long conversations about social issues and he's actually very open-minded. Yes, he's got the "everyone for themselves" attitude, but he doesn't blame his situation on anyone else.

Other than that, yeah...Reagan is God to him. :eyes: I have to give him credit for using real words in our debates, though.

They is WHY I vote for Democrats.

When the Leader of the Democratic Party is out on the Campaign Trail
PUSHING cuts in Government Spending and De-Funding the Safety Net,
I am not just intolerant,
I am Gawd Dammned Intolerant,
and I WILL STAND UP and express MY opinion.

You can "get straight" whatever YOU need to get straigh",
but I have been straight about what I support and don't support since 1964.

I SUPPORT the following traditional Democratic values:

I am Politically Intolerant of those who don't fully support the above Democratic values.
Are we "straight" yet?


"My problem with centrists is simple, they agree with Republicans more than I do."


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

when bvar22 shows up, sometimes all that's required of me is

+1

:applause:

I have no problem with your proposals, what I would like to know is HOW we realize them!

Idealism is easy, implementing it is hard.

And if you expecting Obama to hand this to you on a silver patter, boy, do I have a bridge to sell you!

was the way to get those things done. But then, when we did, we were told we had not 'elected enough Democrats', that we needed both houses of Congress and the WH. That seemed like almost an impossible task, for so many reasons. But, we really, really wanted to get at least some of those things done. So we went to work and we DID IT!

We kicked out the Republicans and took both Houses of Congress and the WH. We were ready to GO!

Is there any need for me to go back over what happened next?

Let me ask you. How do YOU propose we implement at least some of those ideas??

I really wish, btw, that you would not have resorted to the old 'you wanted this on a silver platter' talking point. Maybe no one told you yet, but that, along with a long list of others, is not only BS, it is a deliberate attempt to paint grown-up, intelligent people as children. It has been thoroughly rejected by anyone who actually wants to have a rational discussion which you have said is what you want. Seeing that at the end, caused me to wonder how you expect to have such a discussion when you resort to such tactics.

I've noticed more and more DUers coming out on the side of sanity...from both "sides". The left will always have its problems. Face it, it's more difficult to be a Democrat than it is to be a Republican. They already know how to think because they're told on a regular basis. For us, we have to overanalyze every issue and debate/argue it to death before we can "maybe" come to a general agreement. Throw in our extremes and we have one helluva volatile mixture. Because I've gone from the extreme to the moderate and then back to Liberal, I see the potential power of the Democratic Party if we could ever truly join forces. Each section of our party has the same list of issues that we find important enough to fight for. It's patience, logic and reasoning that we lose in our passion. Redirecting that passion towards a common, attainable goal is something we should work towards.


My "score" was surprising.

Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.13

I'm sitting almost on top of Gandhi. I'm seriously shocked. I don't intentionally refer to myself as a Liberal, just a Democrat.

K & R :thumbsup:

to read any article and make sense of it.

to toss in superfluous chest puffing. It's like you were telling us how to bake a cake, then mentioned in passing that your dick is huge. It doesn't make any sense, which makes it a perfect place for a rational reader to stop.

I have been gravely disappointed by his not drawing a line and battling tax cuts. I think it is what defines us vs them, it is THE issue. AND, I think if the Ds showed the FIRST spine in fighting the fight, it is a sure winner politically, and the right thing by a long shot.

I don't like that he is as cozy as he is to establishment "economic" thinkers and wall street, but I get it from a pragmatic standpoint.

But, he has been a GOOD president. Not even debatable IMO.

And, after Rs spent 8 years loyally defending the worst president we have seen in our lives like their lives depended on it, and now that they have attacked this president mercilessly, it just drives me NUTS to see people in our own party going after him like they do.

I have highlighted it a number of times on this board - it almost ALWAYS is a liberal who is using republican talking points or mindsets, it just is STUNNING how it is like battling with hard right wingers. "He just give good speeches" or "he is weak."

It is like reading Free Republic, and yeah, the indignant retort is always - "those who worship him" or some crape like that, which ... is what the right wingers say ...

:wtf:

Let's face it. Obama is no liberal or progressive.

What he is, is better than the Republican alternative. Whoop-dee-doo! I will vote for him if he's the nominee. (Heck - I'll vote for whomever is the Democratic nominee.) I don't have to be excited about that. I don't have to give him money.

I will give money to local. state, and even national Democrats who espouse those democratic values that are important to me. Not to Obama. Not again. He doesn't seem to be hurting for money, and he won't miss my lowly offering. Someone else may appreciate and need it more.

Of course, it's still at 0 recs.

Back up to +1 for you

I agree with most of what you have to say but paraphrasing is not quoting


http://www.poemhunter.com/song/revolution-7/

^snip^

But if you go carrying pictures of chairman mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow

NGU.

If that's where you land on the political compass, why are you such a passionate supporter of authoritarian/right politicians?



It seems a funny place for someone who hates hypocrisy to land in.

As for the rest? Pot, meet kettle.

completely wrong? Or, at least, they do not match mine. But, I am still Liberal. Have you begun questioning your own position, yet? Because that is something that Liberals constantatly do.

I've been questioning EVERYONE'S position, including mine, for more than 40 years.

"Like it or not, Democracy is messy." Wow. That's really deep.

"let me give you my most recent score from PoliticalCompass.org..." Whoaa! A test score! That cinches it! (NCLB must be right!!!)

However, I understand you gotta do what you gotta do. Hold the line for party loyalty against the barbarians who just ain't buying ANY of it anymore. Us unregenerate lefties who are fucking fed up with the whole damn charade and see no good reason to cooperate with the program.

Do your thing, man, and I wish you all the best. Just lay off the high-handed lecturing. I'm not here to get saved.

Oh, and, if your OP was "concise", my post is a fucking haiku.

sw

--when he excused all the looting in Iraq while the occupiers --us-- stood by and watched/let them do it.

It doesn't have a good history.

Especially the last line!

...our fellow Dems to STFU and "fall in line."

:rofl:

NGU.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

this is a manufactured "outrage". Please prove me wrong.

CW, I loved your previous work on databases, so this especially distresses me that you accept rhetoric over fact. You really disappoint me.

except for you--because you're a liberal because you say so.

Gotcha, boss.

Come up with a new moniker, "boss". This one is already taken.

Tell me one position that you and Teddy Roosevelt have in common. (Besides, maybe political party.)

Unrec.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

:boring:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Well said, Six_Sigma_Sensei..

There is only another fist.

UNREC.



:eyes: to your post, oh, and a :rofl:.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Are you a sockpuppet?

"Which often means that we have to choose the best alternative - because no choice is “perfect”."


Sounds like a "lesser of two evils" choice to me. A choice which some of us choose not to make.

And no matter what choices you have SOMEONE is always going to paint it as the lesser of two evils.

This is the basis of Democracy. Like it or not.

I'm not negotiating anything. I don't need to come around to anyone's way of thinking. I'm quite accustomed to voting for the losing candidate in general elections. I have no plans to vote for President Obama next time around--my current plan is to leave the top of the ballot blank and vote on the remainder of the slate. I may vote for Obama in the end, but if I do, it will be because he's radically changed his approach to fulfilling his duties as President, and not because some centerist browbeat me into voting for him. I've done that too often in the past--just wait for next time around, it will get better; grit your teeth and vote for the man, ad infinitum. Nope, not playing. You can exhort all you want. You can threaten the awful spectre of a Bachman presidency, or a Palin supreme court, or Chuck Norris as poet laurette. I don't care. If the GOP wins, it's not my fault, and I'm completely deaf to all this boy-who-cried-wolf-Perry-as-President stuff. That's the President's problem, and to date, he's completely failed to address that problem in any effective way. I won't be a party to standing for nothing at all other than reelection.

I don't want anything from you, so don't be surprised that your words hold no meaning for me.
You want something from me--my vote in the general for Barack Obama. It's admirable that you're trying, but only the president himself has the power to change my mind, and he's shown no inclination toward this.

I pretty much know all the words to any of the standard replies to this line of reasoning. I'm young and immature (42, thanks). I'll cause Bachman/Perry/Satan to be elected President (see above, that's Obama's fault, not mine). I just want a pony/unicorn/shiny object (nope, already said I don't want anything, but if Obama starts to govern like, say, a Democrat, I'd vote for him with no equine requirement attached).

Thank you.

Who's ever in the Socialist row is likely to get my vote.

--imm

what is or is not in play.

Although you went a long way to exonerate yourself, the facts are the facts. Your actions have consequences, and n omatter how hard you try to "justify" those actions, the consequences are the same.

Let me reiterate that: THE CONSEQUENCES ARE THE SAME!

and, yes, it's your fault.

See how that works? I no longer give one single fuck what people like you demand of me in the way of loyalty and voting. You can call it my fault if you want to--see where that gets you. You can try browbeating me, but I don't care. Not sure why you enclosed the word justify in quotes, but I'm not trying to justify any actions. I've already cleared my actions with myself, and no other justification is necessary. My vote, or lack thereof, was set in motion by the man I voted for last time around. You want something from me. I don't want anything from you. You hold no power over me, and I'm not interested in settling for worthless liars and democrats who govern like republicans. You've got nothing--move on to greener pastures. Good day.

unless he does something like repeal NAFTA and install fair trade tariffs like we use to have. Now that would be a job's program that I and millions of other working people could support!

My guess is though his job program will be just another give away to small business and more tax cuts for the wealthy.

I hate the thought of myself leaving the president of the United States blank on my next ballot, but I'll be damn if I'll ever vote for another DINO!

constructive criticism" of Obama, or does everyone who makes a criticism automatically get labeled a "basher"?

In fact, I don't care at all what you call yourself. What you think doesn't impact me at all. What I do feel is that your post is full of hypocrisy. But then you don't care what I think either, so we are even.

You are NOT falling in lock step with the Karl Rov'ian manuscript.

Heaven forbid you should have your own positive agenda haa haa


a huge K & R from me.

I'm sorry for not being blind to the fact Obama is a corporate shill. I'm sorry for not ignoring how he's jumped into bed with wealthy corporate interests. I'm sorry for not ignoring how he's escalated the wars in the Middle East. I'm sorry I've ignored how the man has co-opted the language of the right about "shared responsibility" when the right creates a faux budget crisis. The time has long past for us all to see the national party for what it is: an extension of corporate power. If this makes me a Maoist, then get me a fucking little red book.

Black Belt: is it because you can't argue with anything else in my post? If you want to cast aversion at such a minor part of my post, then I must assume that you agree with the rest of it.

(Just teasing...I think you meant the idiom, "cast aspersions.")

Keep in mind that "Firebagger" came from a Hamsherite who called himself "The last real progressive standing" or something similar right there on FDL, then he called himself "Firebagger".

You are forever in my mind now Six Sigma Sensei..

And you did it to yourself while sneeringly referring to "Firebaggers"..

Talk about hoisting yourself on your very own petard.

:rofl:

for a start...;-)