Widgetized Section
Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
Irrational Obama Hate Turns The Far Left Into Fox News Progressives
The far left is outraged because they wanted a monarch and got a president
At America’s founding, the Constitution’s framers created a government structure that included a balance of power to reflect their desire to be as far removed from England’s monarchy as possible. Although the president is America’s leader and the office has the appearance of supreme power, he can always be held in check if the two houses of Congress can muster enough votes to override a veto and in extreme cases, impeach him if they believe a crime has been committed. Although our government is not perfect, the system has worked relatively well throughout our history and with the two-party system, represents the will of the people in most cases. There are some Americans who do not comprehend that a president is not a monarch, and if their particular issues are not addressed to their satisfaction, tend to blame the person at the top regardless if he is associated with their party or not.
President Obama is a Constitutional scholar and certainly understands the limitations of his office, and even if he did not, the members of Congress would be quick to remind him that just because he supports a certain agenda, he is restricted from acting unilaterally on nearly every issue except where the military is concerned because he is Commander in Chief of all armed forces. However simple the president’s Constitutional duties and job description are, there are self-proclaimed liberals who expect him to be a monarch who dictates his agenda without Congressional approval and they show their ignorance and selfishness every time they open their mouths or publish pathetic diatribes against the president.
First and foremost, every citizen in America has the Constitutional right of free speech and our waning democracy requires criticism of all leaders when appropriate, but since Barack Obama has been in office, his critics in both parties engage in lies and misinformation to mislead the public. Obama’s critics on the right can be excused for lying about the president and Democratic agenda because they just don’t understand the meaning of veracity and have openly stated their goal is to limit him to one term in office. Republicans have lied to the American people about Obama as a matter-of-course and this column will not enumerate the thousands of Republican assertions regarding the president that are patently false. There is time though, to address a couple of the faux liberals’ misstatements about the president because their goal is the same as Republicans and they are using emotionally charged issues and misunderstanding of the president’s Constitutional limits of power.
One of the issues that the self proclaimed ideologically pure progressives use to engender hate against the president is the detention of the soldier who confessed to stealing and passing state secrets in the Wikileaks scandal.Some on the distant left have went as far as accusing President Obama of supporting the torture of Bradley Manning. Of course Manning was not tortured and the president did not water board the troubled young man, but like the vile pundits at Fox News, many on the fringe left repeated the story enough that there are liberals who truly believe the president arrested, imprisoned, and personally tortured the alleged traitor because that is what the evil Black president does. The story is so outlandishly unbelievable that it gives one pause that any semi-intelligent person would believe it, but there are thousands who accept these contentions without questioning their logic. If the far left had a rudimentary understanding of the Constitution, they would know the president does not have the authority to arrest, imprison, or torture anyone whether they are a traitor or not; unless they are George W. Bush.
Some members of the gay community have been convinced that Obama is personally responsible for the prohibition on same sex marriage as well as DOMA even though he cannot wave his scepter and make the laws in every state vanish. The Constitution does not give any person in government that kind of power, but like Fox News, the extreme left has incited with repeated fallacious assertions that have provoked at least one high profile victim of the cruel DADT policy to proclaim Obama is the worst president in American history. Apparently they have chosen to ignore the fact that Obama supported ending DADT or that he instructed the Justice Department to stop defending DOMA in court because it is unconstitutional.
There are many other issues the faux left and ignorant progressives assail the president over and the lack of a public option in the health law stands out as a prime example. Ezra Klein astutely pointed out that if Obama had demanded a public option, a couple of conservative Democrats would have withheld their support and healthcare reform would have never left a committee. Other left-leaning pundits have attacked Obama for not closing Guantanamo Bay, but they fail to understand that Congress held the power to relocate the prisoners held there; not President Obama. This list could go on indefinitely, but it would waste time and energy. The point is that the president is restricted from achieving each and every group’s pet concerns because he is not a monarch; he is the president of the United States.
One of the core reasons the president has not been able to achieve every one of his campaign pledges is Democrats in Congress were not 100% supportive of any of his agenda. With majorities in the House and Senate, there was always just enough dissension among Democrats that it enabled Republicans to obstruct the president’s agenda. Even without complete support of every Democrat, President Obama has achieved the lion’s share of his programs because he worked tirelessly to garner support from wayward Democrats. There is another little issue the disparate groups of crybabies fails to understand; Obama is president of the entire country. There are more than just far-left voters in this country and the president must consider all citizen’s issues and not just those of his base. America has moved to the right and the President has to take the entire country’s well-being and concerns into account regardless what some liberals think.
The 2010 midterm elections were an indication that voters are not all far-left and although it pains Progressives and Liberals, that is the reality. However, reality is as elusive to the professional left and faux liberals as it is to hard-right conservatives and Libertarians in the Republican Party. In fact, the words and actions of these pretend liberal groups are not unlike teabaggers who advocate for policies and issues in their imagination instead of reality. Apparently, reality and pragmatic expectations are as foreign to the professional left as they are to teabaggers and the pundits at Fox News. It seems reasonable that a civics lesson intervention is necessary to enlighten the adherents of the far left philosophy as well as any number of disparate groups that the president is not a dictator or a monarch, and that he cannot grant them each their private desires.
It is invariably up to each citizen to know what the limitations of a president entails so they are able to make informed decision when it comes time to vote. There are calls for making primary challenges to President Obama for the purpose of “pulling him farther left,” but the only outcome will be a divided voting bloc in 2012. It is telling that the usual list of primary challengers includes self promoters and long shots who could not win a presidential election.What many of the supporters of the far left don’t realize is that some of the people they following receive back backdoor funding from GOP groups.
The supporters of the far left mean well, but they are not helping the American people by working against President Obama. If they are deluded to think they will be successful forcing Obama to acquiesce to their demands and move farther to the left, then maybe they really need more than a civics lesson; because if they believe a Bachmann, Palin, Pawlenty, or Cain presidency is preferable to President Obama, then they need psychiatric help and they need it now because they are not helping America. What they are helping is to get more ad dollars and notoriety for themselves which seems to be their real intentions and it smacks of conservatism; pure and simple.
Related Posts :
There is always a tendency to blame the person at the top for every problem in an organization whether i ...
After the 2008 presidential election, Barack Obama told the assembled crowd that he was president to all ...
The 2010 midterm elections were a disaster for Americans who are not extremely wealthy or do not own cor ...
Although human beings hardly give any thought to the process by which they encode, store, and retrieve i ...
After President Obama’s press conference announcing a deal with Republicans on tax cuts, the left explod ...
92 Responses to Irrational Obama Hate Turns The Far Left Into Fox News Progressives
Public Service Advertisements
MickeyBruce
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:19 am
very informative article! we live in tough times, but we have a good, intelligent man as our President. I hope he’s re-elected in 2012.
Cathy
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:57 am
I second that! Thank you, Rmuse, for an excellent article.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 11:09 am
I third that, Muse. Excellent analysis. Moderation seems always to be the enemy.
Dennis Roth
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Fourth here! I’m not a moderate, by any means. I’m a realist.
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 5:21 pm
Fifth here! I am as radical as there is but I am an adult and understand the way the government functions. So great thanks to Muse for telling the truth and exposing these “holier than thou progressives.”
Laura S
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 11:46 am
What a ridiculous article. The progressives ARE pragmatic!! How do you negotiate with a group that only knows the word NO, like a two year old who never grew up? How can Obama ignore economics 101 that the rich don’t make jobs, demand does and he needs to get more money to PEOPLE so they can buy things and then the companies will hire? How can he have said NO to medicare for all, when obviously that is THE ONLY WAY to really save money is healthcare. How can he even contemplate cutting social safety nets when too many people’s lives are hanging by a thread? How can Obama only have Goldman Sucks grads advising him on economics and not talk to Krugman and Reich, the UTTER VOICES OF COMMON SENSE. I never thought HOPE was a good idea, only idealists with too gentle a touch use those words. We needed a strong hand against the liars and cheaters and myth makers of the teapublicans. We Needed FDR and got casper milktoast.
robin
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 12:12 pm
Reich gave us nafta.
english saddle
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 1:56 pm
So FDR had the same Congress? Lol. You’re ignorant but entitled to call names if it makes you feel better. How about Bernie’s vote on gitmo? Forgive them they don’t know what they do!
shamus
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 8:08 am
“You’re ignorant but entitled to call names if it makes you feel better.”
You name call, while at the same time call someone else a name caller? Well…to quote you, “If it makes you feel better.”
Mo
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 2:26 pm
The minute I see ALL CAPS sprinkled through a post, I skip over it without a glance.
Dennis Roth
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:22 pm
Ditto!
Dwaine
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:55 pm
When we speak like we are so damn smart we should run for office be we don’t we sit back an try to play the blame game . i for one am so damn tried of people crying like little Bitches,You know the President Is the most intellegent man in the room, but the good old boys the GANG of six ,and they Call the president the thug,This is not biblical or racial or practical it’s a turn to the years past old ideaolgy,in slave a country and it’s people to the billionaires tycoons oil corps and Big insurance.The people of this country that i love was born in and raised to defend ,people i refuse to fight and die for what i see now as the government to ass holes how are now putting my babies in harms way and destroying there future,Anarchies an rebellions will ring out just like in europe and mid east , We have to be better than that if we are to lead the World
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:03 pm
Well Laura, there you go again peddling the myth of FDR! Lets examine some of the not so progressive things FDR did:
1. The great Social Security Act of 1935 excluded agricultural and domestic workers. At the time that meant almost 50% of black workers. Why? to compromise with the Dixiecrats who were part of FDR’s coalition.(For your information were not covered by SS until the 1970′s and 1980′s respectively).
2. By 1940′s when FDR run for the third term unemployment was still in double digits and unemployment in many of the the Black communities was still overt 30%. In all honesty the massive spending to fight WWII did more to end the severe unemployment than did the lauded work programs.
3.FDR sent thousands of innocent Japanese Americans to detention camps, without trial, simply because of their race.
4. Again to appease his Dixiecrat supporters, FDR refused to vigorously support an anti-lynching Bill.
5. FDR presided over a segregated military despite calls for integration from NAACP and other Black organization.
6. FDR tried to pack the U.S. Supreme Court and failed miserably.
Yes, FDR was a good president but he was not the same as the mythical hero of the “holier than thou progressives.” I am really sick and tired of President Obama being constantly demonized because people “needed an FDR.” Well , Laura, time to grow up! The 1930′s are not the same as to-day. You can’t have FDR! He is dead! If you thought you voted for FDR then you need help! I know I did not vote for FDR, or LBJ, or JFK or WJC. I voted for BHO. In my book he is as good, if not better, than all those heroes invoked by you and other “holier than thou progressives.” You can disrespect him all you want by calling him “milktoast” but I know many distinguished historians who have examined his record who would beg to differ.
Krugman and Reich are distinguished economists, but they are not the only distinguished economists.If they had all the commonsense you claim they have then they would know how complicated it is to get ultra liberal progressive legislation passed by the Congress. By the way, you don’t have to lie by claiming the PRESIDENT (yes he is the PRESIDENT, although people like you consistently refuse to honor his title) “only have Goldman Sucks grads advising him on economics…” You know that is a bare-faced lie! And if you don’t know that it’s a lie then you are simply repeating what you heard without checking the facts yourself.
english saddle
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:52 pm
They don’t care about history they’re going to need their own fake left dictionary do they can invent reality like the teabagger do.
Whoever here wrote that these people are being led by so called former right and how dare they pretend they are the base got it right. I don’t know about kos, though, I think he is sincere. At least he cares about unions. The rest of the leaders mentioned make money and fame off of demonizing Democrats.
I’m a Democrat and do not feel represented by those greedy agitprop. BP funded Trojan horses. No thanks.
Shirley Fleischman
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 2:33 am
Thanks you for an intelligent response! I appreciate the perspective and I agree wholeheartedly!
Aishatonu
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Excellent points, all!
sherriww
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 8:19 pm
Yes,we certinly do have a good man in as President,an we MUST keep him or all but the very rich are TOAST! I have spent a lot of this day,on the phone,giving several Dem. Congressmen,and several Dem.Senators my very strong views on this mess(and I like all the ones I called)BUT I told them that they MUST help the President AND also try to Keep Him from giving in and giving too much,to these “domestic terrorists” in the Repub party!! Giving away the store is not acceptable,debt ceiling or not!
Aishatonu
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 8:26 pm
President Obama is lightyears ahead of George W. Bush in terms of intelligence, capability, and insight.
And he’s still a corporate tool who is so lacking in vision and is so plodding in his progress that we “Herbal Teabaggers” (to quote Christopher Calkins, later down in the comments) are past frustration.
And these Democrats, who Rmuse accuses of rarely having supported the President, are, let’s face it, Republicans in sheep’s clothing. If there were TRUE liberals in the Congress, yes, maybe Obama would be able to accomplish a more liberal program agenda.
But the real problem is, Obama doesn’t know how to negotiate compromise. Ideally, you go into a negotiation (say, like on healthcare, where he should have demanded adoption of the British or Canadian system), and argue for 100% of your plan, hoping to get 75%. But what does he do? He low-balls everything. He goes in asking for 50%, and settles for 10%, and then the country is supposed to get down on our knees and thank him for it? I think not.
I’m tired of the Obama-bots singing his hosannas. It’s not “irrational Obama hate” to expect, demand, and require him to do a better job than he’s doing—frankly, we should demand the same for all of our Presidents. That’s what a critical—dare I say, visionary—approach to politics requires of us, the voting public. We have to expect more of our leaders than the status quo.
Obama promised vision on the campaign trail; he’s delivered business as usual. He could have been FDR: The Next Generation, and he’s delivered Hoover Redux. It’s time to call him to task for it.
If that’s not rational, I don’t know what is.
Cynthia McKinney/ Cindy Sheehan 2012!
Lysana
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 3:55 pm
Someone didn’t read the article.
Someone’s calling names instead of arguing the points in the article.
Someone’s backing a ticket weaker than Palin/Santorum for voter support.
And someone’s a walking proof of the article.
Thank you for the object lesson.
Jim H
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:22 am
Good points.
jlt
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:43 am
Choi is a newly OUT screamer..everything at first is critically against them and not enough…Bradley Manning had similiar problems if reports are correct..
This is a radical response to distorted facts..but the progressives did help the tea baggers and now look what we got in the House!
The public seems not to be buying into the debt ceiling blame coming from the right:
www.washingtonpost.com/bl...
Debra
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:25 am
And it’s precisely why I don’t listen to them any more than I listen to any fire breather on Fox. Pointless.
jlt
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:45 am
X2 Debea…
franklin coriaci
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:26 am
Please provide a link to the article or a link to the government press release that shows Bradley Manning confessed to passing anything to wikileaks. You won’t find one because none exists. He confessed to nothing. So that’s wrong and makes your entire screed suspect. And thanks for giving us YOUR definition of torture. Fortunately, we have the Geneva Convention and Convention Against Torture definition, which says your wrong.
boil
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 11:12 am
i agree, manning may have not been water boarded, but his treatment is a form of torture. lights on 24hrs, no contact with anyone, take all cloths and reading materials away. and stuff i am sure we dont know about. yet, there has NOT been a confession. nor has manning had a day in court. gitmo is still going on, and who knows what else the CIA is doing with their parties as proxies…. obama has only made the situation worse, in this regard.
flasher702
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:13 pm
How did you manage to miss the entire point of the article? It doesn’t matter if he confessed or not. It doesn’t matter if he was torched or not. Everything you are whining about here is nearly completely irrelevant to Obama. He didn’t do it and he can’t stop it either. Do a little research and direct your diatribes at the correct person.
Katie Boman
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 5:04 pm
gizmodo.com/5591905/wikil...
Investigation was actively underway while Manning was confessing his leaks to Adrian Lamo.
As for the question of torture…he’s in isolation. He’s getting meals. He’s not being prodded, poked, or physically abused in any way. IF the lights are on round the clock, and that that’s a big IF, it’s better than lights OFF around the clock, as would be the case if he were in “the hole,” as solitary confinement is referred to in standard prison situations.
Since when is a confession from the criminal required for confirmation of guilt? If you have an eye witness that can provide video of an accused killer pulling the trigger on his murder victim, would a lack of confession from the accused stay the hand of justice? Um, no. If it’s taking time for Manning to be brought to trial, well, how is that any different from any other case of criminals for whom undeniable guilt has already been established? Oh, that’s right, it’s NOT any different. But since Manning is young and white and a soldier, he must be being tortured unfairly by a black liberal President who is apparently supposed to be able to be in 5 places at once on a daily basis and issue demands that will be met as though he were God and not to be defied on pain of eternal hellfire…oh, and those orders must all be the orders you think you would give if you ruled the universe.
“[T]he president does not have the authority to arrest, imprison, or torture anyone whether they are a traitor or not…” This also means that, just because he has the power as Commander in Chief to issue war/battle orders, he is not “in charge” of how military prisons are run. It isn’t his job to manage the wardens of any of those prisons.
So if you feel so strongly that daily exercise and sheets and a pillow are basic necessities, the deprivation of which constitutes “torture,” take it up with the chief wardens at the prison itself. But before you do, get a grip; close to a third of Americans obviously do not think daily exercise is a necessity, the deprivation of which constitutes torture. And there are plenty of folks doing with out sheets and pillows…hell, hundreds of thousands of working poor facing the possibility of doing without beds and roofs and three meals a day in this country. They aren’t criminals. And at this very moment, our president is working hard to convince a significant portion of Congress that the working poor and unemployed need to be protected from the torture of having a government that will hang them out to dry so that corporations will continue to hoard their wealth at the top while they continue to not create the jobs that they’ve been promising, and that’s because they were never the ones who were in charge of creating the jobs! They’ve already hoarded so much and repressed wages for so long that the demand that is truly the thing that creates job has been utterly suffocated.
english saddle
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 2:02 pm
Id like a link showing he was tortured. I do t agree that anyone should be tortured but he did break the law and was a traitor so unless he’s being tortured I don’t have a problem. I read that thus entire story was started by someone who never even examined him. I guess since u have family in Iraq fighting for us I don’t think too highly of someone who put our troops in harms way! Does anyone here care about them?
Dennis Roth
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
I care and you’re absolutely right.
Reynardine
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:36 am
In Berlin Diary, William Shirer related his astonishment that the reason France was taken so easily was that the French didn’t fight.
Two factions were responsible for this. French plutocrats wanted the invasion to be swift and bloodless, so that France’s assets would be left intact for their use, now worked by a Nazi- disenfranchised force at dirt-cheap wages and limitless hours. The other was French workers themselves, now in the trenches… because the Communist party had told them not to defend a bourgeois regime.
Whoever does not learn from history is doomed to repeat it.
Doug
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:38 am
Worthwhile points here. You missed perhaps the best example on the limitations of his office – the inability to pass major environmental legislation that would push America towards clean, renewable energy. He was limited in his ability to do so by the operating culture of the Federal Government itself. When he took office, the Federal Government under George W. Bush was probably the most wasteful consumer of energy in the world. They mostly drove big SUVs that gulped oil. Government buildings were not energy-efficient and did not use renewable energy. Recycling and using sustainable items were not big priorities either. The Obama Administration has worked hard to change this, but it is a much bigger project than any corporation has ever took on. Had President Obama signed a strong environmental bill passed by Congress, the Federal Government would like hypocrites, as they would likely be violating laws that they would enforce on the American people.
Christopher Calkins
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:51 am
Herbal TeaBaggers: ‘Doing The Work Of The RIGHT WING, For Them, Daily!’.
F Joy
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 10:58 am
Thank you so much for this post. It’s so infuriating to listen to the left wing be so extremely critical of the President. He has always been clear about being the President of all of the United Staes even while knowing he’s hated by a particular segment of this society. He’s never had full support of the Democratic party once he took office. He was met with the economic crisis of the century created by the Bush administration. And every policy and campaign promise was met with a fight by the GOP as well as his own Blue Dog DEMs. Just think if President Obama would have had the support that the GOP has right now. He could have had a public option, DADT, Gitmo closing, financial regulation and lots more. No one acts like he’s even cut taxes which he has. Everyone expected their demands to be met in the first year. It’s still been only 2 1/2 years and more has been expected from his party than has been expected of other Presidents in 2 terms. The DEMs did not come out and support President Obama in the midterms which is why the country is being held hostage now by the Tea Party and the Debt Ceiling crisis. It’s why certain states are crushing unions, education, protection and healthcare. The GOP are destroying human rights while feeding the rich and corporate America. The DEMs need to get their act together before the GOP destroys the country and the world economy because they are currently being led by extremists.
Stop whining and complaining Democratic Party. Obama has done more for gay civil rights than any previous President. He captured and killed Public Enemy number 1. He at least initated a healthcare bill that 4 previous administrations have been unable to do. He can’t keep battling alone. The Democratic party needs to support him dramatically or you’re no better than the Tea Party! Our country is at stake here and Obama has put his Presidency on the line. What are you doing?
muttmutt
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 11:28 am
There’s an awful lot of “my way or the highway” attitude here in the comment thread (and in the article itself). This is not a game of “we win, you lose” with the Republicans, but a sober question of policy priorities. When Obama went over to the supply-side of the economic policy fence, he completely lost my support. His economic policies (such as they are) echo the worst ideas of the Reagan administration and he should be held to account for those policy choices. Frankly, if that means running him through a primary season to get his priorities re-aligned with policy positions that work, then that’s what we should do.
What separates Democrats from Republicans is our willingness to accept a diversity of views under our big tent. This article seems to forget that or, at best, treat that idea as quaint. This patronizing attitude is something I’d expect from the GOP, not from the Democrats.
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:12 pm
Oh Please! Do you even understand what “supply-side economics.” is all about? Your entire comment is based on lies I’ve seen repeated by the “holier than thou progressives” without any shade of serious analysis based on factual evidence.
Taradacktyl
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 12:29 pm
Excuses… excuses…
Obama had a mandate for “change” as well as majorities in both houses that he SQUANDERED with his chronic capitulations – anyone remember why Scott Brown got elected? Not because CONS have such great ideas, but because DEMS stayed home – sick of the “Republican Lite.”
So, I wouldn’t exactly call the “Obama hatred” “irrational.” He EARNED it. Never before has a President wasted SO MUCH political capital and worldwide political good will to please the very people whose policies collapsed the economy 2x in 100 years.
In FACT – this has nothing to do with “Obama hatred.” It has nothing to do with HIM, per-se. He was elected to represent the people – not use the social safety net they paid into for generations as a “chip” to please his Wall Street benefactors in ANOTHER trumped-up Republican-created “crisis.”
His constant willingness to play on the Republican’s field is evidence that Obama is not a leader – he’s an empty suit who pontificates about “change” while shoving MORE trickle down voodoo down our throat – because THAT’S easier than actually using the bully pulpit to advance a DEMOCRATIC agenda. When America needed a NEW, New Deal, he channeled Hoover. He’s NO FDR, that’s for sure. – and doesn’t have the courage of Democratic convictions because HE HAS NO CONVICTIONS.
As far as his “accomplishments,” Let me just say I am also a lesbian and an honorably discharged member of the National Guard who had to live under DADT so, although I am no longer in uniform, am happy to see America come closer to “a more perfect union” and join the rest of her allies in the civilized world.
That said, It’s no coincidence that every time the President betrays his economic campaign promises – something that has far more serious impact on the question as to whether the middle class survives and the American Dream is gone forever – that he tries to appease us by doing something like allow gays and lesbians to be open about their sexual orientation when he sends them to fight and die in transnational corporate America’s wars?
Just as when he capitulated to the extension of the Bush tax giveaways, he announced that he wasn’t going to have the Justice Department defend DOMA cases.
As much as I appreciate these advances in civil rights, the truth is, if we worked hard creating a more egalitarian society in general, we would eventually wind up with the same result.
If I were truly cynical, I would say that the President IS playing chess – but not against Republicans – against it’s HIS PROGRESSIVE BASE.
I knocked on doors for Obama, gave money to his campaign BEFORE he was the official candidate, and was such a supporter, I even received an invite to the inauguration – but I WILL NOT VOTE for him again.
We do NOTHING to save this country from the New Gilded Age on Steroids by staying stuck in a destructive cycle that choosing a candidate because he or she “promises” to slam the middle class into a war at 50 MPH, rather than the 75 MPH the other guy demands.
dale
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:43 pm
What is wrong with you whining all the time,do you think everyone got what they wanted be realistic and stop acting like the idiots in the teaparty,if this is the way the progressives act I don’t want any part of your group.
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:21 pm
Over 80% of Democrats support the president. So why are you more of his base than the majority of us who still support him? How come some of the leaders of your base like Arianna Huffington, Ed Shultz, Markos Moultasis, and Cenk Ugur were all former right wing Reagan supporters? How are they now the spokesperson for the base and not all of us who have been Democrats all our lives.
Remember all those people who refused to vote for Al Gore because he was no different from George W. Bush! Look at how that turned out. So please if you wont vote for President Obama stop calling yourself part of his base.
blf
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 1:04 pm
WRONG! We wanted, no WE NEEDED, a President to lead, and we got a sheepish, “wanna be everybody’s friend”, nice speech giver.
Sarah Jones
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 1:22 pm
That explains how he got so much passed with the most obstructionist opposition party ever. Oh, wait.
nk007
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 4:53 am
When Are you planning to run for President so you can show us how leading is done?
Reynardine
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 1:08 pm
If you have a bellyache, little Trojan horses, maybe it’s all those Greek soldiers rioting in your insides.
mel in oregon
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 1:43 pm
well as others have pointed out bradley is being held in solitary confinement, allowed no outside contact & is naked. sorry but that’s torture. as far as far left groups, funny that rmuse doesn’t name any, & fails to quote what he’s so upset about. the fact is obama is a dismal failure. look at his cabinet rmuse, it’s full of wallstreet people who completely toe the line for wallstreet, the pentagon, big pharma, big oil, insurance cos, etc. besides a civics lession, you might study history for a better appreciation of how far to the right obama has gone. all 4 of FDRs sons served in ww2. joe kennedy’s sons, joe jr & john did too, joe jr giving his life. all 6 were in real combat, unlike nixon or reagan who were in public relations outfits. the point of comparison is obama has no guts, is totally beholden to wallstreet, & even though you, your readers & rachel maddow don’t like to hear it, could have done a 180 degree turn from the idiotic gw bush’s policies. instead he continues the wars & starts new ones, continues bush’s idiotic domestic surveilance, supported the bailout of wallstreet, & now puts medicare & social security on the table to be cut. look, it doesn’t matter how selfish & ignorant the average american is, voters want someone that does what is right. they wanted something done about outsourcing of american jobs, they wanted an end to the giveaway taxcuts for the lazy wealthiest americans. obama is a failure by any yardstick, he may win, or maybe romney will, either way it’s no real choice. it really doesn’t make any difference, both are toadies for wallstreet. china will be the dominant power in less than a decade, with india very close to being number 2. then we will realize the mistakes we have made by becoming a non functioning empire.
Lysana
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
Wrong. Bradley is clothed and allowed outside contact. Jane Hamsher, someone who *works with Grover Norquist and other GOP operatives for her day job*, told you those lies. Think about it.
Dennis
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 2:31 pm
This is one of the most clear headed analysis of the quagmire in which our President and our country finds itself. For everyone, it is my way or the highway and the Republicans are simply better at being on one accord about their demands. A committed minority can beat a divided majority every time. Sad to say.
NoMooseStew
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 2:42 pm
OT. I enjoy this blog. I share just about every post as there well written and informative. One question. How do I register to change avatar?
As far as the thread I heard a very good analogy about President Obama. Take 8 hours and totally destroy your house. Then take 2 hours trying to fix it. Add 50 kids who go right behind you and ruin everything you just fixed. That is what President Obama deals with. I may not be great with words but I think this is an apt description of his situation.
dale
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:47 pm
That is the truth,what is wrong with the people in this country?
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:30 pm
I think you explained his situation beautifully! By the way, for all those who wanted another FDR, It took the real FDR over twelve years with the help of massive spending for WWII to finally end high unemployment!
Aishatonu
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:10 am
Not just the massive spending on WWII… FDR also started the WPA… which frankly, a similar program right now would be useful.
And I know such a program was on the table when Obama came up with the bail-out…er, economic stimulus plan, but the fact remains, it landed on the chopping block, like so many of his campaign promises. Obama always compromises too much.
He needs to grow a backbone, declare things by fiat, if he has to–the way FDR did when he told American auto industry no, you won’t make cars any more, you’ll make planes and munitions to support the war effort… and they did.
nk007
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 5:47 am
WPA was a great program which would have absolutely ZERO chance of passing in today’s Congress. I repeat,WPA would have ZERO Chance of passing in todays Congress. But although WPA helped a great deal it still had very little impact on massive unemployment.
As for FDR telling auto companies to make planes and munitions that was because of WWII mobilization. Besides President Obama did tell the auto companies to modernize and focus on fuel efficiency and electric cars and they are doing just that. But of course you are totally oblivious to his accomplishment in rescuing the auto industry. And guess what, FDR’s war mobilization completely ignored the horrendous unemployment in the Black communities. It took A. Philip Randolph’s threat for a massive Black March on Washington for FDR to finally relent and issue an executive order barring discrimination in defense industries.
I am just so sick and tired of people like you who are in love with the FDR myth but pay absolutely no attention to the political reality FDR operated in. It’s the same with people who tell me that the Great Emancipator, Abraham Lincoln, freed the slaves. Chances are that they’ve never read the Emancipation Proclamation. Nor do they know about Lincoln’s tireless efforts to try find a way of expelling blacks (colonization) and resettling them outside of the United States because he did not believe in racial equality.
I have no problem with people criticizing President Obama based on present day reality. What I have a problem with is people criticizing him based on mythology about past Presidents.
In my humble opinion, President Obama has more backbone that all of you whining people who are absolutely clueless about what it takes to govern a diverse country like the United States. President Obama is not just the President of less than 20% of self indulgent whining “holier than thou progressives.” He is the President of the United States. He clearly told you that “there is no Red America or Blue America, but there is only the United States of America.” Sadly teabaggers and “holier than thou progressives” are united in thinking that it’s only their views of America that we must respect and pay attention to. Unfortunately, whether we like it or not the United states still includes Texas, Kansas, Mississippi and Idaho, as well as California, New York, Vermont and Massachusetts. Then the other purple states in between. Even within the blue states you still have strong red state enclaves within those states. Darryl Issa is not from Texas or Mississippi. He is from Blue California. Ryan is from semi blue Wisconsin and Michele Bachmann is from Hubert Humphrey’s Minnesota. When will “holier than thou progressives” and the right wing teabaggers ever grow up to realize that we live in a very diverse country? More diverse than the time when FDR was president?
Cathy
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:21 pm
Just want to say that all of the negative comments above confirm what you shared in the article. Only one negative even mentioned an accomplishment, however with a “but” qualification. Come on people, acknowledge the good things and that we are moving in the right direction, but we can not nit pick every decision and withdraw support because one policy doesn’t work for us. President Obama is President of an entire country–and I am embarrassed that such selfishness is so common an affliction in our nation. My way or the highway is not discourse, common ground and central agreement is the only road to serve all of the people.
Jeff
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:46 pm
Here’s an idea for those who want the President to enact more liberal policies: give him a liberal Congress with which to work. Having one chamber of Congress held by Republicans, and a Democrat-controlled Senate that has more conservative Democrats than liberal Democrats isn’t going to get you much in the way of liberal policy — no matter how much the President demands. Ideological purity makes for nice soundbites, but in this era of divided government, it doesn’t actually get anything done.
Also, making sure state legislatures and governors tack to the left would also help. See: Wisconsin, Ohio, Kansas, Florida and Virginia for examples of what happens when right-wingers are elected on the state level.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 3:56 pm
Excellentmundo
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:32 pm
Bravo, Jeff! Extremely well said.
soxfan4life
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 7:14 pm
“Here’s an idea for those who want the President to enact more liberal policies: give him a liberal Congress with which to work. ”
Isn’t that what he had for his first two years? A super majority in the House and 58 Democrats,1 Socialist, and 1 Independent who was a former Democrat? The last two who caucused with the Democrats. What more does he need? 100 Democrat senators and 435 Democrat Representatives?
As far as state governments tacking to the left, how’s Andrew Cuomo working out for you?
The government works best when there is gridlock and they can do less to us in an average day.
Lysana
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
You’re forgetting the Blue Dogs, I see. And he did a LOT in those two years to move this country to the left despite their presence. I mean, FFS, you’re counting Joe Lieberman as a Democrat. QED.
CW in LA
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:00 pm
My admittedly anecdotally-derived impression is that a lot of the resentment against the prez comes not so much from the “far left” as from unreconstructed PUMAs, which is pretty ironic since Obama has been more or less the same president I expected Hillary Clinton to be. It’s a bit disappointing, sure, but not to the point of giving up on the man. I do feel kind of sheepish about getting so worked up over the epic primary ’08 slap fight, though.
However, I also think a lot of frustration is misdirected: We had big Democratic majorities in congress for two years, and they seemingly went out of their way to be as ineffective as possible. Too much blame is directed at the president and not enough at the likes of Harry “No-gonads” Reid and the Ben Nelsons and Bart Stupaks and Joe f***ing Liebermans that made up the supposed majority.
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:36 pm
CW in LA,
You seem like a reasonable person so can you please check the unprecedented record of achievement by the by the Democratic congress in the first two years of Obama presidency? Why do people keep saying that the congress was “ineffective?” Check the records please.
CW in LA
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 9:32 pm
I can’t speak for people in general, but I say congress was ineffective in ’09 and and ’10 because it took most of that time to get an incredibly lamewad band-aid of a health coverage plan passed, plus the fact that the president couldn’t follow through on his promise to close Guantanamo bay because of all the NIMBY pants-wetters in the legislative branch.
Oh, and the fact that we’re having this ridiculous debt-ceiling fiasco because the congress wouldn’t come up with a more far-reaching budget structure when they had much more favorable numbers. Jack squat on environmental protection, too. Basically, the usual .5% of a loaf where we needed (and had the stage set for) a New Deal. I’m just saying we should blame the president less and congress more for the disappointment.
nk007
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 7:50 am
Please check the record. Calling healthcare a bad-aid is clear evidence that you really don’t know what you are talking about. If it was a bad-aid how come Republicans are so agitated about it? Do you know how many law suits have been filed to stop it? Here are some examples of the things that Congress passed in 2009-2010 that you ignored:
1. A stimulus bill of $790 billions that saved jobs and created between 2-3 million jobs.
2. The most comprehensive financial Regulations since the 1930′s including the first Consumer Financial Protection Agency, the first in history.
3. The Treaty with Russia cutting down nuclear weapons
4. The bill outlawing pay discrimination against women
5. The bill outlawing hate crimes against gays
6. credit card reforms
7. The bill reforming student loans
No the 2009-2010 Congress under Nancy Pelosi (speaker) and Harry Reid
(Senate Majority leader) will go down in history as one of the most productive congress. And so would President Obama whose 97% success in passing legislation he championed eclipsed LBJ’s record of 95%.
CW in LA
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 4:48 pm
My, aren’t we confrontational? Are you suddenly assuming the Republicans wouldn’t be acting like maniacs to destroy any little thing the president accomplished? That’s why they’re trying to wreck the health care law, not any far-reaching magnificence.
The other things are nice. But with two years to pre-empt the kind of fanatical viciousness we’re seeing over the debt ceiling and raise taxes on the wealthy, thus putting the country on a more secure economic footing, they did nothing. A 97% success rate for half-measures and baby steps is still ineffective.
Neal Anthony Camerlengo
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 4:28 pm
I absolutly Agree with this article because it is the whole damn truth progressives are whinning like spoild brats when they don’t get everything they want,and also FDR is a wannabee Hitler because he sent Canadian Americans,Italian Americans,and Japaneese Americans to centration like camps during the WW2 and as an American with Italian blood I hope (even though I am an Athiest) FDR is in hell
Matt Osborne
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 5:12 pm
There is a strain of politics that invests far too much responsibility and agency in a person. It’s how dictatorships happen in leftist regimes. It’s also why Jane Hamsher and Glenn Greenwald groupies pile on anyone who defends the president. They think of themselves as “the base,” but they are not any such thing. They are a small, but very loud, minority.
As for the reference to Dan Choi here: I am dismayed by the path he’s chosen lately. We was talking up Gary Johnson the other day even though the former (Republican) governor backs civil unions, not full equality. He went on to make the most ridiculous, clueless statement about Michele Bachmann, saying that she “foolishly” creates the “impression” that Republicans are anti-gay. In fact, there is a deep split in the GOP between (a) those who want to shut the hell up about abortion and gay marriage and (b) those who won’t shut up about abortion and gay marriage. There’s a reason why Bachmann has enthusiastic support and Johnson is polling in single digits.
It’s hard to overstate the idiocy here. Perhaps Johnson’s a gay-friendly Republican, but his presidency would be a complete disaster for the other 99% of the progressive agenda: he’s a climate change denier who’d abolish the departments of Education and HUD. He would not even try to build high speed rail. He panders to pro-life forces. I hate to say it, but Choi is either deluded or he’s not actually a progressive.
Matt Osborne
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 5:13 pm
“He” was
nk007
Jul. 25th, 2011 at 6:43 pm
I don’t know Don Choi personally. But from the few interviews of him I’ve seen on television it seems that he uses his gayness as a smokescreen for his visceral hatred of the President.
CJS
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:19 am
Absolutely. One. Hundred. Percent. Perfect.
I have been appalled by the “progressive” Left, whose only substantive achievement in recent years has been to give us the teabagger House (remember, they all stayed home last November because the country “needed” to be taught a lesson”), and to fill the air with the intellectually and morally vacant whine of “Bush III”, and to demand the President resign whenever they have a tummyache. I can hardly add anything to this superb piece; though I’ll toss in my personal theory: it’s something analogous to old Northern soft racism (and counterpart to teabaggers’ Southern racism) – they presumed they were voting for him to be their servant (rather than, you know, President) and are infuriated that he hasn’t done whatever they want whenever they want.
It is odd, though, how they give cover and credibility to extreme-right shills like Arianna Huffington and Jane Hamsher; and that their idea of a hero is an opportunist sleaze like Dennis Kucinich, with a history of racism and an extreme anti-choice voting record.
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:40 am
The “Far Left” hated Bush, and we will hate this thieving war criminal Obama too. Freedom of speech. :)
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:53 am
BTW I am BLACK, and we DO NOT need an Obama to speak for or define us! Blacks have many honorable leaders from Frederick Doglass, to MLK and Malcolm X. I can bet this article is written by a white person, and I can see condescending tones taken at Blacks, telling us we should basically fall in line and support Obama or else. That’s who this article is really directed at. Typical elist bourgeoisie class Liberalism…
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:58 am
Really?
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:00 am
Yes, really. I am I allowed to have the audacity masta?
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:07 am
I think you might want to drop your silliness at the door. The article was not about black people, nor was it in a condescending tone. You are either paranoid, delusional, or a right wing white person who is setting at home cleaning his gun. The article doesn’t even mention black people
Rmuse
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 7:21 pm
Robert M., A short question; Where do you presume the article tells African Americans to fall in line or else? As the author, I can assure you that the article was not “really directed at” anyone. It is a commentary, opinion, opposite-editorial (op/ed). What you reveal is a hard-right conservative mindset with statements that have as their basis nothing factual. Imagination is a beautiful thing, but when commenting and assuming to know what the author’s intention and motivation are, it becomes delusion.
I can attest that I have never, ever presumed to tell anyone what to do or think. However, if you are an empath you would know that already. If you are one of those people who know what other human being’s thoughts and intentions are, perhaps you should become a preacher. It is the same mindset and just as disgusting. Thank you so much for commenting and informing me what I really think. The next time I lose a thought (which is quite often), maybe you can help a brother out.
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:13 am
You see, why is it that every time a person of color happens to disagree with American Liberalism, we are labeled as a “white right winger in disguise”? Is it that hard to believe that there are other views and paths other than your own? I’m sorry, but that seems like a salve-master mentality. I feel no obligation to this president and never supported him in the Presidential election. Don’t get it twisted though, MCcain is an even bigger crooks. I don’t like em abrasive or articulate, they all suck to me…
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:18 am
you do not have to support Obama just because you are black. I personally don’t expect you to, nor do I care if you do. And as I noted you are paranoid
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:17 am
“Drop your silliness at the door”? What is the White Liberal’s plan for economic and Social justice? The Democratic party have passed or maintained some of the hashes drug laws impacting the Black community as The Repubs are absolutely genocidal. Choosing the lesser of two evils, signifies that you must choose evil..
Robert M.
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:21 am
Malcom X stated many years ago, that the White Liberals and Conservatives use Blacks as a political football, to fight and jock over THEIR agendas. Couldn’t rain any truer today. Both side think they OWN us…
Steve
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 1:12 pm
Robert M; you’ve blundered onto what looks like a normal left/Dem site, except that at least once a week, a name-calling rant against those who criticize the President must be posted that reaches the worst level of conspiracy theory jabbering. In these articles they demand that ALL of us recognize the alleged brilliance of this President, when those of us who try to think logically understand that he is at best a very mixed bag and at worst a huge disappointment. I can see how you might think from the extremely nasty tone of the article that it is aimed at you as a black person, but honestly I think these folks are equal opportunity haters. If one criticizes Obama, one is an asshole. These folks are so far around the bend, that sheer conjecture is stated as fact, so on this subject I doubt reasonable discussion is possible.
For example, the article states that Scott Brown was elected in Mass. because bad progressives didn’t vote. From what I’ve read, it seemed to me that the major reason he won was that the Dem candidate was a terrible candidate and couldn’t be bothered to campaign seriously because she thought she was going to waltz into the position. Despite our bitching, progressives vote – I certainly do.
It’s the new voter, the one who thought Obama really was our FDR who stayed home in 2010 because they didn’t see Obama live up to his rhetoric. Whether we like it or not, many voters are swayed by emotion and their perceptions of a politician. Obama doesn’t seem to be able to get beyond his tendancy and belief that he can bring both sides together to accomplish rational compromise. Win or lose, he could add 10 points to his favorables if he just allowed himself to pound the table and fight like hell for us on even a few issues.
Crooks and Liars is a very good site that has been running recordings of FDR and it is just amazing to hear how blunt he was in laying out the fact that we were (and are of course) in a class war, and aristocrat that he was, he was on the side of working people and against his own class. For all I know that was a cynical ploy on his part, but he did back it up with actual legislation and actions. And people kept voting for him and progressive Democrats.
Sarah Jones
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 1:20 pm
I’m glad you’re not full of hate yourself:-) I love a good peace-monger. C & L has a great site, I agree.
Since you say you want to talk ideas instead of hate, let’s do that. I’ll ignore your claim that no one can criticize the President here because it’s inaccurate and unfounded and comes from a knee jerk defense so typical as to be boring. It certainly couldn’t be because the criticism was inaccurate – oh no, it must be that we are a hate machine! :-) And surely there can only be one argument to be made, and that’s yours, and everyone else is stupid or they worship the President, because surely there are no scholarly discussions at hand here. Also, I’m sure you’re aware of the further fallacy that one writer’s opinion represents every writer on a website.
Since you profess your opinion to be the ultimate decider re this FDR comparison, I’m sure you will be happy to enlighten us all as the errors in our thinking. Are you aware of any differences between the time FDR was in office and now, in rules (hint: Senate) and in make-up of the bicameral houses of congress that might be in play here? Are there any cultural differences you can spot? Is the role of the President the same? What do you suppose was the impact of both the Nixon and W presidencies in terms of cynicism of the general populace and thus their willingness to follow a President such as FDR? How has the executive office changed in the interim? What role does the 24 hour news cycle play and the internet in a President’s ability to message effectively? How does a propaganda news org like Fox News play into this? Can you draw parallels between the opposition FDR faced and the opposition Obama faces now, and if so, what are the differences?
This site is owned by someone who has read almost every single FDR book ever written, so if you have comparisons to make, I challenge you to bring all of your FDR knowledge with you.
Steve
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:04 pm
As far as scholarly discussions, the type of articles I reference are way over the top in tone and content, and I think the one last week was written by someone else so it isn’t just one crank – it’s seems to be a strongly held point of view around here and it’s counterproductive as hell. When the author starts talking about, “What many of the supporters of the far left don’t realize is that some of the people they following receive back backdoor funding from GOP groups.”, without a single example or cite I think we are well into crazy conspiracy territory. And again unhelpful as hell.
I have no interest or intention of producing a scholarly point by point comparison of FDR and Obama because it’s beside the point. I nominate neither of them for sainthood. I’d say both of them faced equally challenging environments. In some cases FDR had it bettter and in other ways Obama does. One example, for those who don’t know, there actually was a real far left in the 1930′s. Many people and unionists actually belonged to the honest-to-God Socialist and Communist parties. It is thought by many that FDR was as radical as he was because he was desperate to put forth some version of kinder and gentler Capitalism as an alternative to the Revolution being preached by the real far left. The propwash Obama has to deal with is so minimal that people should be embarassed to whine about it compared to what FDR had to deal with. The difference I can see between the two of them is that FDR was the kind of guy who grabbed the bull by the horns and was willing to push the envelope while Obama sees the road to success is a futile attempt to bring both sides together to reason together like rational people. Tough to do when only one side is rational. FDR’s style was to try something to get the economy going again and if that didn’t work he’d try something else, even to the point that the Supreme Court eventually ruled some of what he did unconstitutional. Obama could do that by applying the 14th amendment to the debt ceiling gridlock, but he won’t because he’s not that kind of guy.
The other difference is that Obama is much, much more moderate or conservative than FDR was. One example; many here seem to believe that Obama throwing the big 3 entitlements on the bargaining table for the deficit talks was some sort of spooky Kabuki he was using on the Republicans. Hardly. Obama isn’t just doing this as a ploy. He seriously wants to “fix” the cost of living formula with the proposal he’s made which will seriously hurt those who get the least from Social Security as the years roll on – $500-$1000 less per year over the next 10 years means a lot to someone getting $13,000/year. Shouldn’t the Democratic position be that the rich should start bearing their fair share of the burden in this country to fix things like SS? I think Obama’s position is extremely conservative for a Dem and it sure as hell isn’t protecting SS for the poor and middle class which is what he promised. And worst of all there was no earthly reason for him to put this on the table except that he saw this as a perfect opportunity to implement his terrible cost of living changes. Thanks buddy.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 1:31 pm
Strange, I never thought Obama was FDR. They dont look alike at all
Sarah Jones
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 1:32 pm
Yeah, odd isn’t it?
Rmuse
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 7:43 pm
Steve, I was going to mention that Scott Brown’s election was not mentioned in this article. It is another example of expressing the fantasy in your head. It’s embarrassing and what we have come to expect from neo-cons and teabaggers. I have heard of Mr. Brown, but certainly couldn’t find his name in the article. If nothing else, you have wasted my time looking for it. Good job! There was nothing so important that I had to do except read this stupid article two more times.
Steve
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 9:43 pm
I’d suggest you calm down before you pop a vessel in your neck or something. Although the “progressives didn’t vote” BS was mentioned in several of the responses I’ll be damned if I know why I thought the Scott Brown example was mentioned specifically. My mistake. You see? Sometimes it’s just a mistake – not everything is a big conspiracy theory about fantasies in my neocon head.
However, as long as I’m posting, how about you provide some evidence of the following extreme charge in your post: “What many of the supporters of the far left don’t realize is that some of the people they following receive back backdoor funding from GOP groups.”? I can’t think of a more inflamatory charge to make, without a single example or cite. And I want real honest-to-God journalistic documentation, not the guilt by association stuff about progressives who used to be Republicans that I saw in the responses. That’s a really great attitude – people can never change, or evolve. We’re going to make a lot of progress with that philosophy. Sheesh.
english saddle
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:29 pm
So Steve you are the only person which doesn’t know how Gop Jane earns her money? REALLY!? You know you just don’t care because you believe what your dear leader tells you.
You’re a nasty person. What makes you think rmuse owes you anything? Go start your own blog. Maybe Jane will let you buy Grover ads. You have to feed the corporate whores if you’re going to pretend to be a real progressive.
english saddle
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:31 pm
Hope you don’t hurt your fingers Googling for information everyone but you knows. Thanks for working with the tea party Traitor. Google that.
Steve
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 10:57 pm
Thanks so much for the scholarly discussion. It’s always a pleasure to engage in vigorous, but respectful debate.
Unfortunately, since neither of your replies contained even a shred of factual information to back up the charges of which I spoke, I think I can safely dismiss them as unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.
Thank you for your concern about my fingers. I’m always careful not to tire them out googling nonsense.
Mrraven
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 5:20 pm
Weak even by the low standards held by O-bots, hint if you were correctly angered by Bush, Obama should anger you as well:
Obama as bad as Bush the documented record:
1. The escalated wars even compared to overt war criminal Bush?
www.alternet.org/world/14.....
2. The continuation of the abrogation of Habeas Corpus just like Bush?
www.salon.com/news/opinio...
3. The continuation of military tribunals just like Bush:
www.washingtonpost.com/wp...
4. The continuation of rendition to countries that torture just like Bush:
www.huffingtonpost.com/20...
5. The continuation of a prison camp that tortures in gross violation of the Geneva conventions just like Bush:
www.spiegel.de/internatio...
www.afterdowningstreet.or...
6. Continuation of of Bush’s TARP program to transfer money from the poor and middle class to unaccountable banksters rather than helping the mainly African American victims of sub prime loans?
www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Ec...
www.detroitnaacp.org/civi...
7. The appointment of industry insiders in the industry that supported Obama in the Campaign shades of Cheney and Halliburton:
www.helium.com/items/1813.....
8. Obama’s support for “clean coal,” nuclear power and the first offshore oil drilling in 20 years which was only halted with a moratorium after the disastrous Gulf oil spill, update deepwater drilling resumed:
www.treehugger.com/files/...
articles.cnn.com/2010-02-....
www.nytimes.com/2010/04/0...
www.digitaljournal.com/ar...
9. Obama’s crushing of government whistleblowers of U.S. War crimes and other government malfesance like wikileaks:
www.democracynow.org/2010...
10. Assassination orders against American Citizens overseas:
www.salon.com/news/opinio...
11. Support for expanding Bush’s Unconsitutional surveillance of American citizens:
progressivealaska.blogspo...
www.nytimes.com/2011/02/1...
12. Health insurance reform that is a giveway of a trillion taxpayer dollars to the big insurance companies that broke the system in the first place with no price caps:
static1.firedoglake.com/1...
13. FBI raids on antiwar activists:
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100...
14. Vastly expanded TSA mandate that violates the 4th amendment.
www.refinery29.com/stick-...
15. Cave on fighting for progressive tax cut
www.wsws.org/articles/201...
16. Make illegal indefinite detention of prisoners of wars peranent after lying about closing down Guantanamo:
www.commondreams.org/head...
www.commondreams.org/view...
17. Cave on net neutrality after promising to fight for it:
www.commondreams.org/view...
18. Broken promise to walk with strikers in “comfortable shoes:”
my.firedoglake.com/mmonk/...
19. Unconstitutional war of aggression not cleared with Congress as required by Article 1 Section 8 of the Constitution, on the side of Al Queda affiliated “rebels”
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/...
www.cato.org/pub_display....
20. Extra judicial assasination of Bin Laden rather than trial in a court of law:www.guernicamag.com/blog/...
21. Persecution of NSA whistleblower who exposed spying on Ameican citizens:www.newyorker.com/reporti...
22. Balance budget on the backs of elederly by cutting Medicare, Social Security, and a 6 times budget cut for every tax raise.
www.commondreams.org/view...
23. Rendition and torture in Somalia:
www.democracynow.org/2011...
See also:
stpeteforpeace.org/obama....
www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/...
www.archive.org/details/P...
CJS
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 6:46 pm
Translation: “BUSH III”!!! (Professional Leftbagger Progresso Blameobamabot for “KENYAN MARXIST”!!!)
english saddle
Jul. 26th, 2011 at 10:24 pm
I like the bkaneobamabot!
B. Hamm
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 5:29 pm
You are a censor of free thought that has no profanity but only opinion. I don’t doubt this will be removed as well, but you will read it before you do.
You are no better than any you accuse as your policies here censor the truth that cuts you open exposing you for what you are.
Good luck with that, I am done with you for now and all time.
B. Hamm
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 27th, 2011 at 5:31 pm
How many times are you going to say you are done with someone? I thought you were done and deleted your attack piece out of sympathy for your mental state
BTW, read the right wing blogs. There is a tremendous amount of hate for Obama