-
Website
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/ -
Original page
http://www.jackandjillpolitics.com/2009/11/responding-to-the-progressive-obama-haters-not-quite-one-year-out/ -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
The far left+the far right=whiny ass titty babies. I have no use for either and neither are more happy the when they are unhappy. I really can't take it anymore and the President will probably get more done if he ignores them both. He's the one who figured out how to become the first black president so I'll stick with him for at least a FULL year of him being on the job. Progressives are arguing over who gets what they want first, but Wanda Sykes said it best, no body likes waiting in line but at least with Obama you are IN THE DAMN LINE!
Rant over.
Yea, nobody did anything before him to make that possible - he did it all by himself, lol.
Weaksauce. lol.
How they heard Obama say eleventy-billion times "This is not a liberal-america, this is not a conservative-america, this is the United States of America" and interpreted it as "I am left of Dennis Kuchinich(sic)" is beyond me.
How they heard Obama say 'The fight against Al-Quada is in Afghanistan" and interpreted it as "We're getting out of there post haste" is beyond me.
How they heard Obama say "We need to be as careful getting out of Iraq as we were careless getting in" and interpreted it as "We're getting out of Iraq yesterday" is beyond me.
And I especially wonder how they heard Obama say in his victory speech " The road ahead will be long. Our climb will be steep. We may not get there in one year or even in one term. But, America, I have never been more hopeful than I am tonight that we will get there. I promise you, we as a people will get there.
There will be setbacks and false starts. There are many who won't agree with every decision or policy I make as president. And we know the government can't solve every problem."
and interpreted it as "I will make America a liberal utopia with a wave of my hand".
Someone help me with that, please.
Anyone can sit and write fancy words and phrases, rant and rave about what's wrong, but when it comes to action, real action....... these folks just keep hammering away at the keyboard! SMFDH!
I actually LISTENED to what the guy was saying, instead of thinking how awesome a liberal I would be to vote for a black guy.
awesome a liberal I would be to vote for a black guy."
Yes, listening is an aquired skill, LT. I not only listen to what the
President is saying, I have copeis of all of his speeches, It is a
brilliant collection of discourses for true contemplation and study. If
folks go back and read them, they would discover that the president is
honoring his words.
Nope, folks want to whine, moan, bitch, and complain about what they aren't
getting...
Reminds me of this:
http://www.sfgate.com/blogs/images/sfgate/paren...
NOW that two governors lost for Dems I see that the BASE is now described as young people and BLACK people. WTF.
The Dem party/progressives /liberals or whatever they call themselves need to get their act together. I am sick of the pandering to Black people and acknowledgement of them as part of the DEM party when it comes to a vote. When it comes to policy changes and helping out Black people you hear crickets.
I am disgusted and sickened by these closet racist.
Black people with a voice find it and call out these hypocrites.
Jack Turner you keep up the good work. The white liberals who slam you only want you when u are doing a JIG.
1. Repeal DADT
2. Restructure NAFTA
3. Open up the congressional health care plan for all Americans
4. Provide licenses for undocumented workers
5. Vote against the warrantless wiretapping bill (FISA)
6 support Public Finance.
7. Close gitmo
8 Repeal the bush tax cuts ( not let them expire like he's doing now)
In case you folks don't know, these are all progressive/liberal views and contributed to why many progressives supported Obama.
He's flipped flopped or just refused to do anything on this list and you wonder why progressives are frustrated with him?
Couple all this with his support for the bailouts and his awful appointments of Rahm Emanuel, Larry Summers ( thinks we should be polluting Africa) and Wall Street sycophant Timothy Geithner, and progressives have very little reason to have faith in Obama's presidency.
This BLACK progressive will never vote for Obama or any Democrat again - their losers. Time to focus on building a reputable 3rd Party. There's no difference between the Democrats and Republicans.
Maybe you voted for "Barack, the Magic Negro" who would turn American into liberal utopia with the wave of his magic negro hand, so I can understand why you're disappointed.
You probably took the fact that Santa Claus wasn't real pretty hard as well.
I, on the other hand, voted for Barck Obama, the gifted politician who was the best candidate, and understood decades of bad policy wasn't gonna get turned around overnight.
Good morning.
I think what you fail to realize is that Obama has ALREADY chosen not to do much on that list. He called his own rhetoric about restructuring NAFTA "exaggerated" and said he got caught up in "heated campaign rhetoric".
In the primaries, he lied (yes the messiah lies, lol!) when he said he would vote against the FISA bill which gave legal immunity to telecommunication companies that were engaging in wiretapping of private citizens. Once Obama got the Dem nomination, he went on to vote for the bill to bump up his conservative cred for the general election. He then gave the following lame excuse: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/my-p...
We all know he totally flipped on Public Finance during the campaign when he said he would accept it if his opponent did. McCain accepted the Public Finance and Obama blew the whole idea off after McCain did this.
Opening up the congressional health care plan to the uninsured and underinsured is no longer on the table. Instead, his current “health care reform” proposal argues for individual mandates that require 95 percent of people to buy private insurance. Repealing the Bush Tax cuts for the very rich is also no longer on the table... But I'm sure these little FACTS mean very little to people like you - or to Obama for that matter.
I actually listened to the SPECIFICS of what was said during the campaign, not just the soaring sugar coated rhetoric about there not being a liberal or conservative America. Maybe you should go back and watch the debates to see what he specifically laid out in his platform, and maybe - just maybe, you'll Obama for who he really is: just another corrupt lying politician
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/
If you look at that sight, you can see "Promises Kept" is more that "Compromised", "Broken", and "Stalled" combined.
If you have an issue with a president keeping every single promise he/she makes, you could elect the biggest moonbat in office and he wouldn't be able to keep the promises he/she made if he could.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promise...
As you can see, he hasn't broken that promise, yet. So you're wrong there.
"As the negotiations in Congress over health care have progressed, though, it appears the White House will not push Obama's campaign promise to allow Medicare to negotiate lower drug prices, nor another measure to allow consumers to buy imported prescription drugs"
Yet politifact categorizes this as just being "stalled". Come on.
The site also does not include Obama's flip flops that came before he was elected either - things like voting for FISA or changing his position on NAFTA. People actually voted for him in the primaries because of his positions on these issues. . The general election Obama was much more conservative than the primary Obama - politifact seems to be using the general election platform as a measuring stick totally dismissing the promises made during the primaries that were broken.
It's honestly a waste of time.
-Santa Claus isn't real?
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
(sob) But who ate the cookies & drank the milk I set out for Santa?
(wails) Darn you, LTMidnight. darn you to heck!
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.parentdish.com/media...
African Americans have issues that need to be addressed. Ignoring and pandering to them when a vote is needed is not happening anymore with the DEM party. Putting inadequate candidates on the ballot and expecting the "base" to lick it up is not acceptable.
My vote for Obama had nothing to do with that platform you list. I could care less about most of that list.
Go pander your list to the repubs.
I need to find Al Giordano's smack down of the liberal elite and post it here.
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/white...
Another Giordano writeup on health care making the point it is not just about laying back and taking verbal shots at the Prez:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/3409/...
The fact is that the new voters from 2008 didn't show up. If you want to write off last night by just saying "This always happens in New Jersey and Virginia," then you are using politics as group therapy/infotainment instead of as a tool to understand and change the world. It's a progressive flip on Fox News, where you can live in a dreamland where if we just wait, everything will be just fine. I prefer to take President Obama at his word. He said during the campaign that change doesn't come from inside Washington. It comes from the outside. We need to fight for the change we believe in. Not wait for a White House. And I will go back to writing about sports but you need to go back to writing about politics - and save the propaganda for the DNC.
But I am still greatly annoyed by complete write-offs of this administration by the only people who should be standing by it more than not. You fell into that category when you made a blanket assumption that the reason new dems stayed home was because the president has failed to deliver on his promises and basically has nothing to show for his first 10 months in office.
That's far too broad and simplistic a view, especially given that the two biggest races this week were in states that always do what they do, and you didn't mention it at all. I thought that was highly negligent.
Here's a more complete followup.
Dem turnout was high in 2008 because it was an historic race. 2009 elections are anything but. I see the low youth and Af-Am turnout less as a reflection of disappointment in Obama's policies and more as a reflection of the extraordinary energy and momentum of 2008.
Republican turnout was high because a) there's an party civil war between moderates and conservatives b) the GOP is directing all its firepower at Obama and he's a proxy for their frustration with everything about "government" and "freedom" and "the constitution" and other buzzwords they flaunt without much thought. They have much more to prove, and they're angry. Anger is a great motivator
Many of the items you cite were never part of Obama's campaign or presidential agenda. Gay marriage. Of course I'm pro civil rights, but where did you ever get the idea that Obama would campaign actively to defend marriage equality? He's been very clear that he's not even that hot on it. Meanwhile he hasn't been totally inactive on issues of concern to gay Americans (see HIV travel policy). He's a smart but deliberate leader not prone to massive amounts of rattling. Yes it would have been nice if he made a statement of support, but your larger point in your piece is that "words" don't mean anything, so why do you hold his lack of a "statement" against him?
Afghanistan? Again. He and nearly the entire democratic field campaigned on MORE war in Afghanistan. I don't happen to agree with this. Increasingly Americans don't. And the president is taking a hard look at our options which I'm glad to see.
For the record, I believe progressive pressure on this administration is a GOOD thing. What I think is not as good is calling this administration a failure and saying they've completely let down their supporters. That to me is simply not true, and it's frustrating to see how we treat our own leaders vs. how Republicans treat theirs. I think the lack of GOP criticism of Bush over the 8 year period was capitulation in the extreme, but I'm troubled by what I see as overly dramatic and premature defeatism by some on the left toward our own guy, a big part of whose job is to clean up the mess left by the last guy. I think there's a more supportive and constructive way to apply pressure than calling our own team a total failure and sellout.
I'm looking for more, but I'm also aware that change doesn't just come from the White House.
We would be much better fighters for change if we were unified. But how can I unite with someone who continuously fights (and doubts) my President?
My bad--you all at the Huffington Post are only acting in the best interests of All Americans, right? Nope, you all are acting in the best interests of your web traffic and profits. Sometimes, I don't know what to believe anymore...but I see you Dave. WEESeeYou Dave.
As a matter of fact, WEESeeYou Jane Hamsher, Jack, Jill, & Arianna: All Hugged-Up--Too Close for Comfort?
If you are a journalist it would be wise to ask the question WHY? Could it be that the new voters stayed away for a reason? How about a little investigative journalism before demonizing and accusing the President of not satisfying YOUR expectations pronto.
I voted for the Presdent and support him 100%. IMO he is doing a GREAT job.
I am also concerned about death. The potential death and violence those kids in Chicago face everyday going to school. How about the police brutality that Black people face. Unarmed Black men being killed by police without any sort of justice.
I am impatient and want Obama to do something. However, I have been living for more than thirty years with frustration, anger and impatience. The racial disparities African Americans deal with in this country when it comes to edcuation, criminal justice, employment etc etc are off the chart.
NO ONE in the white house, for as long as I have been alive, have done ANYTHING substantive to change the situation of African Americans in this country. if anything they have made it worse.
PBO is the only HOPE I have to change something men in his position have ignored.
Fish gotta swim, birds gotta fly and whiny ass titty babies will always cry.
Now stop telling us how we should post.
First, in the quote you posted....Zirin makes no real "political analysis"...he merely comments on Democratic turnout, versus Republican turnout, pointing out the fact that Democratic turnout was lower than 2008. He goes on to suggest that Democrats are demoralized by Obama not "bringing home the goods". What is faulty about that?
I'm not fond of sports, nor am I in any mood to defend sportscasters...but what does his profession have to do with his ability to comment on the performance of his President?
Nowhere in his huffpo piece does he use the word "failure" in the context that you suggest...which is that Obama is a failure because he hasn't done everything he set out to do.
I suggest that you stick to recommending books you haven't read, by authors who insist that despite having written 20,000 words, the book-buying public only needs to know 5 of those words.
…
That's what happens when you don't deliver the goods.
…
It is from the 2nd paragraph.
I wonder what that means?
As someone wrote here:
..then the President wallows in powerlessness, while his sycophants attend to him.
I am sure there are rational arguments to potentially defend the President...this one isn't one of those arguments...that is my contention.
Also, re the author, I'm referring to a post some time ago about an author, flogging her book.. when asked to talk about the book, she said that you only need to know 5 words...
At that time, there were only advance reading copies available, and I don't think Jack read the book, while recommending it. It seemed a comedy of errors..as is this harsh assessment of the "nobody" Zirin. There are others on HuffPo to attack...why Zirin? Why not Arianna?
I just find the whole thing perplexing.
..then the President wallows in powerlessness, while his sycophants attend to him.
That is definition of Politics, in a democracy anyway!
Imagine one person having that much power?
If you favor yr. interests you succeed, if you follow yr. belly only you get played, the Tibetan Book of Dead teaches that.
What does that even mean?
"Historic standards", lol.
Obama started out with a great health care plan which included a robust Public Option for everyone. What it has been reduced to is a joke, a waste of time and nothing but a financial bonanza for the insurance companies. Mandates that 95 percent of people buy private health care is not a good idea nor is there anything "historic" about such a thing.
"engagement with the world (including Iran, Burma and the Middle East peace process"
All lip service, little if any action.
"a recovery act that PREVENTED even harsher economic reality for millions"
This is just an assumption that Obama supporters make. There's no way to really know if things would be substantially worse if the stimulus wasn't passed. The Obama administration said that if we didn't pass the stimulus, then we would hit double digit unemployment. Well we passed the stimulus, and yet we're STILL about to hit double digit unemployment - not very effective at stimulating anything.
The bailouts started under Bush and that CONTINUED under the Obama administration were a disgrace. Very few regulations were put in place to stop the financial gangsters from repeating what they did that destroyed the economy, yet they got 700 billion dollars of our money.
And yes democratic voter turnout was not good yesterday because many people are realizing that the Democrats (and Obama) are no better than Bush and the Republicans and have little - dare I say- hope in Democratic Party anymore.
Obama has been a failure thus far.
Can this site increase the size of the standard font? It has gone tiny
Shoot, I thought that it was my "READING GLASSES & I went and bought some with a higher MAGNIFICATION!! :>) :>)
Couldn't C any betta!! :>)
***shakin' my head*** :>) :>)
BBC is promoting Palin already.
Politics IS about interest not ideology.
Read any post by Matt Frei or Mark Mardell over there.
I reached that conclusion NOT overnight.
It is in between the lines.
Those who see Socialism in anything Europe should read their post.
Whatever happened to the private sector providing jobs?????
Why wasn't this crowd screaming years ago when JOBS were being shipped overseas by Democrats and Republicans. Now they have the nerve to Obama to find them jobs.
.
second question, the private sector has been providing jobs. The quality of the jobs since 2000 has been extremely poor as measured by income growth. There hasn't been any. Almost all of the economic activity has been based on borrowing money. think about it college tution has gone up, both private and public, because of borrowing, home values shot up because it was so inexpensive and easy to receive a mortgage, if you owned a home since say 1995 by 2004 it had doubled in value allowing you to suck out equity by remortgaging, credit cards were issued like candy and you were offered zero balance movements and charges if you could pay it off by a given time. That ability to borrow is gone domestically for most people. It means any income left goes to basics or to debt there is little for extra. further many people w/ jobs have had earning cut back, delayed suspended and/or or all three keeping growth in income down. Further state and local governments can't generate any economic activity because the tax bases are impaired because of no growth in tax revenue or declines. any spending they have had has come from the stimlus funds to them.
Many believe that a tax credit would provide new jobs. This is a fallacy because it takes away money from the federal government which can run deficits so it increases them; more borrowed money. The other choice is to cut income taxes across the board. This is a failed idea as well because the tax code currently sheters to much income from taxation and again increases the deficit. The better idea would be to eliminate the current tax code and go for simple flat rates on income in a staggered manner w/ the top rate being about 22%. Tax deductions should be only for home ownership, some consideration for charity and children. The low rates will generate far more economic activity across the board and provide opportunity for entrepenuers. Some jobs will be lost because they exist only because of the tax code but chances will be taken on other things.
Finally as to the screamers, what I refer to as the nomenklature. Their expansion and jobs have come from borrowing over the last 10 to 15 years. The expansion of the nomenklature as an upper middle class phenoma is a result of technological prowess expressed as expansion of computer power. This expansion eliminated many of the middle management jobs, corporate and political bureaucrats and middle class incomes. Knowledge power through computers became the new source of income-we have only to look at the dot.com boom. Simutaneously the computer power made knowledge extremely fungible. One trained person could pass it on to many especially if they value education and/or it is seen as a way of improving your life(think of the maquiladora). This helped eliminate much of the manufactoring jobs in the US. The tradeoff was supposed to be the expansion of the nomenklature doing service work for overseas companies.
The same thing that generated jobs for the nomeklature was not unavailabe to the highly educated overseas and they quickly took those jobs overseas as well. So the nomenklature has nothing as well. They've only themselves to blame.
If our country is going to get out of this we have to move toward our technological prowess and creativity. We have to borrow and spend the money on the ecologically sound jobs; clean energy, water, insulation, retrofitting, sounder sustainable farming policies-yeah we have to change the way we eat, transportation policies, et al.
The only way this is going to really occur is if Americans are willing to recognize the idea that much of what we do has to be standardized. We can't have 20 different models of buses, el trains, insulation standards, local tax codes, educational policies and every thing else. We can't waste money by sustaining multiple systems.
Rob, you got an answer for this?
though Ihave a great deal of sympathy for the inability to come up w/ jobs, the problem of how to do so has not been met. One of the biggest problems being lack of education for many of the jobs available.
Eureka!
And who lend money for the masses to spend and for entrepreneurs to spring their brain?
One of the biggest problems being lack of education for many of the jobs available.
Right, bring on people from India.
Check out:
You refered us to Ari Melber's piece as a more sober analysis of the situation. Can you please tell me how he came up w/ this S@#$?, "....to stack the Treasury with veterans from Goldman Sachs (which topped the list of corporate staff contributions to Obama's presidential campaign). But those alliances were clearly enunciated in campaign season."
I have written critically about the President's economic acumen from the beginning to the point of suggesting he doesn't get it and I have been confirmed right. I wrote that Geithner would be a good pick because as NY FED chr he knew where the skeletons were and had the potential to be Joe Kenneddy(yo, Alex I'm eating serious crow on that one and it taste's like a@@. even Tabasco doens't cover that taste up). But nowhere in hell was it ever evident that Goldman Sachs had an inroad to his admintration.
http://globalgrind.com/content/1114451/Bill-Cos...
Interesting perspective...I think
All the things they say are actually true. What they don’t understand is that the young people who they criticize did not create their own realities. They did not create the crumbling education system that we school them in.
Oxymoron?
Oh, i SUCKceed because i'm bright, those in the ghetto ARE not mantra?!
If you are not able to create yr. own reality in a "FREE" nation …
Another irrelevant hip hop head!
I still think he is a very, very good president. I am proud. But he has flip flopped and although this site won't admit it (seems like you all are NEVER critical of him) he has not been very progressive and is skidish to govern fully from the left the way Bush did from the right.
Congress will have to overturn it.
The candidate and the president have been consistent on promoting competition, controlling costs, de-coupling insurance from employment and a few other key values, but never ever single payer.
Mr. President--dump Geithner!