Spintested: 10/09/10

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

Saturday, October 9, 2010

== Historian Robert Dallek has written persuasively of the Kennedy and Johnson presidencies. "In my judgment," says Dallek, "war kills off great reform movements. " Thus, the American entrance into WWI killed off the progressive movement. WWII stifled the reforms of FDR and began the development of the "military- industrial complex" that Eisenhower later warned of. The Vietnam War ended much of the reform under Johnson and with money only for guns and not butter, halted the War on Poverty.

President Obama was elected on a platform of change and reform. He announced to the world that he would bring fresh faces to Washington, D.C., and change the way it did business. But nothing much has changed on that front: he even kept on George W. Bush’s man at the second most important post in the government, Secretary of Defense. He also kept on and even promoted most of W’s favorite generals, like Gen. McCrystal. ==

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/8755
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

I am an old FDR liberal Democrat. Whether you think that's left or far left (or far right, depending on some people's perspective), then that's what you think about FDR.

I am one of the 70% of liberals that comprise the Democratic Party, and what Obama and Democrats are doing is not what Democratic voters put Obama & Democrats into power to achieve on their behalf.

The DLC is DINO, ideologically the moderate Republicans of the 1950s & 1960s. It is anti-populist and a t00l of the corporations, just like Republicans. The DLC, through no acclaimation of the People or Democratic voters, controls the Democratic Party.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

Politifact has gamed its way of measuring Obama's "promise-keeping"; its categories ('NO ACTION', 'IN THE WORKS', 'STALLED' or 'NOT YET RATED) are misleading. Many a campaign promise or pledge (hundreds of them) has been generously placed in these categories to languish so that Politifact can cut Obama much slack by only recognizing 22 broken promises.

As Politifact claims, "Once we find action is completed, we rate them 'PROMISE KEPT' 'COMPROMISE' or 'PROMISE BROKEN'". By Politifact's own definition, it enables Obama to keep these issues in limbo for 4 years.

One of many examples of Politifact's gaming its list is that Politifact doesn't even list in its "Promises Broken" category Obama's campaign promise to impose 'Windfall Profits Taxes on the Oil & Gas Industry" - Obama immediately reneged on that promise once in office, saying, "The prices have now dropped - We'll see about doing that if or when they rise again." Oil hit over $80/barrel (the amount that, had Obama kept his promise, the windfall profits tax would have been triggered) months ago. Politifact has conveniently ignored this issue.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

Another duped by politifact.com

Between Ar!anna, me and others, Politifact has been discredited as a source for accurate, unbiased assessment. Politifact has gotten it wrong on Obama's "accomplishments', his promise-keeping, on Halliburton, on war contracting, on Nita Lowey, on the Stupak Amendment, on the healthcare legislation, and more:

PolitiFact's Truth-O-Meter in Need of Tune-Up

PolitiFact Embraces Equivocation, the Truth Gets Squeezed

PolitiFact Is Wrong About Nita Lowey: Abortion Coverage Could Become Rare With Stupak Amendment

PolitiFact gets it wrong on Jones

http://southdekalb.wordpress.com/2010/07/01/ajc-politifact-gets-it-wrong-on-jones/

KEEP READING
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

That's not what I said.

And now we come to the problem shared by most of Obama's 'most ardent supporters', and why they have such a seemingly impossible time believing their own lyin' eyes.

'Lawyer-speak', HST. Learn it, learn to recognize it, and it's going to open up your eyes, and save us all a whole lot of grief. Look here -- [Clue: It's all about 'time']:

http://www.westwingtranscripts.com/search.php?flag=getTranscript&id=42

Once you learn it, go back and watch Candidate Obama's speeches, the debates, the interviews (YouTube). Or better yet, read the transcripts -- You won't be distracted and mesmerized by his delivery.

I know it (lawyer-speak), Obama knows it (lawyer-speak), as does just about everyone working in & with government in Washington (and around the country).
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

I don't have time to meet your request at the moment.

But, let me ask You this-

Do you believe we would NOT be at war with IRAN if we'd had four more years of Republican presidency?

===================================

We are no more or less likely to be at war with Iran with a Republican president than a Democratic one.

What do you think Democrats would have done with their majority in both Houses of Congress had a Republican president wanted to go to war in Iran?

We are now engaged in war with Pakistan. Whether it's declared or not, bombing a sovereign nation that has not attacked you is a declaration of war. Obama did NOT go to Congress for authorization. Where is your outrage?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

This election is about what Obama and Democrats did with the mandate given them in 2008. They're not even running on what they did, it's that bad. They're running on "OMIGOD, THE REPUBLICANS ARE COMING!!"

The fear campaign again that we thought we were getting rid of when we put Democrats & Obama into power. No more pre-election Osama B!n Laden tapes leaked, no more 'overseas travel advisories', no non-specific terr0rist threats plastered all over the media in the weeks before an election. We were supposed to be done with all that; Democrats were supposed to be better.

But all we hear out of them and the corporate media is an all-fear, all the time, over Sharon Angle and Christine O'Donnell, 2 candidates unlikely to win (O'Donnell is something like 18 points below Coons). If a fluke happened and either won, she would most likely do what ScottBrown did when he won TedKennedy's seat: Moved to the left, said, "SarahPalin, who???"

SarahPalin herself governed Alaska as a moderate Republican, which is no different than any DLCer governs. If you're not afraid of Evan Bayh (who is to the right of moderate Republicanism & and who is the model for the candidates that Obama & Rahm Emanuel recruited for this election), you have no business being afraid of Sarah Palin.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

Yeah, you can and need to criticize him all the time, until he stops doing what he's being criticized over.

WeThePeople have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted. The founders were nothing if not ironic.

Right this very period, the weeks leading up to an election (voting's already begun and it may be too late) -- That's it for making our deals with the candidates.

And you want that we not only give Democrats a pass for failing to achieve (in such a spectacular fashion, yet) our objectives these past two years, but also ignore the fact that Obama continues to blow the base off, especially in these last weeks, insultingly yet, on everything from Elizabeth Warren to hiding NOAA's Gulf report.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

The media is doing Obama and the corporate-owned DLC a favor by making this election all about witchcraft and Christine O'Donnell. Anything but report what corporate t00Is the DLC has put up to run as Democrats.

WeThePeople have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted. The founders were nothing if not ironic.

Right this very period, the weeks leading up to an election, voting's already begun and it may be too late -- That's it for making our deals with the candidates.

And you want that we not only give Democrats a pass for failing to achieve (in such a spectacular fashion, yet) our objectives these past two years, but also ignore the fact that Obama continues to blow the base off, especially in these last weeks, insultingly yet, on everything from Elizabeth Warren to hiding NOAA's Gulf report.

This election is about what Obama and Democrats did with the mandate given them in 2008. They're not even running on what they did, it's that bad. They're running on SharonAngle & Christine O'Donnell. It's fear again, over 2 candidates unlikely to win (O'Donnell is something like 18 points below Coons. If a fluke happened and either won, she would most likely do what ScottBrown did when he won TedKennedy's seat: Moved to the left, said, "SarahPalin, who???"

Come away from the dark side, and into the transparent light
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

As an old liberal Democrat who's lived through decades of party politics, I suggest that you consider Democrats & Republicans as working on the same side, as tag relay teams. 'Good cop/bad cop'. One side (Republicans) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, & when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats consolidate Republicans' gains from previous years, & continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertising campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what WeThePeople thought they were.

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigans & all the different ways they've been tricked & start seeing Democrats as no different than Republicans, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business -- This current one, because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc., is custom-tailored to Obama's 'bipartisan cooperation' demeanor. It's smirk-worthy when you realize they're trying to sell that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do, & that's "a good thing".

Whichever of us is right (& I can back up my contentions with much evidence of Obama's not being any more ethical than BushCheney, beginning with his assertion that the president has the right to k!II American citizens with absolutely no due process, no oversight), how is his government's ineffectiveness working for you, for us?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

If you think things won't be much worse under Republican rule, you are sadly mistaken.

=============================

How?

Lay it out. What exactly do you think Republicans would do, and how would they do it?

What would Democrats be doing while Republicans are doing whatever you think they'd do?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

As an old liberal Democrat who's lived through decades of party politics, I suggest that you consider Democrats & Republicans as working on the same side, as tag relay teams. 'Good cop/bad cop'. One side (Republicans) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, & when the People have had enough, they put Democrats into power because of Democrats' populist rhetoric.

Once in power, Democrats then consolidate Republicans' gains from previous years, & continue on with Republican policies but renamed, with new advertising campaigns. They throw the People a few bones, but once Democrats leave office, we learn that those bones really weren't what WeThePeople thought they were.

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigans & all the different ways they've been tricked & start seeing Democrats as no different than Republicans, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business -- This current one, because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc., is custom-tailored to Obama's 'bipartisan cooperation' demeanor. It's smirk-worthy when you realize they're trying to sell that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do, & that's "a good thing".

Whichever of us is right (& I can back up my contentions with much evidence of Obama's not being any more ethical than BushCheney, beginning with his assertion that the president has the right to k!II American citizens with absolutely no due process, no oversight), how is his government's ineffectiveness working for you, for
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

If Republicans are such scvm (and I believe they are) and "so dangerous", why isn't Obama investigating and prosecuting them? Why isn't Obama investigating and prosecuting the greatest heist on the People in all history?

Why are Obama and Democrats continuing the war crimes of Bush & Cheney, and blocking investigations and prosecutions into their crimes?

How does a Democratic president, on the heels of the most criminal and corrupt administration in the nation's history, not replace Bush-era US attorneys? This is what Obama's US attorneys do instead of returning the democracy to the American people -- Instead we get Bush-style obscenity prosecutions:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_691667.html

FYI - Presidents may fire US attorneys, and they do so routinely at the beginning of a new administration. It is unusual to fire US attorneys in mid-term (as Bush did) except in cases of gross misconduct (which wasn’t the case during the Bush administration).

We need a real Democrat in the Oval Office, and real Democrats in Congress, instead of these DINOs. With fire in their bellies to go after those who obstruct the People's business (Republicans), and not fire in their bellies to go after the Democratic Party's base.

We have Obama and Democrats to thank for the resurrection of Republicans. The GOP & Bush were down for the count after the 2008, and Obama gave them all pardon.

How do you explain that to yourself?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

There is little, if anything, that I state that isn't factually supportable, the above included.

I'm fascinated though with why you would doubt it. Is it because you believe that Democrats are incompetent or that they're above such enterprising trickery?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

The truth is that Obama is no better than Bush-Cheney. Not better, not worse, but the same. His 'most ardent admirers' just like the packaging better. I'm not talking skin color, although that may be a factor for some of them; I'm talking about how a 'D' after the name is a brand they trust believe and trust in, despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product).

Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromising change to our campaign financing system, until corporations are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participating in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless.

Once campaigns are publicly financed, then reforming our system & returning the government to the People can begin. That's when the work really starts.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

If you must continue to delude yourself into thinking Obama's a good guy who never would have started those wars, & who has only the best of intentions (I don't share that opinion anymore), but got a bad deal, then think of all this as a business plan where the Corporate Masters of the Universe have charted out their plans years in advance (governments do them, too) & select the politician/personality best able to achieve those plans in 4 year increments. If you want to l!e the country into war for oil & war-profiteering, then George W. Bush is your man to front it (with Dick Cheney, the former Secretary of Defense who initiated the privatizing of the military a decade earlier, actually running the operation from the shadows).

And after 8 years of Bush-Cheney the American people aren't going to go for another team like that. They're going to want HOPE & CHANGE, with a persona they can believe in & trust. BarackObama.

KEEP READING
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

Over the course of US history, corporations have managed to game our political system, & done it so effectively that the two-party system competes to serve corporate interests while defending that service as, "What's good for GM (corporations) is good for America (We the People)".

Democrats (controlled by the DLC, and that's important to remember) & Republicans are corporate t00Is. Like siblings competing for the attention & approval (campaign contributions) of a parent, Republicans & DLC-controlled Democrats try to outdo each other in delivering for their real constituent, BigCorporations. The trick for them has been to make it seem as if they were really working on behalf of WeThePeople.

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama & Democrats were for strong regulations on banks, WallStreet, investigations, prosecutions, restitution of what has been robbed from the middle class and poor for the past 30+ years, environmental clean-up, clean, sustainable renewable energy (& that isn't nuclear), putting an end to the wars and occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan, affordable, quality universal healthcare (which ObamaCare is not), and more. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to these & all populist issues, because like the RepublicanParty, the DLC works for the benefit of transnational corporations.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

As an old liberal Democrat, Democrats really aren't any different than Republicans. Not since the DLC took control over the Democratic Party.

You only think that Democrats are because of Democratic politicians' manner and style, the focus-group tested words which have us believing that Democrats are better when, in fact, they're continuing just about everything Bush and Cheney did. And worse. But it's the same pro-corporate, anti-populist, pro-war, anti-civil rights, pro-police state, chipping away at privacy rights &abortion rights as Republicans have been doing.

There's really no defending any of it by any Democrat. But they trust you to be ig.nor.ant. of the facts of what they do (& too overwhelmed just trying to survive to really keep up with what's going on). The 'D' after the name is a brand you believe and trust in (as did I), despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product) as what Bush & Cheney & the GOP gave us.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Joe the Debtor? Miller Owes Tens of Thousands in Credit Card Debt

Meaningless characterization.

Ted Stevens wasn't center-right, and what defines a Democrat isn't center-right.

You don't get to drill for oil in environmentally sensitive areas and call yourself a Democrat.

You don't get to clear-cut old growth, ancient forests and call yourself a Democrat.

You don't get to support anti-abortion legislation and call yourself a Democrat.

You don't get to deny that humans are causing extreme climate change and call yourself a Democrat.

You don't get to be for any of that and call yourself anything but RIGHTWING.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

The real point here is that if you didn't like the Republican Party of the last 35 years, the party of Reagan (forget just the past 8), you're going to h8 where Obama and the DLC are taking the 'new & improved' Democratic Party from which they hope "to govern for 100 years".

That's why all of the incumbents have to go, including Obama.

Haven't you asked yourself how Obama could go after the base of the Democratic Party, Sarah Palin & Rush Limbaugh (2 people with absolutely no role whatsoever in the Republican Party), and he won't go after Bush, Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld, Feith, Wolfowitz, Yoo, Bybee, et al, or anyone in the Republican leadership or in Congress.

Why hasn't Obama (nor any of the DemocraticParty leadership) held the BushAdministration to account? Why hasn't Obama (nor any of the Democratic Party leadership) gone after anyone for the economic meltdown?

Perhaps it would be kind of hard to swallow (Obama going after an administration for having committed crimes) when it's the same activities that Obama's actively engaged in. It's also counter-intuitive to your other agenda, the DLC's agenda for the past 20 years, which is to attract Republican politicians & their supporters into the DemocraticParty, which can only be done by moving the DemocraticParty to the right of right-of-center.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

If you're so worried about teabaggers (& should it happen that a few win their races), you'll have no one to blame but Obama & RahmEmanuel.

Obama and Rahm Emanuel didn't go after the Republican leadership in Congress, or even the Bush-Cheney administration for their many crimes. No, Obama and Emanuel blocked all investigations into Bush-Cheney, & then elevated the teabaggers, SarahPalin & RushLimbaugh, two people with absolutely no job, no position in the GOP..

Why did Obama & Emanuel do that?

Because that's who Obama & the DLC-controlled DemocraticParty wants to run against, both in 2010 & in 2012. Obama wants to drive a wedge between the base of the RepublicanParty that controls the RepublicanParty (teabaggers) and the rest of the RepublicanParty. Obama & the DLC does not want to offend the rest of the RepublicanParty & their voters.

Obama and RahmEmanuel have never gone after the Republican leadership directly. Not MitchMcConnell, not JohnBoehner, not EricCantor, not JohnMcCain (the titular head of the Party, as the last presidential nominee). Oddly, it's because they don't want to offend them. Obama & Rahm are trying to drive a wedge between the extreme far rightwing that controls the RepublicanParty and the other Republicans and their supporters, move the DemocraticParty even farther to the right-right-of-center, to try to attract Republican politicans & their supporters into the DemocraticParty. So that the DemocraticParty can "govern for 100 years", with the base of the DemocraticParty out & marginalized, just like the Teabaggers left comprising the Republican
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

The only actual chance We The People have (to change anything in Washington, but most importantly to get Democrats to act like Democrats) is to throw all incumbents out of office.

That is just the first, but vital, step. The power of the incumbency to retain control of the seat increases with each election they retain the seat.

You can't get to the second step (getting real Democrats into office, and not DLC-Democrats) without getting incumbents out. And there is no way to get the Democrats in office now to behave as Democrats and not corporate Trojan Horse lobbyists who switchback for their own personal financial enrichment between the public and private sectors their entire lives.

And you should know that after the past 2 years of seeing Obama use his considerable abilities against his own base and liberal Democratic politicians instead of on Republicans.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

It's not 12 years, but 30 years, and with Democrats' support.

If you don't know what the DLC and who is in it, you're a dangerous ig.no.rant time-b0mb, helping the transnational corporations retain control over our government.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

The RNC and other right-wing groups are making a concerted effort to overrun and spam progressive and other web sites by paying people to log on and spew right-wing nonsense.

==================================================

Just as the DLC is doing here and at other leftwing sites. Just about every one of Obama's 'most ardent supporters' around HP is a paid political operative.

Unless you're one of the political operatives paid to spread disinformation, just talk about your own opinions, how you come to believe as you do.
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

What issues do you see coming up in the next months leading up to the next campaign (2012), and what Democrats are and aren't willing to support to get votes?

In December, when the Pentagon finishes its study on ending DADT and tells Congress that it should oppose ending DADT, what do you think Congress and Obama are going to do, no matter whose hands Congress is in? Do you think that a Democratically-controlled Congress is going to override the Pentagon's recommendation? Do you think Obama is going to ignore the Pentagon's recommendation and end DADT with the stroke of his pen (executive order)?

What issues are important to you? For example, do you have any expectations of a public option being added to get real healthcare reform? If not now, when? Ever? How?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

What do you think Obama is going to do after the election in just a few weeks if Republicans take control of one or both Houses of Congress?

Do you think he'll veto the legislation they pass (through reconciliation and every other means they can manage, but by means that Democrats have refused to do to pass meaningful reform on behalf of the People)? Do you think Obama will take to the bully pulpit, urge Americans to bury Republicans in email, phone calls, snail mail, and urge Democrats to block Republicans every way possible?

Or do you think that Obama's going to be making deal after deal with them, spinning what he can as somehow "Good for the People and Democrats", and/or, "I'm president of all the People, and the People in their infinite wisdom put Republicans in the majority, so I must honor their wishes and work with Republicans, and not try to obstruct their will"?

And if Democrats keep control of Congress? Do you think Obama's going to continue trying to work in a "bipartisan manner" with Republicans, keep flip-flopping on his campaign promises, and say that the election was a referendum on his trying "change the tone in Washington", and voters want him to do more of the same?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

If Republicans are such scvm (and I believe they are), why isn't Obama investigating and prosecuting the greatest heist on the People in all history?

Why are Obama and Democrats continuing the war crimes of Bush & Cheney, and blocking investigations and prosecutions into their crimes?

We have Obama and Democrats to thank for the resurrection of Republicans. The GOP & Bush were down for the count after the 2008, and Obama gave them all pardon.

We're seeing Democrats running the same fear campaigns that we thought we were getting rid of when we put Democrats and Obama into power. We thought there'd be no more pre-election Osama B!n Laden tapes leaked, no more 'overseas travel advisories', no more non-specific terr0rist threats plastered all over the media in the weeks before an election.

But we're getting the same old, same old, along with "The Republicans are coming, be very afraid!", and 'All Christine O'Donnell', all the time, despite the fact that she's something like 18 points down in the polls.

The DLC-controlled Democrats aren't running on achievements -- They haven't achieved what we put them into power to achieve, through every fault of their own and Obama's. They're actually running on the slogan, "The other guys are worse."

We have Obama and Democrats to thank for the resurrection of Republicans. The GOP & Bush were down for the count after the 2008, and Obama gave them all pardon.

Ask yourselves why?
About 2010 Elections
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Dems Struggle To Build 'Firewall' Against House Losses

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, PublicHealthcare, WallStreet reform, environmental & energy issues, etc.).

If the Bush years taught us nothing else, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid & relentless in your sales pitch & tactics. It's not that Bush&R0ve were geniuses & knew something that nobody else knew; Bush&R0ve were just more ruthless (clumsy & careless many political graybeards would say) in doing what politicians & the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination) & the oldest, most experienced politicians in our nation's history (including the Rove machine) by not having mastered these skills. Nor do Democratic politicians (more incumbents than ever, in office longer) not know how to do it. How do you think Democrats managed to keep impeaching Bush&Cheney off the table & have us still reelecting them, not marching on Washington with torches&pitchforks?

Obama&Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it.

The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to deliver on any of our alleged shared objectives.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Democrats See Glimmer Of Hope Ahead Of 2010 Midterm Elections

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama&Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, PublicHealthcare, WallStreet reform, environmental & energy issues, etc.).

If the Bush years taught us nothing else, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid & relentless in your sales pitch & tactics. It's not that Bush&R0ve were geniuses & knew something that nobody else knew; Bush&R0ve were just more ruthless (clumsy & careless many political graybeards would say) in doing what politicians & the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination) & the oldest, most experienced politicians in our nation's history (including the Rove machine) by not having mastered these skills. Nor do Democratic politicians (more incumbents than ever, in office longer) not know how to do it. How do you think Democrats managed to keep impeaching Bush&Cheney off the table & have us still reelecting them, not marching on Washington with torches&pitchforks?

Obama&Democrats know how to do it -- They don't want to do it.

The trick for them has been to keep the many different populist groups believing that they really do support our issues, but they're merely inept. And to get us to keep voting for them despite their failure to deliver on any of our alleged shared objectives.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Joe the Debtor? Miller Owes Tens of Thousands in Credit Card Debt

What is the Democrat in this race, Scott McAdams, running on?

Does anybody know?

Last I saw, McAdams was invoking the name and spirit of Alaska's former senator Republican Ted Stevens.

A Democrat, assuring the People of Alaska he would represent them as a Republican senator had.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

The solution is to get real Democrats into office, and not DLC-Democrats.

Obama, RahmEmanuel, the DLC, DavidAxelrod, DavidPlouffe, all have worked their @$$es off to prevent real progressives getting into office.

One example right off the bat is Blanche Lincoln.

The White House put its full weight & support behind Blanche Lincoln over the true progressive (& union-backed) candidate in the primary, Bill Halter.

This wasn't unlike when Obama made a deal with Arlen Specter and put the full weight and support of the Democratic machine behind Specter during the 2010 primary in Pennsylvania, trying to buy off (among other alternative candidates Democratic voters in PA might have wanted to vote to have representing them) Joe Sestak. Consider that -- Obama actively went about trying to prevent Democratic voters from choosing their preferred candidate for the US so that a DINO, Republican Arlen Specter, could retain the seat.

Blanche Lincoln is 40 points down behind the GOP candidate John Boozman.

Guess who could beat Boozman in Arkansas? BillHalter. Because, like just about all Americans, Arkansans would prefer an authentic, likable candidate, even if it's a progressive.

But more progressives in Congress means real populist legislation getting passed into law. Real reform bills, that re-regulate banks and big business. Real stimulus bills, with jobs creation, green clean energy development, and more.

But that's not who or what Obama and the DLC-controlled Democrats are about.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

the ENTIRE GOP are also corporate wh@res.

=================================

As is the DLC-controlled Democratic Party.

Obama could have done to Lieberman and the Blue Dogs what he did to Dennis Kucinich, when Kucinich (the last hold-out on the Progressive Caucus, all of whom had pledged to vote for a healthcare bill only if it had a public option, and who all caved) was opposing him. Obama flew to Cleveland, rallied Kucinich's constituents against him & he got Kucinich's vote.

Where was that mentality with Joe Lieberman, Blanche Lincoln, the other Blue Dogs & even Olympia Snowe?

If the president of the United States had used the bully pulpit against them, a lot of progressives would have respected that and said, "You tried your best".

But Obama didn't try. He cut a deal (& lied about it, too). Months earlier, cutting the will of the People off at the knees. The public was powerless in the backroom deal.

It was like many other deals that Obama has cut in the last 2 years and they all look remarkably similar. They all favor corporations over the American people. From the $20 billion deal that we now learn is really $3 billion, non-securitized, non-contractual, and predicated on another deal where BP gets to continue risky and dangerous drilling in sensitive deep waters, to the deal he made with Arlen Specter, to throw the weight of the White House behind his election campaign in the primary over real Democrats.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

I think you're right. And as he's already setting up, he will blame liberals for Democrats' losses.

This plays right into the DLC's plans, of trying to drive liberals out of the Democratic Party, marginalize them (just like the DLC is trying to marginalize the extreme fringe rightwingers that control the Republican Party, and force moderate Republican politicians and their supporters to choose between the extremist rightwing or join/support the Democratic Party).

I really don't know what it's going to take before Democratic voters wake up.

Everywhere I go I ask voters to ask candidates, "What are you going to do if you win the election?" All we're getting are polls and negative ads, slogans and rhetoric on issues that aren't likely to be at issue.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The White House And Senate Blew A Deal For Climate Change: New Yorker

No, I don't.

If Bigfoot exists, it poses no threat to me. The same tools and weapons that I have available to protect myself in the wild against attacks by large wild animals, I think would also work on 'Bigfoot'. So no, I don't worry about 'Bigfoot'.

The same can't be said for the effects of extreme climate change. The odds, however, of my surviving the effects are greater than yours, given I don't live in a trailer park (tornadoes), live above flood lines, and am able to outbid you once the food and water wars begin, and also can afford to pay the increased rates on energy to keep warm and cool (I'm better educated, thus I make more money).
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The White House And Senate Blew A Deal For Climate Change: New Yorker

No, that's not accurate.

Again, as I keep repeating here, precision in language is vital to a well-informed citizenry.

What's being observed (on Jupiter) is a climate cycle where "spots" merge and disappear and reappear, and scientists' analyses are, as yet, unproven. One scientist is making predictions based on his computer models - He's never actually seen Jupiter through a telescope.

If you believe what he's saying, then you have to believe, too, the prediction that Jupiter will "cool down" again in 2014.

http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/jupiter_spots_040421.html

There are naturally occurring climate changing cycles, but their causes are separate from what we're experiencing here on earth now. They're also nothing that we can do anything about, i.e., solar irradiation. What we are doing is making the problem of this naturally occuring cycle worse, for us and all life on the planet. The planet will survive. The same can't be said for the human species and other species alive on the planet now.
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The White House And Senate Blew A Deal For Climate Change: New Yorker

You're going to pay more one way or another. There's just no getting around it.

"Global warming", while an accurate description of the average temperature of the planet on whole, was an unfortunate name for it, because it requires an educated population to understand the science behind the phenomenon.

What's actually happening is a complex chain of events that human activities are causing. Even if you don't believe that humans are causing it, everyone (except the Christine O'Donnells in the US) agrees that human activities are making it worse.

When greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, water vapor, nitrous oxide, and methane) are released into the atmosphere (from human activities), they trap heat and light from the sun in the earth’s atmosphere. This increases the temperature, overall, and causes extremes of climate change. More hurricanes, more floods, more droughts, more extremes of weather. Increased temperatures melting the polar ice caps. Rising ocean temperatures, slowing of ocean currents, the death of algae, etc. There are cycles speeding up, patterns upon patterns, driving this process where life on the planet is being challenged, changing faster than we can deal with it to save our own lives.

http://library.thinkquest.org/CR0215471/global_warming.htm

I recommend you watch a series that James Burke did about 20 years ago called After The Warming:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oFjy5FORbo&feature=PlayList&p=16E277DDB6723CC0&index=0&playnext=1
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The White House And Senate Blew A Deal For Climate Change: New Yorker

Can someone summarize please.

==========================

Yes. The article says, "You need to stop voting and watch more reality TV."
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

What do you think Obama is going to do after the election in just a few weeks if Republicans take control of one or both Houses of Congress?

Do you think he'll veto the legislation they pass (through reconciliation and every other means they can manage)? Do you think Obama will take to the bully pulpit, urge Americans to bury Republicans in email, phone calls, snail mail, and urge Democrats to block Republicans every way possible?

Or do you think that Obama's going to be making deal after deal with them, spinning what he can as somehow "Good for the People and Democrats", and/or, "I'm president of all the People, and the People in their infinite wisdom put Republicans in the majority, so I must honor their wishes and work with Republicans, and not try to obstruct their will"?

And if Democrats keep control of Congress? Do you think Obama's going to continue trying to work in a "bipartisan manner" with Republicans, keep flip-flopping on his campaign promises, and say that the election was a referendum on his trying "change the tone in Washington", and voters want him to do more of the same?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Liberals need to take control of the DemocraticParty and start educating the American people on what liberal policies are, explain them in detail and then discuss why they are the solution. Liberal policies were, after all, what made this country great, built the American dream and created the greatest middle class in the history of the world. And then Nixon came along and wrecked it all to heII.

But that is going to take a while, and it's never going to be possible with the DLC controlling the DemocraticParty.

The DLC's ideologically aligned with Republicans. It's the old RepublicanParty, before RalphReed delivered an organized ChristianRight to the RepublicanParty. Pro-corporate, anti-populist, pro-war, anti-civil rights, pro-police state, chipping away at privacy rights, abortion rights -- There's no defending that out of any Democrat.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Put down the Kool-Aid, step away from the faxed talking points ("Sound like the old trailers for Japanese horror films of the 1950s, like Rodan -- 'OMIGOD, THE REPUBLICANS ARE COMING!!'").

The fear campaign again that we thought we were getting rid of when we put Democrats and Obama into power. No more pre-election OsamaB!nLaden tapes leaked. No more 'overseas travel advisories', and non-specific terr0rist threats plastered all over the media in the weeks before an election.

We were supposed to be done with all that; Democrats were supposed to be better.

The fact of the matter is that once teabagger ScottBrown got elected, he moved to the left, is in the RepublicanCaucus (he ran as a Republican), votes like one, & said, "SarahPalin who?"

SarahPalin herself governed Alaska as a moderate Republican, which is no different than any DLCer governs. If you're not afraid of EvanBayh (who is to the right of moderate Republicanism), you have no business being afraid of SarahPalin.

KEEP READING
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

America Moves On From Spill, Gulf Coast Feels Abandoned

America Moves On From Spill, Gulf Coast Feels Abandoned

===========================================

The language of propaganda; the media and Americans could stop referring to it as a "spill".

This was the greatest environmental disaster in US history and the government was and is complicit in trying to cover it up.

Of course the Gulf coast residents feel abandoned -- They have been abandoned. That's good reality testing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The Controversial Foreclosure Bill Made It Through Congress With No Public Debate

Both corporate parties (Republicans and the DLC-controlled Democrats) will privatize Social Security.

The truth about Obama (and the DLC's intentions) is, as usual, in his lawyer-speak and in his behavior.

Obama Packs Debt Commission with Social Security Looters:

Obama has filled his new 'debt commission' with Wall Street insiders determined to gut Social Security

http://www.alternet.org/story/146183/obama_packs_debt_commission_with_social_ security_looters?page=entire

Obama Packs Debt Commission With Social Security Privatization & Benefit Cut Supporters

http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/05/10/obama-packs-debt-committee-with-supportes-of-social-security-benefit-cuts-and-privatization/

http://www.truth-out.org/obama-catfood-commissioner-threatens-small-town-with-nuclear-annihilation62852gt;

You don't put Social Security on the table at all before a 'Deficit Commission' (it's not in danger of going broke, to begin with) or put people like this on your commission if you weren't signaling that you're open to doing it.

And Chris Van Hollen made an interesting parsing slip on CNN about that very point (he never was the brightest color in the box -- Democratic voters are d00med if this is the future leadership of the party). Go hunt: http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1008/15/sotu.01.html

[Hint: "partial"]
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

How The Controversial Foreclosure Bill Made It Through Congress With No Public Debate

Will the GOP Private Social Security?

Democrats are poised to:

DCCC’s Chair Van Hollen Won’t Commit to Protecting Social Security from Cuts/Higher Retirement Age

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/65637

And the fact that Obama has put Social Security on the table at all of his 'Debt Commission', which runs a surplus. With a group, all of whom support privatizing Social Security.

But why would anybody be surprised by that. It is the SOP for the deceitful Obama & DLC-controlled Democratic Party (DINOs).

Just like early in the healthcare legislation process, Obama declaring that he wouldn't sign any legislation that didn't include a public option (and then k!lling the move to slip it at the last minute -- Few even know about that), Obama will preside over the gutting & privatization of Social Security before his term is over.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

There's nothing in Obama's record to indicate he's anything but a pro-corporate, anti-populist DLC Democrat, a DINO, a Republican-in-Democrats'-clothing.

His flip-flop on FISA in June 2008 was a pretty good indicator of his politics & character (or lack of character).

Obama's most ardent supporters excused that betrayal, insisting that he was a closet liberal who had to vote that way in order to trick centrists & independents into voting for him in the general election.

It's Obama's 'most ardent followers' who were tricked, & are still in denial, for they refuse to acknowledge that Obama has been continuing just about all of Bush's policies, & actually going Bush-Cheney one better on asserting unitary executive powers for himself (preventive detention, murdering Americans without due process or oversight, etc., continuing rendition and t0rture, cloaking it all in the 'State Secrets'-Act).

Until Obama's 'most ardent supporters' wake up, we're all going to be held hostage & suffer the consequences as Obama makes our worst fears come true about where Bush & Cheney were taking this country.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Obama's a politician, and I mean that in the worst sense of the word.

He convinced centrists that he was a centrist.

He convinced liberals he was a liberal posing as a centrist.

First and foremost, however, Obama is a lawyer (also in the worst sense of the word).

Obama chose his words very carefully (lawyer-speak) during the campaign, giving people the sense of what they wanted to hear to get their vote. It's why even among his most ardent admirers, they still argue about whether he's a liberal or a centrist or a moderate Republican.

Doing what's right for transnational corporations is what Obama is about, & trying to sell it as good for Americans is what he does afterwards. He's the epitome of the 1950s Republican, "What's good for GM is good for America."

Obama did a job on everybody.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Spin has gotten us no where. We live high on the hog; with expectations the sky is the limit and we are a rich country. Last three decades teach us that throwing money at issues does not solve them. Often makes it worse.

=========================================================

That's spin.

You can't keep cutting budgets, shortchanging things like public education, and when it fails make the ridiculous claim that "throwing money at it won't fix it".

Again, how old are you, and where do you come from?
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Everybody is ready to sue; because we have a right and contingency-fee system in-cahoots with judges.

=======================================

How do you come to believe this? Have you ever been involved in a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff or a defendant?

Have you ever been harmed or wronged, and as a result your life has been irreparably changed? Corporations have managed to get themselves exempted from legal exposure while doing more each year to harm the public, whether it's through dumping toxic materials into the environment or taking shortcuts to maximize profits while manufacturing shoddy and dangerous products.

Victims shouldn't have recourse?

Suing on contingency is a cr@ps-shoot, the last best hope for most because only the very rich can finance lawsuits out of their own pockets. Even on contingency, it's expensive (you pay court fees, deposition costs, etc.) and takes many years before litigants get their day in court.

Again, please tell us of the life experience you have that has formed your opinion.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

The only power that you and I have in this democratic republic is the weeks before every election every 2 years. That's when deals are cut. That's when candidates' pledges, about what they will or won't do if they get into power, go on the record. For their 'report card' (the next election) when we either give them an 'A' (reelection) or an 'F' (toss them out). Pass/Fail.

What possible good are you doing us now?

You'll take anything, as long as it has a 'D' after it's name. You don't even know that that 'D' is no different than an 'R'. In policies, where it counts. All that either of these 2 corporate parties has to do is put up a candidate with a 'look', a shell' that would appeal to you, fill the candidate with focus-group-tested rhetoric (tested to appeal to Democratic voters) and you wouldn't know the difference.
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

Senior citizens die in hospitals/ nursing homes (raising cost of health-care); because children refuse to care for them at home in their dying days.

========================================

How can "children" care for sick and infirm elderly in a 24-hour day, with at least 8 of those hours spent working to earn money for a roof over one's head, food, etc.?

Do you have any idea the labor involved, the medical expertise necessary, to care for chronically ill patients?

How old are you? What's your life situation? Do you have a job? Family?
About Sarah Palin
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Barack Obama and the Changing Political Landscape

The DLC is trying to marginalize the RepublicanParty by forcing the fringe right of the RepublicanParty into the TeaParty, making the TeaParty the face for the Republican Party, leaving the rest nowhere to go but to the DemocraticParty, which the DLC hopes to control & govern "from the center for 100 years". The DemocraticParty, made over into the old RepublicanParty (right-of-center). All corporate, anti-labor, anti-environment, anti-civil/individual rights, pro-war, surveillance society. Anti-choice (anti-abortion), too.

The tragedy of it all is that Obama's 'most ardent supporters' will settle for that, that they believe it's the best they can get, when the fact is that Obama was elected by more people ever in the history of the country to get rid of corporate rule, and restore the democracy to the People. The People were so thoroughly done with Republicans and conservatism after Bush, they voted for a black man in numbers never before seen.

And no sooner was the election over (before actually, with his FISA vote flip-flop in July 2008), did Obama slam the brakes on the momentum of his victory, of HOPE & CHANGE, and adopt all things Bush-Cheney.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Employers Continue to Discriminate Against Jobless, Think 'The Best People Are Already Working'

The only power that you and I have in this democratic republic is the weeks before every election every 2 years. That's when deals are cut. That's when candidates' pledges, about what they will or won't do if they get into power, go on the record. For their 'report card' (the next election) when we either give them an 'A' (reelection) or an 'F' (toss them out). Pass/Fail.

What possible good are you doing us now?

You'll take anything, as long as it has a 'D' after it's name. You don't even know that that 'D' is no different than an 'R'. In policies, where it counts. All that either of these 2 corporate parties has to do is put up a candidate with a 'look', a shell' that would appeal to you, fill the candidate with focus-group-tested rhetoric (tested to appeal to Democratic voters) and you wouldn't know the difference.
About Economy
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Employers Continue to Discriminate Against Jobless, Think 'The Best People Are Already Working'

The DLC is trying to marginalize the RepublicanParty by forcing the fringe right of the RepublicanParty into the TeaParty, making the TeaParty the face for the Republican Party, leaving the rest nowhere to go but to the DemocraticParty, which the DLC hopes to control & govern "from the center for 100 years". The DemocraticParty, made over into the old RepublicanParty (right-of-center). All corporate, anti-labor, anti-environment, anti-civil/individual rights, pro-war, surveillance society. Anti-choice (anti-abortion), too.

The tragedy of it all is that Obama's 'most ardent supporters' will settle for that, that they believe it's the best they can get, when the fact is that Obama was elected by more people ever in the history of the country to get rid of corporate rule, and restore the democracy to the People. The People were so thoroughly done with Republicans and conservatism after Bush, they voted for a black man in numbers never before seen.

And no sooner was the election over (before actually, with his FISA vote flip-flop in July 2008), did Obama slam the brakes on the momentum of his victory, of HOPE & CHANGE, and adopt all things Bush-Cheney.

KEEP READING
About Economy
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP