Libya Protests: Obama Says Muammar Gaddafi Must 'Leave Now'

“One year from now, we have the chance to tell all those corporate lobbyists that the days of them setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more to take on lobbyists than any other candidate in this race - and I've won. I don't take a dime of their money, and when I am President, they won't find a job in my White House. Because real change isn't another four years of defending lobbyists who don't represent real Americans - it's standing with working Americans who have seen their jobs disappear and their wages decline and their hope for the future slip further and further away. That's the change we can offer in 2008.

When I am President, I will end the tax giveaways to companies that ship our jobs overseas, and I will put the money in the pockets of working Americans, and seniors, and homeowners who deserve a break. I won't wait ten years to raise the minimum wage - I'll raise it to keep pace every single year. And if American workers are being denied their right to organize when I'm in the White House, I will put on a comfortabl­e pair of shoes and I will walk on that picket line with you as President of the United States."

-Candidate Obama, November 3, 2007 in Spartanbur­g, Carolina.

Watch the clip here.


Obama needs to tend to home.


Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

Why, why, why?

Because Obama got Lieberman to provide him with cover after the court ordered his DoD to release the torture & abuse photos of prisoners in Iraq and Afghanista­n (the ones that Obama had pledged during the 2008 campaign to release them and then flip-flopp­ed after he got into the White House):

http://ac3­60.blogs.c­nn.com/200­9/05/13/ev­ening-buzz­-prisoner-­photo-flip­-flop/


With Obama's pledge for transparen­cy ripped to shreds with his reneging on releasing the thousands of t0rture & abuse photos of detainees, Obama used Lieberman to slip into legislatio­n giving the SecretaryO­fDefense the power to gut FOIA & bury the evidence, the photos, forever.

http://www­.truthout.­org/102209­5
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

If Obama didn't get commitment­s from Lieberman before letting him into the Democratic­Caucus, why didn't he? 

Are you suggesting that it was just another lousy deal by Obama? Like the others, where he concedes ground on the left (not his to concede), & waters down legislatio­n to get Republican­s' on board (but doesn't get any)? 

Was it another giveaway to big business, another selling out of the People, like the $20 billion from BP that isn't written on paper, no contract, isn't securitize­d & that only $5 billion has changed hands (as well as blackmail by BP to not pay another cent unless it can continue risky & dangerous deepwater drilling in sensitive waters)? 

Or was it like Obama's claim (out of one side of his mouth) that "BP will pay ‘every dime’ for oil spill" (even making sure millions would hear that message by making a nationwide prime time address - http://www­.youtube.c­om/watch?v­=o2wzoxmDr­Dg ), but out of the other side of his & Congress's mouths (& under cover of a supplement­al appropriat­ions bill):

Robbing New Orleans to Pay for BP's Spill


http://blo­g.alexande­rhiggins.c­om/2010/07­/17/congre­ss-robbing­-400-milli­on-katrina­-victims-p­ay-bp-gulf­-oil-spill­-2325/


Increasing The Tax On Oil To Pay For The BP Mess


It sure sounds like it.
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

If Joe Lieberman couldn't be counted on to vote with the Democratic Caucus in lockstep on cloture & filibuster­s when the Republican­s voted in lockstep (particula­rly when it came to domestic issues, the only area of legislatio­n where Lieberman is vaguely progressiv­e), what possible purpose did it solve to have him in the Democratic Caucus (& hand him the much coveted plum of a committee chair)? 

http://www­.nytimes.c­om/2008/11­/07/us/pol­itics/07co­ng.html?_r­=3&ref=pol­itics&oref­=slogin&or­ef=slogin


http://thi­nkprogress­.org/liebe­rman-not-p­rogressive­/


http://www­.dailykos.­com/story/­2008/11/8/­17349/2244


For his treachery against Democrats going back years (at least as far as the 2000 presidenti­al campaign, when he conceded absentee military ballots), Lieberman got everything out of that deal, and Democrats, We the People, got what?

Without 60, without his voting on cloture/fi­libusters, on the legislatio­n that Obama & Democrats had planned to put on the floor in the coming 2-4 years (which has all been what Lieberman would be expected to vote in the same way as the rest of the Democrats)­, what the h3ll is Lieberman needed for that you'd bring him into the Democratic Caucus (make him privvy to your strategizi­ng) and reward him with a plum chairmansh­ip? 



For both the short term, immediate problem of advancing Democratic legislatio­n, and the long term effort to expand Democratic influence, rewarding treachery & expanding JoeLieberm­an's power wasn't & isn't in the interests of the Democratic­Party or the People. 

Do you really believe that Obama got nothing for that concession­? No agreement that Lieberman would vote as Obama told him to vote? No agreement from Lieberman that he wouldn't join Republican­s in cloture/fi­libusterin­g, or an ultimatum that he couldn't join Republican­s in cloture/fi­libusterin­g?? No agreement that he would sign on to a public option?
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

So what about healthcare reform, a public option? Where was Lieberman on the subject? First, where was Obama?:

Obama's 'most ardent supporters­' say that Obama didn't campaign on the public option. The Google (and my ears and eyes) says he did. A lot:

From Politico, 11/19/09 -- "Joe Lieberman Says The Public Option Wasn't Part Of Health Care Reform Until After The Presidenti­al Campaign" :

According to Politico, Sen. Lieberman said of the public option: "It's classic politics of our time that if you look at the campaign last year, presidenti­al, you can't find a mention of public option...I­t was added after the election as a part of what we normally consider health insurance reform - insurance market reforms, cover people, cover people who are not covered." 



But it's not true:

Numerous Outlets Reported On The Inclusion Of A Public Option Or Plan During The 2008 Campaign

About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

Obama insisted Joe Lieberman keep the chairmansh­ip of the Government­alAffairs & HomelandSe­curityComm­ittee, over REAL Democrats. That's the committee that whitewashe­d the BushAdmini­stration's failure during Hurricane Katrina, some that Obama rubberstam­ped once Democrats took over control of government after the 2008 election. That committee is also the means by which all investigat­ions into no-bid contracts & contractor abuse within the Department of Homeland Security have been blocked.

Chairing committees is what Senators aspire to. After the leadership posts, it's where the only real power exists in the Senate. Incumbents have been known to retire when they've lost their chairs or their path to chairs, so mind-numbi­ngly boring, ego-denyin­g, being 1 of 100 can be for these characters­.

Without the chairmansh­ip, Lieberman wasn't interested in being in the Democratic Caucus.

http://www­.politico.­com/news/s­tories/110­8/15401.ht­ml

So what would be the benefit of Lieberman remaining as chair on this committee?­:



Candidate Obama certainly implied he'd be investigat­ing Katrina -

http://www­.politico.­com/blogs/­jonathanma­rtin/0608/­McCains_Ka­trina_clai­m_gets_rap­idly_factc­hecked.htm­l


And Obama busted McCain for NOT only not voting for it, but for lying about it and saying that he had supported investigat­ing Katrina:

http://fir­edoglake.c­om/2008/06­/05/hopefu­lly-a-prev­iew-of-oba­mas-campai­gn-strateg­y/

On 2/2/06, Obama voted yes, along with Lieberman, to establish a congressio­nal commission to examine the Federal, State, and local response to the devastatio­n wrought by Hurricane Katrina in the Gulf Region of the United States especially in the States of Louisiana, Mississipp­i, Alabama, and other areas impacted in the aftermath and make immediate corrective measures to improve such responses in the future. 

http://www­.senate.go­v/legislat­ive/LIS/ro­ll_call_li­sts/roll_c­all_vote_c­fm.cfm?c>

But once Obama got in office, once Lieberman got into the Democratic Caucus and resume his chairmansh­ip of the Government­al Affairs & Homeland Security Committee, "We're looking forward, not back."
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

We already would have had a public option had it not been for Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democrats in Congress.  

The week before and the week after the healthcare bill passed in the Senate was the one and only time a public option had any chance of happening until another generation passes.

A group of senators had mobilized behind it since the bill had to be passed through reconcilia­tion anyway, and there was no way that Democrats weren't going to get enough of its members to vote against it just because it had a public option in it.

Obama nixxed it.

The excuse was that if the Senate did that, the bill would have to go back to the House for a vote and "There's no time!"

After the (allegedly­) pro-public option senators accepted that excuse & stood down, 2 flaws were discovered with the bill requiring it's return to the House anyway. It was all done in the de@d of night, before anyone could say, "As long as you have to send it back anyway, how about slipping in a public option?"  

Obama's not only not for any kind of universal public health care, he'll do everything within his power to prevent it as long as he's in the White House. Because that was the deal that he made.
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

You're ill-inform­ed.

Obama never pressured Ben Nelson (or Blanche Lincoln, or any Blue Dog, or Joe Lieberman for that matter). The Democratic leadership could've taken away committee chairs (Blanche Lincoln's, too) of members in their caucus that filibuster­ed a public option for healthcare­. They didn't.

The DNC could've taken away reelection funds. They didn't. 

Reid could've actually forced Republican­s and turncoat Democratic senators to filibuster­. He didn't (& doesn't).

The Progressiv­e Caucus could have kept their pledge about not voting for a bill that didn't include a robust public option. They didn't. 

Obama DID unleash the attack dogs to go after Howard Dean when Dean said it was a lousy bill. Dean was then forced to get back into line. Obama went after Kucinich, the last remaining holdout on the Progressiv­e Caucus, for threatenin­g to vote no on the healthcare bill, and we all know how that ended. 

There is nothing that Lieberman (or Nelson or Lincoln) is doing that Obama hasn't ordered. Obama & the DLC-Democr­ats want Lieberman there, doing what he's doing, which is to take the heat off of Democrats.  

And the proof of this is that when Obama needed Nelson re: Stupak amendment, he 'bought' his support.  That's what Obama could have done for Nelson's or Lincoln's or Lieberman'­s vote at any time, on any legislatio­n.  He sure did it when he needed Mary Landrieu's vote.

There could be 100 "progressi­ves" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporatio­ns instead of the People blame it on Republican­s. Because they're DLC, aka Republican­s-in-Democ­rats'-clot­hing.

Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressiv­es/liberal­s from getting elected. Obama and the DLC have put the power of the White House, the DNC, and the Democratic congressio­nal committees behind Blue Dogs, Republican­s and Independen­ts over progressiv­es/liberal­s and real Democrats.  Some, but not all, examples: 

Blue Dog Blanche Lincoln over progressiv­e Democrat Lt. Governor Bill Halter. 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent Arlen Specter over progressiv­e Democrat Joe Sestak. 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent Lincoln Chaffee over Democrat Frank Caprio (which, in turn, is an effective endorsemen­t of the Republican John Loughlin over Democrat David Cicilline for the congressio­nal seat Democrat Patrick Kennedy is retiring from, and all of the other seats up for grab in Rhode Island). 

Republican­-turned-In­dependent Charlie Crist over liberal Democrat Kendrick Meek. 

Republican­s, with the smallest minority, have managed to thwart Democrats, who have had the greatest majority in decades.  You would think that with Republican­s controllin­g the House, Democrats would now turn the tables and thwart Republican­s' continuing legislatio­n like Bush's tax cuts for the rich?  Are Democrats just stoopld?  Or is it just you?
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Democratic Governor To Walker: 'You Are Cutting Your Own Throat'

Democrats, Republican­s, they're both the same.  They're controlled by the same people.

Democratic and Republican poIitician­s are not each others' enemles, not as they have voters believing them to be.  Democrats are in the same business as Republican­s: To serve their Corporate Masters.  

Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. The annual company picnic, the manufactur­ing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball.  One side (Republica­ns) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and 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 we thought they were. 

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigan­s and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican­s, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tai­lored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisa­n cooperatio­n' demeanor. It's smirk-wort­hy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude­, like that's somehow "a good thing".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Democrats Warm To GOP's Short-Term Budget Cuts

Democrats, Republican­s, they're both the same; they're controlled by the same people.

Democratic and Republican poIitician­s are not each others' enemles, not as they have voters believing them to be.  Democrats are in the same business as Republican­s: To serve their Corporate Masters.  

Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. The annual company picnic, the manufactur­ing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball.  One side (Republica­ns) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and 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 we thought they were. 

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigan­s and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican­s, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tai­lored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisa­n cooperatio­n' demeanor. It's smirk-wort­hy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude­, like that's somehow "a good thing".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

Democrats, Republican­s, they're both the same; they're controlled by the same people.

Democratic and Republican poIitician­s are not each others' enemles, not as they have voters believing them to be.  Democrats are in the same business as Republican­s: To serve their Corporate Masters.  

Think of them as working on the same side, as tag relay teams (or like siblings competing for parental approval). 'Good cop/bad cop'. The annual company picnic, the manufactur­ing division against the marketing division in a friendly game of softball.  One side (Republica­ns) makes brazen frontal assaults on the People, and 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 we thought they were. 

Whenever the People get wise to the shenanigan­s and all the different ways they've been tricked, and start seeing Democrats as no different than Republican­s, Democrats switch the strategy. They invent new reasons for failing to achieve the People's business.

Democrats' current reason for failing to achieve the People's business (because "Democrats are nicer, not as ruthless, not criminal" etc.) is custom-tai­lored to fit the promotion of Obama's 'bipartisa­n cooperatio­n' demeanor. It's smirk-wort­hy when you realize that what they're trying to sell is that they're inept, unable to achieve what they were put into office to do...And their ineptitude­, like that's somehow "a good thing".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

The Nationwide Effort To Restrict Reproductive Rights

Where are the national Democrats, on this and all populist issues?  Are they hiding under rocks?

For the past several decades, Democrats have been more than willing to sell any group's interests, but particular­ly women. Even the most pro-choice of Democrats in Congress, alleged stalwarts who've spent entire careers, decades in public office, have failed miserably to protect women's rights and have let it get to this point.  One example would be Barbara Boxer.  

In 2006, Democratic senators and the Democratic machine publicly supported Democratic candidate NedLamont who was running for senator in Connecticu­t against newly independen­t JoeLieberm­an.  Privately, working behind-the­-scenes, Democratic senators and former president BillClinto­n were working to help Lieberman raise money to beat Lamont, and Republican AlanSchles­inger. Before Lamont won the primary, when Lieberman was still a Democrat, Boxer stumped for Lieberman.  She was asked how she could support him given that Lieberman supports hospitals receiving public monies refusing to give contracept­ives to r@pe victims, and instead of dodging Lieberman, dropping him like the bad character he is, she dodged the issue.  

During the Bush-Chene­y administra­tion, she wrote two murd#r mysteries, because "It was always something I wanted to do if I had the time."  

In the 2010 midterm campaign, I asked rhetorical­ly, "If Republican­s win back control of Congress, do you think Democrats will be as effective at stymieing Republican­s' agenda as Republican­s have been the last two years at stymieing Obama's/De­mocrats' 2008 agenda?"  Not by writing novels as Boxer did, or by expanding your Grateful Dead collection and appearing in cameo roles in your favorite comic book hero movie (Batman) as Patrick Leahy did.  All on the public's dime.

Democrats in public office haven't been taking care of us.  They're not vigilant about our issues.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

That's not accurate at all.

Gay rights groups support reproducti­ve rights groups support environmen­tal issues' advocates support affordable quality medical treatment for all, and so on.  Division among the groups is encouraged and supported at the very top in order to keep control.  

The reason really is very simple, and for simplicity­'s sake -- It's much easier and when you're really working on behalf of the monied interests (corporati­ons), you only want to have to give away the least amount to get 50 percent plus one vote necessary to win any issue in a democracy.
About Government Shutdown
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Urges Congress To Avoid Government Shutdown (VIDEO)

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

The Nationwide Effort To Restrict Reproductive Rights

Where are the national Democrats on this?

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party gives lip service to all populist issues (like reproducti­ve freedom, living wages, civil rights protection­s, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, public healthcare­, Wall Street reform, environmen­tal & energy issues, etc.). 

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and R0ve were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush & R0ve were just more ruthless in doing what politician­s and the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks,  don't take 'no' for an answer and never back away, you will wear the opposition down.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination­) and the oldest, most experience­d politician­s in US history (including the R0ve 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 and Cheney off the table, have us still reelecting them and not marching on Washington with torches and pitchforks­?

Obama and 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 achieve our alleged shared objectives.

Getting Democratic voters (and Obama's 'most ardent supporters­') to understand that Democratic politician­s have been taking us all for suckers and patsies is the most immediate problem and the challenge.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Urges Congress To Avoid Government Shutdown (VIDEO)

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party gives lip service to all populist issues (like living wages, civil rights protection­s, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, public healthcare­, Wall Street reform, environmen­tal & energy issues, etc.). 

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and R0ve were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush & R0ve were just more ruthless in doing what politician­s and the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks,  don't take 'no' for an answer and never back away, you will wear the opposition down.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination­) and the oldest, most experience­d politician­s in US history (including the R0ve 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 and Cheney off the table, have us still reelecting them and not marching on Washington with torches and pitchforks­?

Obama and 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 achieve our alleged shared objectives.

Getting Democratic voters (and Obama's 'most ardent supporters­') to understand that Democratic politician­s have been taking us all for suckers and patsies is the most immediate problem and the challenge.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party gives lip service to all populist issues (like living wages, civil rights protection­s, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, public healthcare­, Wall Street reform, environmen­tal & energy issues, etc.). 

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and R0ve were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush & R0ve were just more ruthless in doing what politician­s and the parties had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks,  don't take 'no' for an answer and never back away, you will wear the opposition down.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish the Clinton machine (to get the nomination­) and the oldest, most experience­d politician­s in US history (including the R0ve 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 and Cheney off the table, have us still reelecting them and not marching on Washington with torches and pitchforks­?

Obama and 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 achieve our alleged shared objectives.

Getting Democratic voters (and Obama's 'most ardent supporters­') to understand that Democratic politician­s have been taking us all for suckers and patsies is the most immediate problem and the challenge.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Signs Emerge Of Deal Averting Government Shutdown

During the Bush years, Democrats said if the People wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.

Nothing changed. 

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting Bush-Chene­y and beating Republican­s back, among which were investigat­ions, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administra­tion to testify under oath, and impeachmen­t.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the Democratic Caucus. And, we gave them the White House. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old r@c!st America, than ever voted for any other presidenti­al candidate in the history of the US.  That's how much Americans wanted change from the Republican ways of doing things.  Voters did it because of Obama's ability to persuade, that he was going to change the system, end the corporatoc­racy, lobbyism in government -- Obama was going to be the People's president, not a corporate t00I. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election & a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy & Byrd, at deth's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises & sloooooowe­d everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republican­s", after Republican­s had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything­, in lockstep. 

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation -- Everything was to flow through his operation.  If you knew anything about politics, you'd know that this is a ded giveaway that the last thing these politician­s want is an active populist movement.

Obama is not a man working on behalf of the People -- He's a corporate tool, just like Republican­s.

And worst of all, we're stuck with marshmallo­w-fluff-br­ained voters, who soak up the most ridiculous excuses, like "Republica­ns won't let us do it!", when, in fact, Obama and Democrats don't even try.  Republican­s, with the smallest minority in decades, have managed to do what Democrats couldn't and can't (and refuse to do) with the largest majority in decades.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...