Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Will Continue Obstruction If Obama Is Reelected

Congress is as Democratic as it's going to be for the next generation.  Everybody complains about Congress, but it's the other guys' elected representatives that they're complaining about, not their own.

In 2010, when Obama and Democrats had refused to use the political capital given by them when 10 million more voters voted for them, voters used their votes to dump incumbents -- On both sides of the aisle.  Democratic voters dumped BlueDog incumbents big time; liberals only lost 3 seats.   

The real problem is that Big Money/Big Business controls the political process, which includes high-priced propaganda campaigns that spin policy and candidates as things they're not.  Corporations have been able to control politicians, candidates, the primary process, so that populist candidates can't get a seat at the table.  

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 WhiteHouse, the DNC, and the Democratic congressional committees behind BlueDogs, Republicans and Independents over progressives/liberals and real Democrats.  Some, but not all, examples: 

BlueDog BlancheLincoln over progressive Democrat Lt. Governor BillHalter. 

Republican-turned-Independent ArlenSpecter over progressive Democrat JoeSestak. 

Republican-turned-Independent LincolnChaffee over Democrat FrankCaprio (which, in turn, was an effective endorsement of the Republican JohnLoughlin over Democrat DavidCicilline for the congressional seat Democrat PatrickKennedy retired from, and all of the other seats up for grab in RhodeIsland). 

Republican-turned-Independent CharlieCrist over liberal Democrat KendrickMeek. 

Obama supports voting third parties, even when it risks Democratic turnout.

Republicans, with the smallest minority, have managed to thwart Democrats, who've had the greatest majority in decades.  You would think that with Republicans controlling the House, Democrats would've turned the tables and thwarted Republicans' continuing legislation like Bush's tax cuts for the rich?  Are Democrats just stupld?

Obama never pressured BenNelson (or BlancheLincoln, or any BlueDog). The Democratic leadership could've taken away committee chairs (BlancheLincoln's, too) of members in their caucus that filibustered a PublicOption 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 (and doesn't).

The ProgressiveCaucus could have kept their pledge about not voting for a bill that didn't include a robust PublicOption. They didn't. 

Obama DID unleash the attack dogs to go after HowardDean when Dean said ACA was a lousy bill. Dean was then forced to get back into line. Obama went after Kucinich, the last remaining holdout on the ProgressiveCaucus, for threatening to vote no on the healthcare bill, and we all know how that ended.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Will Continue Obstruction If Obama Is Reelected

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 tool. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election and a filibuster­-proof Senate (tentative yet, with 2 senators, Kennedy and Byrd, at death's door), Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises and slowe­d 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.  This was a dead 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.

Since Obama has gotten into office, he's continued most of Bush's policies & his 'accomplishments' are being spun as "reform" when, in fact, they're Republican in nature.

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate and 435 in the House, and they and Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People.  And then try to blame it on Republicans.

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...

Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Will Continue Obstruction If Obama Is Reelected

Obama came into the White House with Bush-Chene­y-Republic­ans not just on the ropes, but on the mat and down for the count. Obama issued a pardon and let them rise again.

After just one month in the White House, instead of going after Republican­s and how their failed policies have brought us to the brink of destructio­n, instead of hammering Bush-Chene­y-GOP for our economic woes and wars of choice, Obama and Rahm Emanuel went after Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh, two people with no role in the Republican Party.

Obama and Emanuel never mentioned Mitch McConnell, John Boehner, Eric Canter, Karl R0ve, George W,  H.W., Jeb Bush, Cheney, NOBODY who is actually IN the Republican Party as the problem. Obama still doesn't.  During the Republican primaries, he mocked Donald Trump, an undeclared candidate for the presidency who every serious political pundit knew had no intention of actually running.

What makes Obama's most ardent supporters think he and Democrats would be any more successful achieving on our behalf in a second term?  More importantly, should Obama win, what do his supporters believe that Obama will say he has a mandate to do?  In his first term, he didn't do anything that he pledged to do in the 2008 campaign.  As a matter of fact, he flip-flopped on just about every promise.  

After the 2010 midterms, do you recall what Obama said that election's mandate was?  "More of the same", "more bipartisanship", more caving to Republicans, watering down legislation to satisfy conservatives.

I don't hear a single word out of Obama, not one commitment to the policies of the left, of the 99%.  Just more weak tea.

Whether it's Obama Watering Down Regulations More Than Bush, Study Shows, or making Americans more enemies by stepping up drone attacks on sovereign nations, or instituting Simpson-Bowles as he's expected to do, or pushing the job-outsourcing Trans-Pacific free trade treaty through like he did with the S. Korea and Colombia and Panama treaties, how is any of that good for us or any different than what Romney would do?  

Obama's 'most ardent supporters' need to get that both parties have us gamed.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Will Continue Obstruction If Obama Is Reelected

What is Obama running on?  What are Democrats running on?  

Best case scenario: Should Obama win, should Democrats retake the House and keep control of the Senate, what do you believe they will think they have a mandate to do?  

On Bush's Obama's tax cuts - Will Obama let them all lapse or will he cut another deal?  Will that deal include another payroll tax holiday (which is a Social Security killer)?

On budget cuts, will Obama adopt Simpson-Bowles?  

On privatizing Social Security?

On selling off, privatizing, US resources?

Expanding the wars, new lands for drone attacks on civilians?

Continued deregulation of environment and workplace?

New tax laws with lowered corporate rates?

More job outsourcing free trade treaties that give foreign corporations intellectual and property rights over Americans'?

WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE OBAMA AND DEMOCRATS WILL THINK THEY HAVE A MANDATE TO DO?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Nancy Pelosi: Republicans Will Continue Obstruction If Obama Is Reelected

What makes Obama's most ardent supporters think he and Democrats would be any more successful achieving on our behalf in a second term?  More importantly, should Obama win, what do his supporters believe that Obama will say he has a mandate to do?  In his first term, he didn't do anything that he pledged to do in the 2008 campaign.  As a matter of fact, he flip-flopped on just about every promise.  

After the 2010 midterms, do you recall what Obama said that election's mandate was?  "More of the same", "more bipartisanship", more caving to Republicans, watering down legislation to satisfy conservatives.

Do you know what Obama said he'd do if re-elected to a second term?:

Explaining this spring how he would manage to enact his agenda in a second term, Obama was still looking forward to sitting down and cutting deals. This time, he said, Republicans would be nicer because he’s not running for re-election.

Obama's either corrupt or he's the very definition of 'insanity', "doing the same thing over and over again hoping for a different outcome".  Or his supporters are.
 
Whether it's Obama Watering Down Regulations More Than Bush, Study Shows, or making Americans more enemies by stepping up drone attacks on sovereign nations, or instituting Simpson-Bowles as he's expected to do, or pushing the job-outsourcing Trans-Pacific free trade treaty through like he did with the S. Korea and Colombia and Panama treaties, how is any of that good for us or any different than what Romney would do?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Thank You, Paul Ryan

Talk of Democratic politicians having no spines are greatly exaggerated, just like Obama's timidity is myth:  He's plenty tough when it comes to standing up to the Democratic base. 

Democratic voters have mistakenly believed that Obama and Democrats want what they want. The DLC-controlled DemocraticParty gives lip service to all populist issues (like jobs, civil rights protections, restoring habeas corpus, ending the wars, public healthcare, WallStreet reform, environmental and 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 Rove were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove 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, never back away, you'll wear the opposition down.

Obama didn't get to be the first black president, vanquish Clinton's machine (to get the nomination) and the oldest, most experienced politicians in US history (including the RoveMachine) 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 BushCheney off the table, have us still reelecting them, 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.
About Paul Ryan
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Thank You, Paul Ryan

Here we go again, the fear-card, being played to get us to go along with Obama's call for "austerity" and the Simpson-Bowles plan that cuts Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits.

Why aren't Obama, Reid, Pelosi and Democrats talking about the Progressiv­e Caucus's budget and plan to balance the budget (reduces the deficit by $5.1 trillion)?  It beats Obama's, Reid's and Republican­s' plans.

As Krugman has said, the Progressiv­es' budget "balances the budget through higher taxes and defense cuts, plus some tougher bargaining by Medicare (and a PublicOpti­on to reduce the costs of the Affordable­CareAct). The proposed tax hikes would fall on higher incomes, raising the cap on payroll taxes (takes care of SocialSecu­rity's solvency forever)..­. and unlike the Ryan plan, it actually makes sense."
 
But Obama takes solutions that work for the People, the vast majority of Americans, off the table.  Obama kneecaps and handicaps the voters who put him and Democrats into power.  

That's Obama's style, taking solutions that work for the People off the table and out of considerat­ion when we're discussing how we want to proceed.  He did it during the healthcare debate, taking SinglePaye­r off the table before negotiatio­ns ever began.  Because if affordable­, quality medical care for everyone is your goal, then everything else pales against SinglePaye­r.  If, however, keeping the insurance and pharmaceut­ical industry cartels in place and in control of Americans' healthcare and choices, if reaping massive profits for them is your goal, then taking SinglePaye­r off the table is the only way you're going to be able to accomplish it.

If Republican­s are going to turn down anything Obama and Democrats put forth, why then aren't Obama and Democrats fighting for the best plan out there?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...