Spintested: 10/06/12

Obama Campaign Does Debate Cleanup On Social Security Answer

Saturday, October 6, 2012

President Obama has passed more liberal legislation than any president in the past 50 years

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

Only if "up = down" and "liberal = conservative".

NDAA isn't liberal, by any measure of the word.

None of the union-busting, job outsourcing AFTAs are liberal.

ACA was part 2 of Bush's Medicare Reform Act of 2003, and a product of the right-wing think tank, the Heritage Foundation. It's a massive corporate gift-package to the insurance and pharmaceutical industries. Corporate welfare.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Does Debate Cleanup On Social Security Answer

Climate change is real, we know the cause, and we know at least part of the solution. Alternative energy. What prohibits a Manhattan Project-style response is a world-wide energy policy controlled by oil and other greenhouse gas producing industries.
There's no more time to screw around, yet Obama has wasted the one resource he and only he has at his disposal - The Bully Pulpit. What he does instead is sneak around and make secret deals that don't address the problems we're dealing with.

Obama was elected because he implied he was a bigger man, a bigger personality, to accomplish the change we desperately need. Instead, he keeps up with this "bipartisanship" that nobody is interested in and what won't fix our problems. I think what we used to say about George W. Bush is true also for Obama - All hat, no cattle.

I think Obama was put into power by the establishment elites to achieve what Bush couldn't: Democratic voters' approval of a continued push to the right. Like "only Nixon could go to China," "only Obama could put Social Security on the road to ruin."

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Obama and the DLC worked their butts off to PREVENT more progressives/liberals from getting elected and suppress Democratic voter turnout in the 2010 midterms.

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.

By the way, by getting involved in the election at the primaries' stage, Obama became the first sitting president in U.S. history to interfere with the citizens' very limited rights in this democratic republic to select who they will trust to make laws to which they consent to be governed.

Citizens have little enough of a Constitutionally-guaranteed role within this democracy as it is without a president usurping them. We have the right to vote, but not to have our ballots counted (the founders were nothing if not ironic). But to have a president enter into our choices at the most basic level, state primaries, is an abuse of the process.

Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignments, etc., but did not.

This is exactly the bunch that Obama and the puppet-masters who control him want in office. On both sides of the aisle. Obama, Democrats and Republicans in office, working on behalf of transnational corporations.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Obama did what he could to discourage Democratic turnout in 2010, thus preventing getting more progressives.

Just before the 2010 midterms, Obama broadcast that he would be doing more of the same, even if Democrats remained the majority and in control of both Houses of Congress. More caving by Obama and Democrats, to Republicans:

Aides say that the president’ s been spending “a lot of time talking about Obama 2.0,” brainstorming with administration officials about the best way to revamp the strategies and goals of the White House.

And despite the predictions that Democrats may relinquish a large degree of legislating power, including perhaps control of the House and even Senate, Obama isn’t thinking of the next two years as a period that’ll be marked with the same obstructive nature from the GOP.

“It may be that regardless of what happens after this election, [Republicans] feel more responsible, either because they didn’t do as well as they anticipated, and so the strategy of just saying no to everything and sitting on the sidelines and throwing bombs didn’t work for them,” Obama says. “Or they did reasonably well, in which case the American people are going to be looking to them to offer serious proposals and work with me in a serious way.”

Dick Durbin says Obama’s post-election agenda “will have to be limited and focused on the things that are achievable and high priorities for the American people.” Tom Daschle says Obama has to reach out more: “The keyword is inclusion. He’s got to find ways to be inclusive. “

This after Republicans couldn’t have been clearer, from even before Obama got into the White House, that they had no intention of working with him or Democrats.

This and broadcasting "more of the same seeking of bipartisanship" and Republican-like legislation is before the 2010 midterms is exactly like what Nancy Pelosi did prior to the 2006 midterms -- She announced that if Democrats took control over Congress, impeaching Bush was "off the table." The reason to do that is to be able to spin after the election, "We told you what we were going to do before the election, so our success in retaining our seats means you were voting for what we broadcast."

KEEP READING

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Here's a list of all of the candidates running for president.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

I'm not suggesting that anyone vote for Romney. Here's a list of all of the candidates running for president.

The old "lesser of two eviIs" argument reeks of denial. Obama's continuing just about all of the Bush-Cheney policies, even going BushCo one better: How do any of Obama's 'most ardent supporters' explain Obama's doctrine that presidents have the right to kill American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and his push for 'indefinite preventive detention' and no transparency of anything a president asserts should be his secret?

As a Democrat, I don't know how any Democrat can get behind this.

If Republicans are such scum (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-Democrats continuing the war crimes of Bush-Cheney, blocking investigations and prosecutions into their crimes?

How does a Democratic president, on the heels of the most criminally corrupt administration in the nation's history, not replace Bush-era U.S. attorneys? Presidents may fire U.S. attorneys, and they do so routinely at the beginning of a new administration. It is unusual to fire U.S. attorneys in mid-term (as Bush did) except in cases of gross misconduct (which wasn’t the case during the Bush Administration). Instead of returning the democracy to the American people, Obama's Attorney General has US attorneys going after legalized medicinal marijuana in the states and Bush-style obscenity prosecutions:

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

How do Obama's 'most ardent supporters' explain his putting Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, veterans' care, et al, on the table for benefits' cuts?

And then there's the escalation of wars, continued occupation of Afghanistan, NDAA, and Obama's atrocious environmental record.

You defend Obama at the expense of your own best interests. As long as his numbers remain high, he does the bidding of corporations and establishment elites.

Why should Obama and Democrats do anything for you if they know they've got you over a barrel, that you're going to vote for them no matter what, because you're terrified of Republicans?

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Obama's picks for the SupremeCourt are nothing to crow about. Both Sotomayor and Kagan are to the right of the justices that they replaced (Souter and Stevens).

See here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

Elena Kagan is the Goldman Sachs seat, not to mention that she was the 5th vote in rolling back Miranda a few weeks ago, and she joined the conservatives on the Medicare portion of ACA (that states may opt out) a few weeks ago.

If you're voting for Obama out of fear over what Romney would do if elected, Romney's record as governor isn't all that dissimilar from Obama's in the White House. There were even moments of liberalism to Romney's record (gun control, state co-pays for abortion, etc.) - Certainly more progressive than Obama. Even the Boston Globe admitted Romney's judicial picks "have generally not been is overtly partisan".

The Boston Globe on Romney’s judicial appointments:

Governor Mitt Romney, who touts his conservative credentials to out-of-state Republicans, has passed over GOP lawyers for three-quarters (75%) of the 36 judicial vacancies he has faced, instead tapping registered Democrats or independents – including two gay lawyers who have supported expanded same-sex rights.

Of the 36 people Romney named to be judges or clerk magistrates, 23 are either registered Democrats or unenrolled voters who have made multiple contributions to Democratic politicians or who voted in Democratic primaries, state and local records show. In all, he has nominated nine registered Republicans, 13 unenrolled voters, and 14 registered Democrats.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

I never advise people to sit out elections because the first rule of politics is, "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu." It's what pisses me off about Obama (and one of many reasons I know him to be a con man betraying "them that brung 'im") because by shutting out liberals, the Democratic base, from his administration, by taking single payer, a public option, off the table, by putting Social Security and Medicare on the table, by eliminating regulatory oversight from finance reform legislation, he's given pro-corporate, Republican-like policies an inside line. The People's advocates can't even get in the door of this government much less a seat at the table.

KEEP READING

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama: Congress Should Act On Tax Cut, Housing

Bowles-Simpson (Catfood Commission) plan cuts Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security (Social Security wasn't even on their plate to be considered) and puts the burden on the poor and middle classes, and lets the rich keep their ill-gotten booty.

France has announced a massive redistributive tax program which would send the top tax rate soaring and increase taxes broadly on the top 10% of society:

French Prime Minister Ayrault has said that nine out of 10 citizens will not see their income taxes rise in the new budget and has confirmed that there is to be a new 75% tax rate for people earning more than 1m euros (£800,000; $1.3m) a year.

The 75% rate would be on income earnings, but there will also be a wealth tax on holdings above 1.31 million euros, and a cap on tax deductions, as well as a reduction on the tax burden at low incomes.

There should be tax HIKES on corporations and the rich. There should be massive cuts to the military. Banks should be threatened with nationalization unless they begin lending to small businesses. There have been more than 3.5 million home foreclosures but there are 11 million more in the pipeline — There must be principal write-downs.

Democratic politicians should be beating this drum and pushing the People’s Budget instead of working off of a set of corporate lobbyists’ plans. It reduces the deficit by $5.1 trillion and it beats Obama’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 public option to reduce the costs of the Affordable Care Act). The proposed tax hikes would fall on higher incomes, raising the cap on payroll taxes (takes care of Social Security’s solvency forever)... and unlike the Ryan plan, it actually makes sense.”

But Obama takes solutions that work for the People off the table. Obama kneecaps and handicaps the Democratic voters who put him and Democrats into power. He’s the grifter leading off the second half of the con game, which is to squeeze the rest of the dimes from the poor and middle classes. It began with part 2 of Bush’s Medicare ReformAct of 2003 (high-priced junk health insurance that has no cost controls), continues with more *AFTA treaties (outsourcing more Americans’ jobs) and “payroll tax ‘holidays’” that lead to the end of Social Security.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaigns In The Rain, A Long Way From 2008

The forces governing this country, under our system of Inverted Totalitarianism, aren’t afraid of elections, speeches, petitions on Facebook, and certainly not the media they control. They’re only afraid of what the American people could do if enough of us rise up and just plain refuse to work within the system any more. General strikes, peaceful civil disobedience in large numbers, removal of funds from major banks, filling the streets, that’s what might get their attention, not voting for a “green” candidate or one of the duopoly.

This election is merely a distraction. They’re counting on American’s propensity for magical thinking, and that most of us will vote and carry-on because we believe in the idea of America, and don’t look deeply enough to see the reality of what it’s become.

About Barack Obama

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaigns In The Rain, A Long Way From 2008

I’m tired of hearing the argument that “Romney would be a disaster,” or “the Supreme Court would be more conservative.” Actually, if it were possible for Romney to win this election, it would probably be the best thing for the country in the long run. Why? Obama can get away with doing anything, as far as the left is concerned. After the election, he will “make a deal” on Social Security, lowering benefits and increasing the retirement age, in fact, he’s already said he supports it. The left will go along with it, because he’ll sell it as the “best deal he could get,” just like he sold the insurance company bonanza that is Obamacare. The left will go along with his approval of the northern half of the sludgepipe, and probably the bombing of Iran as well. Actually, there’s almost nothing he won’t be able to get away with.

Romney, on the other hand, won’t be able to get away with anything. He’ll do the exact same things Obama would have done, but the left won’t stand for it. Not for a moment! Romney doing the same things, might even put hundreds-of-thousands of people in the streets, which will be the only way this country might have a chance of surviving.

The system we’re living under is rotten to the core. Our government, all three branches, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of our banks and major corporations. We’ve run out of time for incremental changes and tweaks to the system, it must be replaced. The effects of climate change: the food and water shortages, relocations, and increasingly violent weather, are going to be combined with another major economic crash, and coming energy shortages due to the effects of peak oil, and upsets in the Middle East.

Our government is fully aware of these facts. Why, for goodness sake, has Homeland Security purchased and distributed millions of rounds of .40 hollow point ammunition, which is illegal under the Geneva Convention? Why have police forces all across the land been equipped to the point where some of them could defeat most countries armies? Why has our society become the most heavily surveiled in the entire world? Do you really think that voting for one candidate or the other is going to change where all this is headed? If you do, I’m afraid that you’re just engaging in more of that magical thinking I mentioned.

KEEP READING

About Barack Obama

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaigns In The Rain, A Long Way From 2008

Obamapoligists insist that those of us who see him for what he is are comparing our expectations to his performance, and ignoring the Republican obstructionism that seemingly thwarted his every effort. What they fail to realize is that, in most cases, Obama either capitulated to Republican demands, or compromised before negotiations even began, such as during the health care debate. We are not judging him upon the basis of his performance; we are weighing him by what should be universally accepted standards of truth, justice, and human decency, and finding him seriously wanting.

Running as the “peace” candidate, then increasing our commitment in Afghanistan, trying to extend our occupation of Iraq, increasing murderous, illegal drone warfare, and extending it to additional countries, these things are deal-breakers for some of us, and should be for all progressives. He campaigned as an environmentalist and then sold us out to big oil at every turn. He made a show of “vetoing” the Canadian sludgepipe, then turned around and approved the southern half. He allowed drilling and fracking everywhere, and did virtually nothing to further the development of renewable resources. A Constitutional lawyer, he signed the NDAA with the provision allowing the indefinite detention of American citizens without due process. Even though he assured us that he would never use it, his Justice Department is vigorously appealing the decision of a Federal judge which declared the provision unconstitutional. This, coupled with his insistence that he can murder Americans without due process, so long as he declares them “enemies of the state” is another one of those pesky deal-breakers for some of us.

If you support Obama as a candidate, you are saying that you are in favor of these actions, and want these policies to continue. To believe he’s going to do anything differently in his second term is engaging in more of that magical thinking that got us into this mess in the first place.

KEEP READING
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaigns In The Rain, A Long Way From 2008

I only wish Obama was a liberal instead of the DINO we on the left know him to be - "Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat" - Blue Dog = might as well re-register as a Republican.

It was liberal policies and legislation that created the middle class, built post-war Europe, built the Hoover Dam, brought electricity to every house in America, wiped out smallpox, increased longevity, decreased infant mortality, built the infrastructure across the nation, clean potable water to every home, etc.

Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, all liberal policies, and responsible for lifting more Americans out of poverty and providing opportunities for an improved quality of life.

And then there's the 40-hour work week, humane and safe working conditions, ending to child labor, all liberal policies.

That's what Obama should have talked about in the debate, and what every Democratic politician running should be beating their drums about.

About Barack Obama

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Changing the filibuster rules will not happen.

And Republicans haven't been filibustering; they've been threatening to filibuster. Harry Reid could have forced them to actually do it, filibuster, at any time. That is at the discretion of the Senate Majority Leader (Democrat Harry Reid). Senate Rule 22. When it serves something that the DLC-controlled Democrats want, Harry Reid can (and has) require the GOP to actually filibuster (stand and talk without end).

Harry Reid has had no problem forcing the GOP to actually filibuster when it's something that the DLC wants and perceives it needs. For example, when Democrats needed unemployment benefits to continue because the masses were becoming 'critical', Reid had no problem calling Republican Jim Bunning's bluff to filibuster. Reid said, "Bring in the cots, do it" and Bunning and the GOP caved. Benefits for unemployed workers continued.

Democrats could even have changed the supermajority rule (it does NOT have to be done at the beginning of a new Congress, as some argued). It can be done at any time (see page 6 - http://fpc .state.gov/documents/organization/45448. pdf ].

But Democrats put off their critics for not forcing the Republicans to actually filibuster and changing Senate Rule 22 during the session by assuring fed-up Democratic voters, "We'll change the rule come the beginning of the next Congress".

They didn't.

There's not just one way (or even two or three) for Democrats to get bills passed without Republican votes.

But Obama and the DLC-controlled DemocraticParty didn't and aren't doing that. Because it might actually work to get Democratic voters' legislative agenda made into the law of the land and do good for the People. And that's not what Obama and Company are there for.

Obama and Company are there to do the work of the transnational corporations. Along with the Republicans, as was clearly evidenced the time that Harry Reid kept the Senate open (pro forma) so that Obama couldn't make recess appointments, collaborating with Republicans to keep progressives and liberals out of government. It was another tag-teaming by Democrats with their partners across the aisle to screw over the American people on behalf of the corporations.

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. They don't want to do it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaigns In The Rain, A Long Way From 2008

re you supporting the real Obama or the idea of Obama?

A large number of Democratic voters (most of whom call themselves Liberals) want so much for the idea of Obama to be true that they are willing to forget or ignore most of his actions over the last four years. In a likewise manner, they want so much for theidea of America to be true that they still believe that elections can make a difference, and somehow, if Obama has another four years, he will stop the killing, bring the jobs back, restore the Bill of Rights, lessen the inequity in wealth distribution, take steps to mitigate the effects of global warming, and restore the “American Dream.” They can engage in such magical thinking because they have developed the skill of ignoring not only the current political reality, but also the reality of who Obama is, and who he’s working for. Their magical thinking allows them to accept behavior from Obama for which they would excoriate a Republican, such as murdering women and children by the hundreds in an illegal drone war waged over an entire region, and approving any scheme by the oil companies, no matter the cost to the environment.

They can see the reality of the Republican slate and platform well enough, and react with the appropriate disdain but then, like an addict comparing their own insides to other people’s outsides, they compare that regressive platform with the idea of Obama, not the reality. If they were looking at the reality of Obama, they would see a President who toed the Wall Street, big oil, multi-national corporation line throughout his presidency, doing their bidding at every opportunity. They would see the man who appointed Larry Summers and Tim Geithner, signaling Wall Street that his administration would be conducting business as usual. They would see the man who cut a deal with the health insurers precluding single-payer, or even a public option before the negotiations even started in the House. They would see the man who abandoned card-check, and the union workers in Wisconsin, after running as pro-union.

A realistic look at the Nobel Peace Prize winner would reveal the man who tried every diplomatic trick in the book to keep us in Iraq past the expiration of the Status of Forces agreement, until we were finally thrown out kicking and screaming. And then there’s the escalation in Afghanistan, and the drones, always the drones. Without a doubt, they’re the finest creator of terrorists ever devised. I don’t intend to go into the whole extended litany of Obama’s actions; I think you get my drift.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

No, he actually hasn't.

What he's said (and it's been a one-time comment so I wouldn't take it to the bank) is so typically 'Obamaesque' - “I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional amendment process to overturn Citizens United, even if the amendment process falls short, it can shine a spotlight of the super PAC phenomenon and help apply pressure for change".

There's nothing serious or determined in that. It's like, "We should think about getting around to painting the house one of these days".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Does Debate Cleanup On Social Security Answer

In so far as forming a "true Progressive Party", I say this as an old, OLD liberal Democrat with decades of experience working in government and politics, the best and surest way to achieve real populist governance is voting third party now.

There are a number of reasons, but specifically it's the surest way to either wrench the Democratic Party out of the hands of the corporatists or to actually form a third competing party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Does Debate Cleanup On Social Security Answer

You're talking about Democratic Party and legislation enacted 50+ years ago. A Republican president freed the slaves -- 150 years ago!

Republicans couldn't have done anything in the last ten years without Democrats signing on. On everything from the Patriot Act to extending Bush's tax cuts for the rich, Democrats, not just Blue Dogs, piled on to support.

Just to show you where Obama's and the DLC's real heart lies, there are so many things he and the DLC/DNC could have done, could be doing, to get real Democratic legislation through, but don't.

Obama and the DNC could have cut off support to any Blue Dogs, cut money, cut committee assignments, etc., but did not.

There is plenty that a President and a Speaker of the House and a Senate Majority Leader can do to pressure representatives and senators into voting as you want them to vote. We saw that Obama had no problem doing it when he wanted and needed Blue Dogs like Ben Nelson and Mary Landrieu's votes -- He literally bought them.

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

Obama and Democrats in Congress continuing BushCheneyRepublican policies and legislation winds up kneecapping Democratic policies and legislation by converting right-wing dogma into bipartisan consensus.

There is nothing that the Blue Dogs are doing that Obama and the DLC doesn't want them to do.

Before the midterms of 2010, I asked, facetiously, if Obama's 'most ardent supporters' believed that if Democrats lost control of Congress, would they be as effective at preventing the Republicans' agenda from moving forward as Republicans have been at stymieing Democrats. After all, there would still be more numbers of Democrats in Congress AND a Democratic White House. Not one of Obama's 'most ardent fans' replied.

How much evidence do you need before you realize that Obama isn't any kind of Democrat?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Allow me to end with an example of how, when you don't rectify the mistakes of the past, they not only continue, but get worse: "Obama killed Osama Bin Laden".

Anyone who says that, I ask, "How do you know?"

The greatest terrorist attack on the US and the alleged perpetrator, ill with kidney disease and blind in one eye, a towering figure of 6'4" living and traveling among 5 and-a-half-foot people, eludes apprehension for a decade, and when we ultimately get him we quickly dispose of the body where it can never be exhumed, refuse to release photographs or anything confirming the death ("Take our word for it") and hide the SEAL team and let conflicting accounts of what happened remain.

It's as likely to be true as the official account of 9/11, where the US sent all of the steel from the WTC to China, untested, to be recycled.

We don't do that in the US. We salvage downed air planes from the bottom of the ocean and reconstruct them in hangars to find out what happened. It's why we are a nation run by rule of law and not rule of man. Where we examine evidence in courtrooms to get to the truth.

But all that is over.

The situation might have been remedied had Democrats and Obama come into office investigating and prosecuting the Bush administertion, Wall Street, defense contractors, and restoring the 'rule of law'. BushCheney exploited the inherent weaknesses in the Constitution: A precarious balance of power between the three branches of government. But Obama refused, and has continued the BushCheney disregard of the Constitution, even going beyond BushCheney abuses.

Do you know that the Pentagon has no photos of the dead OBL, and no DNA analysis was done on OBL. Nor does any video exist of the raid, either at the scene, at the Pentagon, in the WH Situation Room.

If you want to talk about OBL, then let's throw the windows open and get a real investigation. Starting with what actually happened on 9/11 (the 911 Commission was a cruel joke), the policies that led to 9/11, our response to it, the post-9/11 policies which have us in a perpetual state of war with Americans being no safer.

Until we examine and evaluate the past, we're just continuing with the failed policies of the neocons and neolibs, no matter which party controls the White House or the Congress.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

That fact alone casts suspicion on Obama's good intentions after his failure to investigate and prosecute, and his continuing Bush's "unitary executive" practices (and expanding them, with "indefinite preventive detention" of American citizens and Obama's doctrine that presidents have the right to kill American citizens with no due process, no oversight, and his push for and no transparency of anything a president asserts should be his secret). It is pure Kafka.

Most of Obama's supporters believe that Obama ended the torture practices of the Bush-Cheney regime and closed down the CIA black sites, but apparently that's not true: Obama's continuing to torture and has decriminalized it, along with creating all new black sites (Prison Ships, Ghost Prisoners and Obama's Interrogation Program).

There was a coup d'etat in this nation, a bloodless one, but a coup nonetheless. And both parties are in on it and we're "flying without a net" (Constitution).

The U.S. can only survive by everyone (not just the liberals) wanting to get along with each other. You've got to want the country to work more than you want your way over other Americans getting their way. Or some of their way. You've got to be willing to compromise.

But 'compromising' isn't "capitulating." "Compromise" requires getting something you want in return, and Democratic voters aren't getting that with the deals that Obama makes with Republicans.

Bush wasn't into compromising, and got everything he wanted from Congress. And when he didn't get what he wanted, when members of Congress learned they had been lied to, tricked, Congress didn't challenge him in the third branch of government, the judiciary. Bush created one Constitutional crisis after another. There's been real concern that if the judiciary ruled against him, he wouldn't abide. Then what? Nobody can force him. Three co-equal branches of government.

So Congress turned the other cheek. And the incoming administration "looks forward, not back." So that future administrations know they have nothing to fear, no one to harness and restrain them from imperial ambitions. From "Unitary Executive." From becoming king.

KEEP READING

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

At the very root of our problems are Constitutional crises created by, first, Republican presidents and now under a Democratic president. Republicans' utter contempt for the Constitution and callous disregard for it by creating these crises (and Democrats' cowering response) is what underpins all of our problems and what's destroying the country.

As president, you've got to really want the US to work, to exist, to not exploit the loopholes in the Constitution that keep our three-branches of government precariously balancing the democracy. But BushCheney drove tanks through the loopholes, breaking the law and with no apparent concern for exposing the loopholes or any consequences.

Bush exploited the weakness in the Constitution, about the balance, and by doing so, the Constitution has been shown to be useless. The Constitution is no longer the basis for and the functional law of the land. The Constitution is no longer much respected in Congress, the Executive Branch, the SupremeCourt, nor in law or business.

Bush wasn't the first to create Constitutional crises, but he created more of them, eviscerating the Constitution for all time. How do you go forward with it when its Achilles' heel has been laid bare for any BushCheney wannabe waiting in the weeds to exploit? What's now happened in the aftermath of BushCheney is that what Nixon did has been made legal. Once BushCheney happened, once they exploited those loopholes for everyone to see, you can't just go on as if it never happened. You can't "look forward, not back".

The situation might have been remedied had Obama come into office investigating and prosecuting the Bush administration and restoring the 'rule of law'. BushCheney exploited the inherent weaknesses in the Constitution: A precarious balance of power between the three branches of government. But Obama refused, and has continued the BushCheney disregard of the Constitution, even going beyond BushCheney abuses.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

If you're talking about freedoms, how does any Democratic voter defend Obama after he asserts he has the right to kill any American citizen without due process or oversight? And Obama's claims of 'state secrets' to deny courts even look at his assassination program? And 'indefinite preventive detention'?

An argument can be made, quite convincingly, that Obama and DLC Democrats are the worse evil. Bush and Cheney made no excuses or bones about who they were and what they stood for. Obama and DLC Democrats ran on doing different, because they knew better.

Two articles that speak that I think are must reads for Democratic voters are John Cusack's Interview of Law Professor Jonathan Turley About the Obama Administration's War on the Constitution and journalist Russell Mokhiber's Ten Reasons I'm Not With Barack Obama.

The Fate of Humanity Is at Stake -- Why Are Romney and Obama Too Cowardly to Talk About What Really Matters?

Just as Obama has expanded and increased the wars, Iran will be bombed no matter who is in the White House. When it comes to our foreign policy, both parties share the same goals - A destabilized Middle East where the US's ambitions of empire and controlling the world's resources are realized.

The only difference is in how enthusiastically the lemmings should march toward the cliff.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

In claims against big business, Sotomayor (herself a former corporate lawyer) wrote the dissent in a 2-1 decision that ultimately favored victims' families. This was concerning the 1996 crash of TWA flight 800 off of LongIsland. Sotomayor wrote, "The crash hadn't occurred in US territorial waters, therefore victims' families shouldn't have had the right to sue for extra damages." She wrote that the judges who disagreed with her were ignoring legislative history and earlier case law," saying "their decision was a legislative policy choice which shouldn't be made by the courts".

That's conservative talk.

In 2002, on the issue of abortion, Sotomayor upheld Bush's 'Global Gag Rule' (the policy of withholding funds for international groups that offer family planning information and services, including abortion).

On the issue of discrimination, she frequently rules against plaintiffs. For example, in 2004, she ruled against African-American corrections' officers who said they were retaliated against for filing discrimination complaints.

Sotomayor certainly doesn't look at the law through the prism of how it serves the interests of the People.

And Sotomayor was with the Scalia-Thomas-Alito faction that boycotted the SOTU - Sotomayor was in Guam, addressing a group of students and swearing in new members of the Guam Bar Association, a first for a US Supreme Court Justice (are you kidding, Sonia, missing the most public showing of US democracy and the 3 branches of government by leaving the US for a 5 day trip to Guam?).

ElenaKagan is the GoldmanSacks seat, not to mention that she was the 5th vote in rolling back Miranda a few weeks ago, and she joined the conservatives on the Medicare portion of ACA (that states may opt out).

We need more Earl Warrens. What we don't need are politicians looking to avoid a fight, and want to work "in a bipartisan manner". Republicans declared war on Democrats years and years ago, while Democrats keep trying to "make nice". Democratic politicians have gotten fat and lazy, feathering their own nests while Republicans have made long inroads into furthering corporate interests.

Whether Democrats are inept or corrupt, the result is the same: They have failed to protect the interests of the 99%. And all that they're putting out this campaign season is warmed-over Republican-like policies when drastic populist steps need to be taken.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

The Supreme Court is already lost, and Obama's picks for the Supreme Court are nothing to crow about. Both Sotomayor and Kagan are to the right of the justices that they replaced (Souter and Stevens).

See here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.

ElenaKagan is the GoldmanSacks seat, not to mention that she was the 5th vote in rolling back Miranda a few weeks ago, and she joined the conservatives on the Medicare portion of ACA (that states may opt out) a couple of weeks ago.

Obama's spin when trying to get both Kagan and Sotomayor (a lackluster intellect if ever there was one) confirmed was that they'd be effective at countering the conservatives arguments when it came to trying to pull Kennedy over. It hasn't happened; Roberts, Alito, and Scalia wield far greater political warfare skills. And it was Kennedy who worked on Roberts for weeks, to bring Roberts over to the conservative side on ACA??

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

#6 - Continue the Insanity, meaning we keep doing the same thing* over and over again hoping for a different outcome.

[* - Same thing = Continue to refuse to believe our own 'lyin' eyes', keep doing what we've been doing for the past 20 years, continue voting for DLC-controlled Democrats, vote again for Obama in the hopes that he's a closet liberal playing eleventy-dimensional chess, believing that he's got a plan, a strategy, that nobody can see or figure out, but because he's the smartest, grown-uppiest in the room, in all of Washington (on the whole planet, even) his scheme eludes and confounds us, so we just need to be like Republican voters and have blind faith in our political leaders.

Clue: There aren't any grown-ups to save us; we're 'it'.]

What happens when millions are out of work, no jobs, no money, no hope. London, Philadelphia, where next?

"Quickly Brad, there are thousands of lives at stake... Brad any answer..." - Roy Neary, 'Close Encounters of the Third Kind
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

#4 - A Third Party Challenge

We're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian, in just about every race. If for no other reason than to get the percentage necessary for getting a seat at the table, I think that may be enough for great numbers of Democratic voters this time around.

#5 - The "Oh, F R I C K it, let's get it over with - Vote for Republicans"-plan

The horse is out of the barn and we should just let the radical right have its way. It's not like Obama and the gutless Dems are going to stop them.

It would be carnage for a few years, people eating other people (though that really only happens in the southern tier of states), old people dying (why are we so eager to keep them alive, anyway?) and cats and dogs living together...

Let it all come crashing down--but let's make sure to kill Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare. These Tea Partiers should be allowed to pay what the market will bear, right?

By the way, while our Tea-Party/Real Men (or whatever those guys who wouldn't pay taxes a few years ago are called) friends talk about how they'd like to keep more of their hard earned money and give less to the idiots who "gave us Vietnam and Iraq," perhaps they'd like to pick up the bill for the grading and paving of the road that leads from their home to their office--can't be what, more than $60K a year.

While they're at it, maybe they'd like to cut a check for the police and fire people they'd have to employ to protect their home and valuables from damage. If they could get one guy for another $30K, they'd be lucky. Oh, and then there's that water and waste service, if you've got that.

Really, just let these frickers get what they want and we'll repair it all afterwards.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

#3 - Primary Incumbent Democrats (Obama)

Here were/are two powerful arguments for challenging Obama from the left (either from inside or outside the party):

Michael Lerner's very powerful case for primarying Obama.

Ralph Nader's very powerful case for primarying Obama (and no, he's not running again).

Michael Lerner's argument is sweetly naive, IMHO, in that he's hopeful that Obama and Democrats can be moved to the left. I don't think that's true anymore. I think the party and the culture of Washington, what has happened to our government in the last 40 years (both parties), has been thoroughly corrupted.

To begin with, no one in the Democratic Party would do it. Due to the hierarchical system of party government, it would be suicide for any professional politician in the Democratic Party to run against the party's sitting president.

Liberals/progressives within the Democratic Party, no matter what their rhetoric, no matter what they say, they march to Obama's/Reid's/Pelosi's tune. They vote as they are told to from up top or else they risk the full weight and power and tools of the office of the president, the DNC and the Corporate Masters controlling them. The Party will cover them as best it can, get as many votes as it needs from Democrats in safe districts first, and will only call upon liberals/progressives to betray their constituents from safe districts if it needs them, accompanied by threats/promises of national party help when it comes time for their reelection bid (Alan Grayson, Dennis Kucinich, 2 examples).

The DLC has gotten too powerful, what with a Democrat in the White House and a Democratically-controlled Senate overseeing an NSA with today's eavesdropping abilities (I say that somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but it's really impossible to deny in light of things like this).

Word had it that a challenge is coming, but it wasn't really not a serious one, not intended for anyone to get the nomination from Obama.

So unless Obama dropped out (in which case another corporate tool would take his place), the only legitimate challenges to him would come from outside the Democratic Party (Republicans or Independents). And the most likely way that Obama would drop out is if his numbers plummet.

So what's left?

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

Try to focus on what I did say and not the voices that only you hear in your head.

FYI, there are real options, other than voting for Obama or the GOP. I'll lay out some, but certainly not all, of the options and possible solutions as I see them:

#1 - Sitting Out The Election
I never advise people to sit out elections because the first rule of politics is, "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu". It's what p!sses me off about Obama (and one of many reasons I know him to be a con man betraying "them that brung 'im") because by shutting out liberals, the Democratic base, from his administration, by taking single payer, a public option, off the table, by putting Social Security and Medicare on the table, by eliminating regulatory oversight from finance reform legislations, he's given pro-corporate, Republican-like policies an inside line. The People's advocates can't even get in the door of this government much less a seat at the table.

#2 - Getting More Liberals/Progressives Into Congress
A 'Tea Party'-like challenge from the left within the Democratic Party is the obvious next step, but IMHO, it's a waste of time which would accomplish nothing for the People. Obama and the DNC have been working their butts off to prevent real Democrats, real progressives, from getting into office - Their strategy for getting more Democrats into office has been to run Democratic candidates who believe in Republican ideology and support Republican policies and legislation.

It's too late for this one variation, but if, A) Obama didn't pull an LBJ (drop out) or, B) another Democrat or third party candidate didn't challenge him, then take the money and shoe leather that you were planning on spending for Obama and use it to make both Houses of Congress overwhelmingly 'blue' and let the chips fall where they may (Obama sinks or swims on his own, or a Republican gets into the White House) and we go to work immediately finding a real Democrat for 2016. An Obama win makes the DLC's/ThirdWay/NoLabels' (corporate) control of the Democratic Party in 2016 certain.

Given how effective Republicans (with the smallest minority in decades) have been at stymieing Democratic legislation and policies, you would think Democrats could do the same for any Romney administration.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Blasts Mitt Romney's Debate Claims: 'You Owe The American People The Truth'

Do you remember this?

That's how I feel. About the law, about the Constitution, about this country. It is the underpinning for everything I've done in my life, the lens through which I see the world. To realize that it's all been a lie has been a crushing blow. And that it's not likely anything that can be or will be repaired.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Race Shaken Up By Debate, Jobs Report

They are both lying jacka***ses.

And it's not a matter of agreement (that Obama is a Blue Dog) - It's what Obama says of himself.

We're not limited to voting for just Democrats and Republicans. There are other alternatives besides sitting out the election or voting for Republicans. There are other candidates running as independents, from Green to Libertarian (Jill Stein, Rocky Anderson, et al), in just about every race. If you don't know which candidate best fits your views, you might want to take an online quiz. All that prevents any of them winning is the perception put out by the corporately-owned that they can't.

If for no other reason than to get enough of a percentage of the vote necessary for getting a seat at the table, I think that may be enough for great numbers of Democratic voters this time around who are dissatisfied with Obama and the Democratic Party and are willing to vote third party to make that happen.

What this means is a considered, longer term approach instead of just accepting the traditionally passive role of citizens to vote for whatever slate is offered by one of the two parties that is closer to your opinions on issues. We saw this in the 2008 when first Obama and Democrats were swept into power on a platform of CHANGE, and in 2010 when disappointed and dissatisfied voters took out incumbents in both parties. We'll see if that trend continues in 2012, and how it will be spun by political operatives in the media. In 2010, the media spun it (and Obama framed it) as a mandate to move the government even farther to the right, despite the fact that while Blue Dogs were turned out of office big time, progressives/liberals only lost 3 seats.

As an old, OLD, liberal Democrat who has never voted for a Republican, never will, and can't fathom ever voting for another Democrat again, the decision has been liberating.

Free from fear, free at last.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama, Democrats' Fundraising Raised $181 Million In September

The key solution to our broken system (campaign finance and election reform and ending corporate 'personhood') isn't on Democrats' agenda and won't be.

Any party that doesn't have that as their first order of business (particularly after the Citizens United decision and the overwhelming public support for reform) is dirty, rotten and corrupt to the bone.

I'm an old, lifelong Democrat saying that. I've never voted Republican, never will, and I may never vote for another Democrat again. But I think it may be too late for that, for this "noble experiment" (continuing the U.S. as we've known it and as it was intended) a democratic republic) by the framers.

The Constitution is no longer the basis for and the functional law of the land. The Constitution is no longer much respected in Congress, the Executive Branch, the Supreme Court nor in law or business. That might've been remedied had Obama come into office investigating and prosecuting the Bush administration and restoring the "rule of law." Bush-Cheney exploited the inherent weaknesses in the Constitution: The precarious balance of power between the three branches of government. But Obama refused, and has continued to disregard the Constitution, going even beyond Bush-Cheney abuses.

As president, you've got to really want the U.S. to work, to exist, to not exploit the loopholes in the Constitution that keep our three branches of government precariously balancing the democracy. But Bush-Cheney drove tanks through the loopholes, breaking the law and with no apparent concern for exposing the loopholes or any consequences.

That fact alone casts suspicion on Obama's good intentions after his failure to investigate and prosecute them, continuing Bush's "unitary executive" practices (expanding on them, with "indefinite preventive detention" of American citizens and the killing of Americans with no due process or oversight).

There was a coup d'etat in this nation, a bloodless one, but a coup nonetheless, and both parties are in on it.

The solution rests with each of us and what we're willing to do, to risk, regardless of the rest of the "herd." If you think that Republicans are worse, if you don't realize that Republicans and Democrats work together in a "good cop/bad cop" dance to further the interests of transnational corporations, then it'll be more of the same until we're all squeezed dry and living like Haitians.

If you think that Republicans are worse and you're going to continue voting for Democrats, why should Obama and Democrats do anything for you? They know they've got you no matter how much they ignore/lie/rob you blind, take away your rights.

Dr. Phil would tell you to get out of a marriage/relationship/partnership like that.

Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

2012 Race Shaken Up By Debate, Jobs Report

All Democratic and Republican politicians are pro-corporate, pro-military industrial complex. The only differences have been on social issues, and on the Democratic side, they have proven to be, let's say, 'less committed' to their party's stated values, ideals, and goals, i.e. the People's issues. Democratic voters have let them get away with it because of the propaganda campaigns aimed at us is to be "reasonable", and "compromising".

Under the DLC's control, Democratic politicians have stood for nothing and compromised away everything in the Democratic Party's platform. Democratic voters have gone along, but when because they stand for nothing, they fall for anything. Democratic voters have put politicians into power who do not stand and fight for their issues. Democratic politicians have "compromised" them away.

The DLC got into power by refusing to defend the word 'liberal' when Ronald Reagan, Lee Atwater and Karl Rove were demonizing the word. Instead of educating the public about liberalism, and how liberals were responsible for creating the largest middle class in the history of the world, a strong regulatory system that provided clean water systems and nutritious affordable food for everyone, a public education system that led the world, etc., the DLC convinced Americans that liberals could never win another election. The DLC attributed to ideology what is more accurately explained by lousy campaigns outgvnned by election dirty tricks & fraud.

What we are dealing with is a corporate takeover of the US government. And Obama is a DINO - A Democrat-In-Name-Only. He's not a "centrist" as has been sold to us from his entry onto the national stage -- "Privately, Obama describes himself as a Blue Dog Democrat."

Blue Dog Democrat = REPUBLICAN

If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, changing its name to 'bee' isn't going to get you any honey.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Obama Campaign Does Debate Cleanup On Social Security Answer

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".

When it comes to achieving corporations' business, Democrats are remarkably competent. Obama is even more competent in that he's been able to give himself some distance from policies that displease Democratic voters ('plausible deniability') in a variety of ways that keep his favorable ratings high. Whether it's renaming Republican legislation ("Romney healthcare " to "Affordable Health Insurance Act") to getting other legislators like Joe Lieberman to actually do the heavy lifting legislatively, Obama's 'most ardent admirers' lay themselves on the line for him out of their ignorance of what he's actually doing.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates Newspaper by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP