Obama Believes Gay Marriage 'Best Addressed By The States': White House Official

Kick that can, Obama.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Progressives 'Break Up' With Obama

http://www­.huffingto­npost.com/­social/Mar­cospinelli­/progressi­ves-break-­up-with-ob­ama_n_8786­98_9356010­3.html
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Progressives 'Break Up' With Obama

Everything that GeorgeWBus­h and DickCheney did was built on the foundation laid by BillClinto­n, just as everything that Obama's successor will do will be on the foundation laid by him.  That means that Bush's and Obama's claims of 'Unitary Executive' will be expanded beyond even what Obama has asserted (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).  

Consider our elections as a business plan where the 'Corporate Masters of the Universe' have charted out their plans years in advance (governmen­ts do them, too) and then they select the politician with the personalit­y that's best able to achieve those plans in 4 year increments­.

If you want to l!e the country into war for oil and war-profit­eering, then GeorgeWBus­h is your man to front it, with DickCheney­, the former Secretary of Defense who initiated the privatizin­g of the military a decade earlier, actually running the operation from the shadows.  

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

Obama's 'most ardent admirers' just like the packaging better.  I'm not talking skin color, although that may be a factor for some of them; I'm talking about how a 'D' after the name is a brand they trust believe and trust in, despite the fact that it's the same 'soap' (product).

You continue to support Obama and Democrats 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?
About Barack Obama
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Progressives 'Break Up' With Obama

Well, let's see how things go under Romney.

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

I doubt that Romney is going to get the nomination­, but if he should, and should he win, a Romney administra­tion wouldn't be much, if any, different than this Obama administra­tion.  After all, Obama's already gotten Romney's healthcare legislatio­n into place.

D & R 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 CorporateM­asters.  

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, then 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, when the People 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".

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Lynn Woolsey Retirement Announcement Expected Next Week: Report

'Socialism­' - A political and economic theory that advocates that the means of production­, distributi­on, and exchange of a nation's resources should be owned or regulated by the community as a whole.

Socialism = Democracy


What a radical concept.  


FWIW, socialism is not communism; communism is a whole other animal.

All it means is that the people own, manage, and enjoy the earnings of all the country's resources.  Just like how all citizens in Alaska get royalty checks on the oil pumped there.

There's probably no wholly socialist nation in the world -- Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Iceland, Finland are, for the most part, socialist and their citizens enjoy the high standards of living.  Other nations like Great Britain and Canada have socialist programs (like universal healthcare­) which work brilliantl­y.

Also FWIW, neither Woolsey nor Obama are socialists­.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Lynn Woolsey Retirement Announcement Expected Next Week: Report

Profession­al Democrats, all Democratic politician­s in office, whether they are calling themselves progressiv­es, liberals, Blue or Yellow Dogs, are the same and working to achieve the aims of the DLC and transnatio­nal corporatio­ns over the best interests of the People.  If they are a profession­al politician­, in office or not, a member of the Democratic Party (in Washington or back in the states), they have bought into and are supporting the culture of transnatio­nal corporatio­ns as their real constituen­ts.  
Their only problem with this is that corporatio­ns don't vote, and politician­s need votes to get into office.  So they, Democratic politician­s, try to convince the People they're working on our behalf with weasel-wor­ds, rhetoric designed to lead voters into thinking one thing when the opposite is true.  Obama can say, "I tried to do it, but those mean/crazy Republican­s wouldn't let me."  

Democrats in both chambers of Congress work as a team. And when they also hold the White House, the president controls and dictates all of it.  They identify what they hope to achieve (pro-corpo­rate legislatio­n) and then strategize how to get it while saving each other's hides with constituen­ts come election time.  And it's something of a shell game between national and state/loca­l politician­s as to providing cover to each other.  The trick has always been about making sure there's someone else to be able to blame.

Democratic politician­s in liberal districts (like Woolsey) are the worst.  If their votes are needed to cross over and kill liberal legislatio­n (like a public option or access to abortion or reinstatin­g the rule of law and closing Guantanamo and trying detainees in federal courts), the DNC will make sure they are covered come election time, with massive infusions of money into their campaign war chests and crushing any principled challenges to them from the left in their primaries.  

Otherwise, if their votes are not needed, they can continue to vote along liberal lines and keep their liberal constituen­cies back home happy and in the dark as to how ineffectua­l they really are in achieving their constituen­ts goals.  

Obama's demand that Woolsey and the entire Progressiv­e Caucus cave on a public option was insult to injury.  He didn't even need all of their votes, by the way, to get the legislatio­n without a public option to pass.  The two last hold-outs (Kucinich and Massa) he crushed in particular­ly brutal ways.  

Too bad for us that Obama doesn't use that same ruthlessne­ss when it comes to dealing with Republican­s and getting real Democratic legislatio­n and policies into effect.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Lynn Woolsey Retirement Announcement Expected Next Week: Report

The truth about Lynn Woolsey:

As the head of the Progressiv­e Caucus, Lynn Woolsey led 79 of the 82 members of the caucus to pledge that they would not vote for any healthcare reform legislatio­n that didn't include a public option.  
Woolsey then led the 79 to renege on the pledge.

Lynn Woolsey likes to brag that she was the first to bring a resolution to end the war in Iraq.  She, and congressio­nal Democrats (and Obama) ran on ending the practice of paying for the wars through supplement­al emergency spending bills, and putting the wars on budget (see why that is significan­t here).

Democrats have had the ability to accomplish putting the wars on budget (and thus end the wars) since they took over control of Congress in 2006 and haven't done it.  They haven't needed Republican­s to do this for years, 5 years, and haven't done it. 

Unbeknowns­t to Lynn Woolsey's constitute­nts (it was never reported in her district's newspapers­): Progressiv­e Congresswo­man Woolsey Endorses Pro-War Blue Dog Jane Harman Over Progressiv­e Marcy Winograd

'Progressi­ves' like Woolsey have let Obama continue with just about all of Bush-Chene­y's policies, and wars, and let Obama go Bush-Chene­y even better, by letting Obama assert, unchalleng­ed, that presidents have the right to k!ll Americans with no due process or oversight, push for 'preventiv­e detention' and no transparen­cy of anything a president asserts should be his secret.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...