Here ya go: Obameter: Campaign Promises that are Compromise | PolitiFact
To be fair government is the business of compromise. Or used to be anyway.
Don’t start. I was using the same wording the OP used [and he was being facetious unless I’m very much mistakes]. 
He isn’t accomplishing much of anything. He’s a coward, not a “realist”.
Even assuming you are right, so what? Why should anyone on the left care if the Democrats lose when all they do is act like Republicans anyway?
Really? Because he SEEMS to have accomplished quite a bit from where I’m standing. A lot more than a lot of other presidents did in their first terms (not even through his first term yet actually).
Why? 'Cause he’s not doing all the unrealistic bullshit you THINK he should or could be doing?
Because you know as well as I do that left wing politics are never going to get much traction in the US without being under one of the big two umbrellas, and the Republicans are militantly unlikely to take you folks in. Hell, my guess is even the Democrats look on folks like you as a mixed blessing, since you seemingly have no grasp of political realities in AMERICA…as opposed to whatever utopia you guys THINK you live in.
-XT
There is no such thing as “Obamacare.”
He caved in on the public option. That was pretty much giving away the store. He pussed out on the extending the unfunded tax giveaways to the richest cocksuckers. That’s complete capitulation.
He has passed no liberal policies (much less “socialist”) and hasn’t even proposed any that I can think of. Obama is a moderate conservative. The idea that he’s even a liberal, much less a “radical socialist” is laughable bullshit.
Allowing people to keep more of their own stuff than you were taking from them to begin with is not “giving” them anything. And there’s nothing to “fund” in doing so, unless you start with the premise that the money you were taking from them before is rightfully everyone else’s in the first place and for all time.
Oh, wait…
And besides, having money and producing things and offering products and services that people want and being successful at it does not make a person a cocksucker.
Caving in to the Republicans isn’t an “accomplishment”.
Such as?
The Democrats have demonstrated a willingness to go against their own base and against the majority of what Americans say they want in order to suck up to the Republicans. This is about Democratic spinelessness, not “political realities”.
It’s an obvious Cloward-Piven strategy: Obama caves to the Republicans because he sees that’s the fastest way to crash the system.
Because you say so… I remember how that works.
It’s more descriptive than “healthcare” as in “We gave the people healthcare.” or “The Republicans are against healthcare”.
Well, I’ve never denied socialism is radical. Major problems, such as the barbarous nature of laisser faire capitalism, require radical solutions. Radical isn’t a bad word - reactionary on the other hand is, which accurately describes everything dribbling from the mouths of the GOP and their apologists.
The people who think Obama is a radical socialist are the same people who think Rush Limbaugh knows more about climate science than professors at MIT and who think creationism is a valid scientific concept that should be taught in schools. You might as well start an OP titled “How do we square creationism with fields like geology and biology?” and expect to find good answers. There aren’t any.
aka, the people who believe those things (creationism, radical global warming denial, Obama is a radical socialist, etc) are totally disinterested in facts when those facts fail to support their theocratic, perma-victim conservative worldview. You can’t reconcile them in a factual way. But you can’t factually reconcile creationism with science either. Neither stops the tea party and religious right though.
I for one welcome our future Chinese overlords.
I actually agree (as if that matters). I broke my own rule upthread - the rule being that I won’t take seriously anyone who says “Obamacare.” “Health care reform” might be just as vague in the other direction but it’s less loaded and misleading. Regardless, there was a lot of compromise on that bill. It was very public, too. There might have been more wrangling on that bill than any other piece of legislation we’re going to see for decades.
Looking from outside the US, I have no idea whether Obama is compromising his political objectives because I don’t follow American politics in detail. Nevertheless, politics is the art of the possible (Otto Von Bismark).
I can say that Obama is a remarkable breath of fresh air as a president. He is erudite, highly intelligent, and respected internationally.
However he is no radical socialist. More of a centrist.
As for the US public healthcare debate: most of us in the developed world cannot understand why you don’t have public healthcare? The USA is the only OECD nation without it.
Yup. Right wingers can’t even get the definition of socialism down correctly.
Can one be an obsessive compromiser, and still be a pragmatist?
I think you’re on the right track, but there appears to be some pathology in his need to accomplish something/anything. It makes him a sucker for hard line oppo, like the pubs have been playing.
Would the terms “RomneyCare” or “BobDoleCare” work in lieu of Obamacare?
Invalid comparison.
Because unlike Obama they’re not [black] Muslim [black] Kenyan [black] foreign nationals who [are black] surrender-bow to Arab leaders and falsify birth certificates for the glory of Islam.
(That’s sarcasm, folks.)
That happens all the time…it’s detachable.
I hear they leak.