I don’t believe that will ever happen. Not in your lifetime or in mine. Or that of any of our hypothetical children. IMHO the nature of the Two-Party state ( which will continue to be for the forseeable future ) virtually guarantees it.
You might as well chuck your idealism now and embrace your inner realist. It is a much less stressful way to live :).
Meanwhile, at least Obama did just officially dump “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, which is one of those rare campaign promises fulfilled.
Don’t be absurd. See my link below.
Come join us on Twitter, where we’ve “trended” #F***YouWashington with our outrage. It’s very cathartic. PM if you want my Twitter handle.
This is just plain silly. President Obama is exactly as advertised. He has always been a compromiser, and it’s one of the primary reasons so many of us supported him – because we thought that if anyone could finally get the two sides to come together for the good of the country, it would be him.
Unfortunately, no one anticipated the seething hatred the RWNJs in congress would have for him, and the lengths they’d go to not to bend an inch.
When we had majorities in both houses, we actually got a shitload of stuff done. But the big stuff was nearly impossible because we didn’t have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate. President Obama can only do so much with what we give him to work with!
You’re extremely misinformed. This president has been outstanding at doing this job, especially in the face of all the utter crap he’s had to put up with. His ability to do his job isn’t gauged based on whether or not you got your way on everything you wanted. I sure didn’t, but I don’t blame him.
I BLAME US!
If you want Barack Obama not to have to bend so far to give in to Republican demands, then give him super-majorities in both houses of congress instead of handing the damn House of Representatives to the Tea Party.
It’s All Our Fault. This Election, Let’s Not Fail! Re-Elect Democratic Senators & Congresspeople
If he wanted to work with the Republicans, he would have ask the Democrats in the house and senate not to stick pork onto his health care package.
I am annoyed that Hillary campaigned that everyone must pay in the health care plan, and Obama said not everyone should-until he was elected and had to implement it.
Obama has proven to be disappointing in a very serious way, his major principle seems to be his self image and reputation as a post partisan figurehead seems to trump his commitment to progressive (or even democratic) values.
Granted, that could just be bitching on my part. But he seems like his main goal is to get ‘any’ bipartisan deal, even if it involves doing things democrats and progressives would not like.
Maybe Bernie Sanders will do a primary.
http://thinkprogress.org/special/2011/07/22/277124/bernie-sanders-primary-obama/
He is an independent, so no idea if that would work.
Obama is light years better than anything the GOP can put up (I’ll take Obama over Palin, Cain, Romney, Bachmann, etc any day).
But if the best the dems can do with Obama in the white house, 59 senators and about 260 house members is extend Bush’s supply side tax cuts, or pass a health reform law that while good, is full of methods to make entrenched powers even more powerful by eliminating their competition (no medicare negotiations of drugs, no reimportation, no public option) what is the point of even having a majority? We get to choose between a center right party and a radical, extremist party.
Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid are all headed towards insolvency, just like the rest of the federal government. Something has to change–either more money needs to be put in, or fewer outlays need to be distributed. It’s that simple.
However, go ahead and don’t vote…and watch the Republicans simply dismantle them instead.
I’m a veteran, and I’m not scared to death…mainly because I don’t get a check from the federal government. Not all veterans pull retirement, you know.
No–the DOI states that “it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish” the government if the government becomes destructive to the people’s rights, which include “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.”
How is modifying Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, or failing to send out checks on August 3 “destructive to the people’s rights”?
The Supreme Court is far more important than your disappointment in someone who’s done everything he could with the hand we dealt him to play with. First we tied one hand behind his back for 2 years, now we’ve tied them both behind his back, and we expect him to be able to bat 1000? That’s pure insanity. How about instead of wishing for a Primary, you bust your ass to give him a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and return the House to Democratic control?
http://reelectdemocrats.blogspot.com/p/re-elect-these-democrats-to-senate-in.html
No, it’s not that simple. Actually, it’s the opposite.
Which would still seriously damage his ability to get reelected.
So you think Obama is a corporatist but you want to vote for Hillary.
Wut.
Then again, you could say the same thing about any Dem candidate. Why bother? The LOTE principle is pretty flimsy.
And it still doesn’t. Unless, that is, you think a couple of yahoos with a newspaper editorial you found somewhere represent the thinking of the Monolithic Left of the SDMB. But it’s just too damn much fun to make insinuations of hypocrisy to let the lack of actual facts stop you, isn’t it?
Now, to the OP, while we’re all impatient with President Spock’s weak spine (and some of us had that identified as a problem we didn’t have to deal with as long ago as the primaries), let’s not go straight to self-destructive behaviors over it. He’s capable of learning, and shows signs of learning from this experience too, albeit belatedly. We can more effectively protect our progress, and make more, by helping him realize and internalize what We The People want, that boldness is actually a safer strategy than compromise when faced with bold opposition, and thereby make him act more progressively.
The OP doesn’t agree that the big 3 couldn’t stand to be modified or does the OP just not like the timing or rather it be done by Repubs?
If you are being honest, you realize that there are no sacred cows and that these subjects need to be looked at. You’d also realize that, at least for me, I’d rather trust a Dem president on this subject that a Repub. I just don’t believe that a Dem president would support nearly the drastic cuts Repubs want.
Change is going to happen, who would you rather negotiate the details?
Pretty sure the OP doesn’t think those cuts in services need to be done at all. Given our historically-low current tax rates, that is probably the case, too.
I can’t say Obama is the president I would most prefer. I’m well to the right of him on some issues, and well to the left on others. But I think he has done a fairly good job of doing what he said he would.
The Obameter
Promise Kept 138
Compromise 41
Promise Broken 43
Stalled 69
In the Works 215
Not yet rated 2
Anyone who was expecting significantly better, had unrealistic expectations, especially once congress became split in 2010.
Rants belong in The BBQ Pit.
Dear Obvious Troll,
You're Obvious.
Regards,
D
I have always thought of Obama as an Antonius Pius at a time when the US needed a Diocletian.
Because we’re a nation of pussies who need a good ol’ fashioned public hanging of a government dissenter to give us some frickin’ perspective of the purpose of the DOI. Or even a state enforced religion might cut it; perhaps a tax which would literally take away a persons means of living would do.
Get over it people. Things aren’t so bad. Citizens don’t need to invoke the same high-minded ideals that the founding fathers did to overcome the *relatively *simple challenges facing us today. We just need to be willing to compromise and stop assuming that no longer having certain government assistance programs in exactly the same form they were when created (re entitlements) means we are being outright oppressed. :eek:
It would be quite frustrating for these programs to be significantly changed, and possibly devastating to certain individual’s livelihoods, but certainly not **oppressive **to the point that we ought to be invoking the ideals put forth in the Declaration of frickin’ Independence.
God…get some perspective. Read a history book or something.
Disclaimer: This post is not a statement of political affiliation or a call to political action - short of motivating people to stop being whiny little ideologue bitches.
I’m not happy with Obama caving in to Republicans, but something has to be done. The Republicans clearly don’t care about causing a global economic disaster, so Obama has to be the one to put on his big boy underwear and bite the bullet, even if it isn’t the best way to solve the problem.
“Big Boy Underwear”?
A silly way of saying, “Act like an adult”. 