Cenk Uyger ends the Obama delusion

[Broke Wave]

I'm telling you not to do it because you are wrong. There are lots of constitutional questions involving the drone strikes, but you're using the wrong amendment to make your argument. Your Obama point makes no sense because the people who criticize him on constitutional grounds, and most effectively are constitutional scholars who would use the proper amendment to do so. The fact that you don't realize you're using the wrong amendment proves my point. Unless you're talking about the surveillance aspects.

Let's just leave this point alone we're going nowhere. The public option provision was IN the initially passed health bill and was left out during reconciliation. I really don't want to recount that entire p*ssy episode on behalf of the Democrats. On Joe though. Joe Lieberman supported McCain but caucused with Democrats, and he still had a high progressive rating, but that's not why he was mentioned. He was mentioned because he was going to fillibuster the bill and then the entire thing would've been dead.

Please stop. Number 1: most of the issues you listed are non-partisan. Number 2: you never mentioned infrastructure the first time around so I have no idea why you're acting like I didn't address something you didn't bring up. Actual terms, mean in how the government is constructued. It means from the governships to the state legislatures to the distribution of seats within the house of representatives. There are more people that support progressive platforms naturally as more and more young people join the voter base, but given where people are distributed, those shifts are not realized. So from a functionalist perspective, the United States is center-right and it's something progressive politicians realize, even Pelosi who I have met on more than one occasion.

You just googled a random article to try to support your point. That is early evidence. However, there is some merit to that. Politicians do overestimate how conservative their populations are. Fair enough, but those same populations still elect them. On an issue by issue basis, we are more to the left than conventional wisdom says, but as an overarching ideology like I said, there is cognitive dissonance. Your report does nothing but confirm the thread I made last month (or two months ago) and it doesn't destroy my point.

No, I am not agreeing with you. I said functionally speaking, we are center-right. After the 2008 election, I thought we were now center-left, and for that brief moment, we were. Functionally. From a governing standpoint. There hasn't been a progressive agenda in America in over 30 years, you're right. Now why is that...

There was a progressive agenda in the 80s, and Democrats lost on it (obviously not cleanly given that machine of the right-wing). Bill Clinton's center-left movement was viewed as a god send. Part of his rise to promise was him showing that he would not be beholden to traditional progressive centers, he had to repudiate the Jesse Jacksons of the world. The American polity was not susceptible to the notion of "liberalism" and "progressivism" despite tacitly endorsing many progressive policies if they were isolated. Even now, we can't even properly address the poverty issue in the United States because most people consider themselves middle class even when they're not. You WERE there in that TLR thread last week where it was me and you arguing side by side about minimum wage against everyone, that right there, was America. That is what people are inundated with.

The issues are being framed, Democrats are just poor framers of arguments and their arguments cause people to go against what has become inserted into their psyche since inception. What I'm getting at with you is that individual support for policies often bumps against people's entelechy and the latter usually wins out. Some call it "generational entelechy." BUT I will give you this homie, D.C. does trail the country in progressivism on many issues. No question. I really don't get why you try to fight me on this stuff. It's not like I have any vested interest in the status quo, I left DC frustrated and not giving a fukk about politics.

Breh I said the NDAA and PATRIOT act were repeals of the 4th Amendment, not the drone program.

We can't have a serious discussion if you consider Nancy Pelosi to be a progressive politician and still unscientifically operate on the premise that America is a center right nation, without offering any proof other than your anecdotes!

I mean you rag on me for apparently not knowing anything about the American poltiical process but you're still adamant that even Joe Liebermann is or was a progressive? In what way? A progressive rating? A man who recently said they should cut social security and medicaid in order to fund future wars against Al Qaeda?

Joe Lieberman Says U.S. Should Cut Social Security To Pay For Fighting 'The Islamist Extremists' | ThinkProgress

That's someone you called a progressive. I think maybe YOU don't understand what a progressive is, if you keep lumping in Independents who supported McCain, and corporate democrats, and Obama, a self described BLUE DOG.

 

[No1]

Breh I said the NDAA and PATRIOT act were repeals of the 4th Amendment, not the drone program.

We can't have a serious discussion if you consider Nancy Pelosi to be a progressive politician and still unscientifically operate on the premise that America is a center right nation, without offering any proof other than your anecdotes!

I mean you rag on me for apparently not knowing anything about the American poltiical process but you're still adamant that even Joe Liebermann is or was a progressive? In what way? A progressive rating? A man who recently said they should cut social security and medicaid in order to fund future wars against Al Qaeda?

Joe Lieberman Says U.S. Should Cut Social Security To Pay For Fighting 'The Islamist Extremists' | ThinkProgress

That's someone you called a progressive. I think maybe YOU don't understand what a progressive is, if you keep lumping in Independents who supported McCain, and corporate democrats, and Obama, a self described BLUE DOG.

NDAA does not go at the 4th amendment. It goes at the 5th amendment, and the way your sentences were worded was towards a 5th amendment analysis. Read Ron Paul if you don't comprehend: The NDAA Repeals More Rights by Rep. Ron Paul -- Antiwar.com

Our problem is simple, you have idealistic notion of the pristine progressive and you want them to be that way regardless of the circumstances. That doesn't happen anywhere in the world. So let this be my last post on the subject because obviously you think that it's wise to continue arguments by googling random points to support your arguments instead of looking at a collective body. Obama called himself a blue dog in order to be electable. Use common sense. I really hope I do not have break down the entire schema of what type of candidate a black guy seeking win a nation-wide office has to be. He's more to the left than every single blue dog in congress.

The worst part is you attempting to school me. You think I don't know who Joe Lieberman is, you toss out stuff like progressive ratings because you have nothing to stand on but visceral reactions and quickly googled points that aren't well thought out. Joe Lieberman used to be a progressive. Sometime around 2008 he lost that and he got progressively worse. He has even joined a conservative think tank. I know who Joe Lieberman is, that doesn't change who he was. He was always hawkish on foreign policy but domestically he was never questioned as progressive 90% of the time until circa 2006. I can't believe you wasted time trying to draw out that point on what was basically irrelevant to the larger narrative.

But don't worry, I will not be partaking in these sort of discussions with you further, and it has nothing to do with your "mental ability" since apparently everyone is sensitive. It's stubbornness. Last post for me on the subject homie.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

NDAA does not go at the 4th amendment. It goes at the 5th amendment, and the way your sentences were worded was towards a 5th amendment analysis. Read Ron Paul if you don't comprehend: The NDAA Repeals More Rights by Rep. Ron Paul -- Antiwar.com

Our problem is simple, you have idealistic notion of the pristine progressive and you want them to be that way regardless of the circumstances. That doesn't happen anywhere in the world. So let this be my last post on the subject because obviously you think that it's wise to continue arguments by googling random points to support your arguments instead of looking at a collective body. Obama called himself a blue dog in order to be electable. Use common sense. I really hope I do not have break down the entire schema of what type of candidate a black guy seeking win a nation-wide office has to be. He's more to the left than every single blue dog in congress.

The worst part is you attempting to school me. You think I don't know who Joe Lieberman is, you toss out stuff like progressive ratings because you have nothing to stand on but visceral reactions and quickly googled points that aren't well thought out. Joe Lieberman used to be a progressive. Sometime around 2008 he lost that and he got progressively worse. He has even joined a conservative think tank. I know who Joe Lieberman is, that doesn't change who he was. He was always hawkish on foreign policy but domestically he was never questioned as progressive 90% of the time until circa 2006. I can't believe you wasted time trying to draw out that point on what was basically irrelevant to the larger narrative.

But don't worry, I will not be partaking in these sort of discussions with you further, and it has nothing to do with your "mental ability" since apparently everyone is sensitive. It's stubbornness. Last post for me on the subject homie.

This post reads like it came from someone anxious as fukk to establish a career within the Democratic party!