The Progressive Case Against Obama

[Mike Otherz]

What is Obama going to do for you?

Not on some "buy you a TV" shyt, but on some doing what you believe shyt? You just admitted he is going to fail on foreign policy. What is he going to pass on?

er, romney is way worse. i am impressed with obamas foreign policy so far, but on Israel /Iran, the last time he checked Israel, there was push back against him from his own side like Harry Reid. how the fk is Harry Reid siding with Israel over the President? i honestly think he has no choice, the Israel lobby is too powerful. If Obama stands up to Israel, dude would get crazy props from me.


plus a lot of obamas policies will get traction in the future. its bad that it takes time for policy to kick in like obama care, i wish it kicked in as soon as it passed, but it needs two more years.


i read that if healthcare was obamas big idea for his first term, the transition to green energy is the big idea for his second term.


look, dude aint perfect, i could pick a bunch of things i don't feel him on, but its naive to expect a perfect record. and its pathetic to try and punish dude by voting for romney which is really just cutting ya nose to spit ya face. u saw what happened with Bush, another so called moderate conservative. Romney is
gonna be Bush part 2 brehs. congress on the re[ublicn side is so far to the right, they gonna be dictating to dude.

 

[MeachTheMonster]

Op do you really think a third party candidate would could drastically change things if they were to get in office? If intelligence supports our current foreign policy, do you think a third party candidate would walk into office and just throw all of that out the window? If Obama has proven anything is that drastic change is very difficult. Obama has been held back from fulfilling a lot of his promises by politics and necessity. Economically things were way worse than we all thought when Obama took office, so a lot of his promised goals and policies were just unattainable, add that to a congress bent on blocking everything, and he's had a very hard time getting anything done. Same with foreign policy, it's easy to run around on the campagn trail talking about what you'd do differently, but when you sit down with real generals and advisors, and there's real lives on the line, it's not as easy to follow up on all those claims.

Overall I think Obama has done well. There are some valid criticisms, but his overall policy goals, and ideologies havn't changed. If you supported him 4 years ago, you have no reason not to support him now.

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

Op do you really think a third party candidate would could drastically change things if they were to get in office? If intelligence supports our current foreign policy, do you think a third party candidate would walk into office and just throw all of that out the window?

What the commander in chief says goes

If Obama has proven anything is that drastic change is very difficult. Obama has been held back from fulfilling a lot of his promises by politics and necessity.

Such as? What has he actually fought for that he couldn't get through? He wanted Obamacare he got Obamacare. He wanted out of Iraq we got out of Iraq. He wanted stimulus we got stimulus. Plus don't forget he had a Democratic congress when he got in office, and yes while the economy was bad it also presented a huge vacuum of power he could have used to push some FDR level shyt through. If he couldn't get shyt through then what makes you think he will get it through now?

Economically things were way worse than we all thought when Obama took office, so a lot of his promised goals and policies were just unattainable, add that to a congress bent on blocking everything, and he's had a very hard time getting anything done. Same with foreign policy, it's easy to run around on the campagn trail talking about what you'd do differently, but when you sit down with real generals and advisors, and there's real lives on the line, it's not as easy to follow up on all those claims.

FDR accomplished more under more dire constraints. Plus you keep tempering expectations + making excuses for dude's inability to execute. "The economy was bad" The economy is still bad. "Republicans blocked everything" Republicans will continue to block everything. Not to mention he has blocked some key progressive openings himself (the mortgage writedowns for example. Who gained from those being blocked???).

Overall I think Obama has done well. There are some valid criticisms, but his overall policy goals, and ideologies havn't changed. If you supported him 4 years ago, you have no reason not to support him now.

Obama has done well? By what metrics? What progressive causes/goals has he furthered/accomplished? What indications has he made that he will be able to overcome the obstacles that kept him from achieving his goals over the last 4 years? We have to stop enabling failure. That is not to say vote for Romney. But again. Democrats don't have a monopoly on progressivism.

 

[thekingsmen]

I wonder if many know of the law he signed in again this week...

How Progressive is this?

Obama Signs New Executive Order Expanding Homeland Security Mission In The U.S. | Pakalert Press

 

[No1]

She Agree That I'm Looney, you lost all credibility in this discussion the second you said that you hope Romney wins because you believe he will be better for business despite Obama being great for business and that not affecting the general populace at all. You're obviously one of those liberals who live in this either or world where you start defeating your own common sense.

You are a "progressive." Progressives do not buy the trickle down logic. Yet, you said you hope that Romney wins because you think that corporate profits will trickle down. I didn't even bother reading the article after I read you post that. You have no idea where you stand. VVD has it right, I'm so sick and tired of people on the left throwing hissy fits because every single thing they want doesn't happen at once. People on the left live in this imaginary world where one administration can come in and magically shift the country to the left. Obama could've pushed everything you said and it still would've gone nowhere. Democrats took over with a wide net that included Blue Dog Democrats who are basically moderate Republicans.

What made you believe that he had the political capital at any point? If Healthcare caused that much of a backlash, what do you think would happen if he pushed TRULY left policies? You can talk about political courage all you want, but that starts with the Congress because one guy can't push it all alone. A guy who had moderate policies held up by Congress is certainly going to be able to enact a far left agenda. Stop it.

We're still a generation away from a truly center-left United States.

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

She Agree That I'm Looney, you lost all credibility in this discussion the second you said that you hope Romney wins because you believe he will be better for business despite Obama being great for business and that not affecting the general populace at all. You're obviously one of those liberals who live in this either or world where you start defeating your own common sense.

You are a "progressive." Progressives do not buy the trickle down logic. Yet, you said you hope that Romney wins because you think that corporate profits will trickle down. I didn't even bother reading the article after I read you post that. You have no idea where you stand. VVD has it right, I'm so sick and tired of people on the left throwing hissy fits because every single thing they want doesn't happen at once. People on the left live in this imaginary world where one administration can come in and magically shift the country to the left. Obama could've pushed everything you said and it still would've gone nowhere. Democrats took over with a wide net that included Blue Dog Democrats who are basically moderate Republicans.

What made you believe that he had the political capital at any point? If Healthcare caused that much of a backlash, what do you think would happen if he pushed TRULY left policies? You can talk about political courage all you want, but that starts with the Congress because one guy can't push it all alone. A guy who had moderate policies held up by Congress is certainly going to be able to enact a far left agenda. Stop it.

We're still a generation away from a truly center-left United States.

Looney I haven't forgotten about your response btw. I'll respond later on.

 

[No1]

Looney I haven't forgotten about your response btw. I'll respond later on.

So why'd you respond to me lol?

 

[Dusty Bake Activate]

So why'd you respond to me lol?

I don't know man I'm multitasking.

 

[Type Username Here]

VVD has it right, I'm so sick and tired of people on the left throwing hissy fits because every single thing they want doesn't happen at once. People on the left live in this imaginary world where one administration can come in and magically shift the country to the left. Obama could've pushed everything you said and it still would've gone nowhere. Democrats took over with a wide net that included Blue Dog Democrats who are basically moderate Republicans.

Why does it have to be classified as a hissy fit?

Some of us find issues such as NDAA, killing American Citizens with a Presidential signature, indefinite detention, TSA, Raiding of Dispensaries, wall street lobbyists/former bigwigs in the cabinet, and tap dancing for the film and recording industries a sign of an ineffective leader.

Just because you don't feel those things are important, doesn't mean they aren't.

They are important to me and a lot of people on the left. It seemed to be VERY important to Democrats and the left when they were opposing Bush, including people on this board. Now we have to give a pass because he's better than the alternative?

No thank you.

 

[Nascimento]

I think they are legitimate. I also think they are great for the country. The black congressional caucus called shenanigans years ago, which was kind of a wake up call for me but of course they were dismissed. However, progressives? That was Obama's last bastion of ideological dominance, and now hes proven that he has no fukks to give about them or their ideas.

Its so bizarre that the right hadn't jumped on any of these points in their beef with dude. I mean, not really but you know what I mean. The right can't criticize dude's politics because he's actually helped further a lot of their causes. So they have to jump on things that "excite their base" to keep their constituents at bay and keep the dollars flowing.

I think these epiphanies happened too late for this election- but if dude gets re-elected, honestly I think the next 4 years will be a shyt show as far as our economy and foreign policy go, and much of the same disillusionment and anger folks had with the GOP after 8 yrs of Bush will be recharged and thrown at the Dems. We are getting into a realm of socioeconomic parameters where shyt is bad enough to make people look around and think, and I think people are beginning to realize the two big players are both no good for the country.

To keep it 110, Romney's a weasel and has no integrity, but then neither does Obama... however I do think Romney will be legitimately better for the economy in a way that's more equitable for society, so low key I am kind of hoping he takes it. I'm not voting for him or Obama, but I am kind of hoping he wins. He will be better for business which I am hoping will work in everyone's favor.

A voice of reason in HL in these election times, when this board has degenerated into a cheer-leading festival as if in anticipation of some sporting event, devoid of critical thought and worthwhile ideas. It's a complete circus, in perfect emulation of mainstream media.

American politics has been a duopoly for generations. The parties aren't interested in a free market of ideas. As evidenced in the tightly controlled and ridiculous Presidential debates where even the questions are lies. "The main issue of security for the United Sates is Iran..."

Nah, the main issue of security is the outright theft of all meaningful government and control of public discourse by oligarchical, corporate wealth. And the creation of the largest, enslaved incarceration population in world history.

how effectively campaigns manage to limit every discussion to the recitation of talking points, focus-grouped spin, and how effectively they manage to exclude new ideas and substantive arguments. But I digress.

I see intelligent and knowledgeable posters supporting Obama and frankly I find it baffling. Obama been ambivalent on civil rights issues, sucks up to big corporations, is continuing full steam ahead in all the unwinnable wars (terrorism, drugs), and couldn't give a shyt less about the plight of the common citizen. As is clarified in the article in the OP.

In defense of Obama, people say that he's been obstructed by the opposition. If he actually had a track record showing integrity then he could've credibly made this case to the voting public and probably retain their trust. But he doesn't, and he can't. This is one of the problems with politics today and it seems to be universal in Western democracies - that is, stand-up people of integrity with a real backbone are simply weeded out or become crooks as they advance in their careers.

This is not about naive idealism or unrealistic expectations. Tune out a bit from mainstream reporting and look at what's actually going on. Infrastructure and public services are crumbling throughout the nation, while the militarization process of police and law enforcement continues unabated. You have more or less obvious courses of action that need to be taken in public policy in a wide range of matters that are being left totally off the table, with no redeeming qualities or efforts to be found in a single instance of action taken by Obama and his administration.

Societies live, grow and die. They die because they become captive to an entrenched minority who games the social cultural political system and secures for itself some positive feedback loop that reinforces their power and permits them to write the rules of society to their personal, narrow advantage. Thenceforward, at every decision point, their local, short terms needs are serviced first and in the American case, almost exclusively. Obama has proven in his first term to be every bit a part of this mess.

The problem with the Democrats and the Republicans is that both parties are basically fascist: the government is right, the police are soldiers, and if you disagree you go to jail. Unless you run a big corporation; then you get to call the shots and command the fascist system.

When you have police officers with automatic weapons and grenades attacking civilian homes in your country, you know that the people in power probably do not represent you. When anti-aircraft missiles are considered to be part of providing Honduras with law enforcement assistance, you know that the minor differences between Democrats and Republicans are too small to really matter.

At this point it is comical to see people arguing about Romney vs Obama vs third party as if there is any real difference between the two first mentioned. In the ways that matter, Obama is neither a change for the better nor a lesser evil in any substantive sense. His presidency has shown him to be A) an incapable leader or B) dishonest. In my mind Americans have no time to waste by voting in favor of the status quo, and the sooner third parties grow into a force to be reckoned with the better off the country will be.

http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg

Now go ahead dismiss me as a low-information dummy.

 

[Darts]

FDR accomplished more under more dire constraints.

I truly hate when progressives bring this up...its like ignorance personified.


FDR in his first few years was blessed with a Congress that was more activist than him. Think about that for a sec...a Congress that actually wanted to do more reaching stuff than a president! FDR had to moderate and restrain his congress from going overboard...so it wasn't nothing for him to get most of what he wanted, because they wanted to do it anyway.

To put it in perspective its like if FDR wanted to get some carbon law passed...his congress would've tried to do a carbon tax and they would probably end up with a compromise cap and trade system.

Obviously the same can't be said with Obama and Congress at any point in his term (even the so called Dem majorities).

 

[TLR Is Mental Poison]

I truly hate when progressives bring this up...its like ignorance personified.


FDR in his first few years was blessed with a Congress that was more activist than him. Think about that for a sec...a Congress that actually wants to do more reaching stuff than a president! FDR had to moderate and restrain his congress from going overboard...so it wasn't nothing for him to get most of what he wanted, because they wanted to do it anyway.

To put it in perspective its like if FDR wanted to get some carbon law passed...his congress would've tried to do a carbon tax and they would probably end up with a compromise cap and trade system.

Obviously the same can't be said with Obama and Congress at any point in his term (even the so called Dem majorities).

1 Im not a progressive

2 fair enough.

 

[Type Username Here]

A voice of reason in HL in these election times, when this board has degenerated into a cheer-leading festival as if in anticipation of some sporting event, devoid of critical thought and worthwhile ideas. It's a complete circus, in perfect emulation of mainstream media.

American politics has been a duopoly for generations. The parties aren't interested in a free market of ideas. As evidenced in the tightly controlled and ridiculous Presidential debates where even the questions are lies. "The main issue of security for the United Sates is Iran..."

Nah, the main issue of security is the outright theft of all meaningful government and control of public discourse by oligarchical, corporate wealth. And the creation of the largest, enslaved incarceration population in world history.

how effectively campaigns manage to limit every discussion to the recitation of talking points, focus-grouped spin, and how effectively they manage to exclude new ideas and substantive arguments. But I digress.

I see intelligent and knowledgeable posters supporting Obama and frankly I find it baffling. Obama been ambivalent on civil rights issues, sucks up to big corporations, is continuing full steam ahead in all the unwinnable wars (terrorism, drugs), and couldn't give a shyt less about the plight of the common citizen. As is clarified in the article in the OP.

In defense of Obama, people say that he's been obstructed by the opposition. If he actually had a track record showing integrity then he could've credibly made this case to the voting public and probably retain their trust. But he doesn't, and he can't. This is one of the problems with politics today and it seems to be universal in Western democracies - that is, stand-up people of integrity with a real backbone are simply weeded out or become crooks as they advance in their careers.

This is not about naive idealism or unrealistic expectations. Tune out a bit from mainstream reporting and look at what's actually going on. Infrastructure and public services are crumbling throughout the nation, while the militarization process of police and law enforcement continues unabated. You have more or less obvious courses of action that need to be taken in public policy in a wide range of matters that are being left totally off the table, with no redeeming qualities or efforts to be found in a single instance of action taken by Obama and his administration.

Societies live, grow and die. They die because they become captive to an entrenched minority who games the social cultural political system and secures for itself some positive feedback loop that reinforces their power and permits them to write the rules of society to their personal, narrow advantage. Thenceforward, at every decision point, their local, short terms needs are serviced first and in the American case, almost exclusively. Obama has proven in his first term to be every bit a part of this mess.

The problem with the Democrats and the Republicans is that both parties are basically fascist: the government is right, the police are soldiers, and if you disagree you go to jail. Unless you run a big corporation; then you get to call the shots and command the fascist system.

When you have police officers with automatic weapons and grenades attacking civilian homes in your country, you know that the people in power probably do not represent you. When anti-aircraft missiles are considered to be part of providing Honduras with law enforcement assistance, you know that the minor differences between Democrats and Republicans are too small to really matter.

At this point it is comical to see people arguing about Romney vs Obama vs third party as if there is any real difference between the two first mentioned. In the ways that matter, Obama is neither a change for the better nor a lesser evil in any substantive sense. His presidency has shown him to be A) an incapable leader or B) dishonest. In my mind Americans have no time to waste by voting in favor of the status quo, and the sooner third parties grow into a force to be reckoned with the better off the country will be.

http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg

Now go ahead dismiss me as a low-information dummy.

Sweet mercy friend.

 

[Julius Skrrvin]

A voice of reason in HL in these election times, when this board has degenerated into a cheer-leading festival as if in anticipation of some sporting event, devoid of critical thought and worthwhile ideas. It's a complete circus, in perfect emulation of mainstream media.

American politics has been a duopoly for generations. The parties aren't interested in a free market of ideas. As evidenced in the tightly controlled and ridiculous Presidential debates where even the questions are lies. "The main issue of security for the United Sates is Iran..."

Nah, the main issue of security is the outright theft of all meaningful government and control of public discourse by oligarchical, corporate wealth. And the creation of the largest, enslaved incarceration population in world history.

how effectively campaigns manage to limit every discussion to the recitation of talking points, focus-grouped spin, and how effectively they manage to exclude new ideas and substantive arguments. But I digress.

I see intelligent and knowledgeable posters supporting Obama and frankly I find it baffling. Obama been ambivalent on civil rights issues, sucks up to big corporations, is continuing full steam ahead in all the unwinnable wars (terrorism, drugs), and couldn't give a shyt less about the plight of the common citizen. As is clarified in the article in the OP.

In defense of Obama, people say that he's been obstructed by the opposition. If he actually had a track record showing integrity then he could've credibly made this case to the voting public and probably retain their trust. But he doesn't, and he can't. This is one of the problems with politics today and it seems to be universal in Western democracies - that is, stand-up people of integrity with a real backbone are simply weeded out or become crooks as they advance in their careers.

This is not about naive idealism or unrealistic expectations. Tune out a bit from mainstream reporting and look at what's actually going on. Infrastructure and public services are crumbling throughout the nation, while the militarization process of police and law enforcement continues unabated. You have more or less obvious courses of action that need to be taken in public policy in a wide range of matters that are being left totally off the table, with no redeeming qualities or efforts to be found in a single instance of action taken by Obama and his administration.

Societies live, grow and die. They die because they become captive to an entrenched minority who games the social cultural political system and secures for itself some positive feedback loop that reinforces their power and permits them to write the rules of society to their personal, narrow advantage. Thenceforward, at every decision point, their local, short terms needs are serviced first and in the American case, almost exclusively. Obama has proven in his first term to be every bit a part of this mess.

The problem with the Democrats and the Republicans is that both parties are basically fascist: the government is right, the police are soldiers, and if you disagree you go to jail. Unless you run a big corporation; then you get to call the shots and command the fascist system.

When you have police officers with automatic weapons and grenades attacking civilian homes in your country, you know that the people in power probably do not represent you. When anti-aircraft missiles are considered to be part of providing Honduras with law enforcement assistance, you know that the minor differences between Democrats and Republicans are too small to really matter.

At this point it is comical to see people arguing about Romney vs Obama vs third party as if there is any real difference between the two first mentioned. In the ways that matter, Obama is neither a change for the better nor a lesser evil in any substantive sense. His presidency has shown him to be A) an incapable leader or B) dishonest. In my mind Americans have no time to waste by voting in favor of the status quo, and the sooner third parties grow into a force to be reckoned with the better off the country will be.

http://i.imgur.com/PVpFY.jpg

Now go ahead dismiss me as a low-information dummy.

It's true. I'm in a swing state so I'm voting for Rocky Anderson (show a little third party love), but pretty much the only reason I'm rooting for Obama is because he isn't Romney who I can't stand on any level.

Big douche, giant turd etc.

 

[Brown_Pride]

My questions would simply be
1. Why are we assuming that the lost savings should have come back (if it was indeed a bubble, doesn't that mean that the housing market is now priced at its true value?)
2. Why are we assuming that the corporate profits aren't inflated themselves

yeah that's some BS.
Basically they are saying the faux gains they made, the very ones that came toppling down nearly causing the country to go belly up, they want them back.

it's like being scammed by a Nigerian prince, getting your shyt taken, then demanding someone wire you the promised 1 million.

You know it was wrong in the first place, don't try to get slick and want it back...that's just ignorant.