President Barack Obama/Vice-President Joe Biden Re-elected to 2nd Term Thread

[Teller]

In your world' date=' is it possible to want corporations to succeed while hating corporate personhood and the consolidation of corporate power?[/quote']

And profits. Don't forget profits.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

Hey h_h, I'm confused about something and maybe you can help out. A lot of liberals are mad at Obama because they feel that he ran as a liberal but he's not governing as one (which is utter nonsense). I know you voted for him too and are also mad at him. Do you think he ran as a centrist or even a conservatives but is governing as a liberal? Not trying to argue, I just legitimately don't get it.

Btw Bliz, sorry for bumping the Breitbaet thread with the Obama college video after you had already posted it in here. I just missed your post. My bad.

[Bliz]

Btw Bliz, sorry for bumping the Breitbaet thread with the Obama college video after you had already posted it in here. I just missed your post. My bad.

No worries, man.

I debated about which one to post it in, but figured it might come up in both.

[Teller]

Hey h_h, I'm confused about something and maybe you can help out. A lot of liberals are mad at Obama because they feel that he ran as a liberal but he's not governing as one (which is utter nonsense). I know you voted for him too and are also mad at him. Do you think he ran as a centrist or even a conservatives but is governing as a liberal? Not trying to argue, I just legitimately don't get it.

It's a fair question.

I try not to pigeon hole candidates as much as possible. Of course I do it, and we all do it to some extent, but I'm not the type to say "that guy's a liberal, so I won't even consider him." Nor do I say "this guy's a democrat, so he necessarily believes 'X.'"

My problems with this president are issue specific. Candidate Obama promised to do everything in his power to get us off ME oil. President Obama has done everything but. Candidate Obama promised tax credits for fathers paying child support. President Obama seems to have forgotten that. Candidate Obama promised no tax increases for anyone making less than $250,000. President Obama is going to fine me because my employer doesn't provide affordable health insurance.

Overall, I cast that (proxy) ballot because I was really struggling four years ago. It was the first time in my life I cast a "selfish" ballot. In most elections, I vote for the guy who I think is best for the country. This time I voted for the guy I thought would be best for me personally. It hasn't worked out that way. While this president has been stellar in his prosecution of the wars and terrorism, he's been an unmitigated disaster at home, IMHO.

But more to your point, it wouldn't be fair for me to criticize the president for "being a liberal." Anyone who did their research knew to expect that. It's the empty/broken promises that aggravate me.

FWIW, I'm not sure if most democrats are frustrated because he's not liberal enough. Most of the democrats in my circle are disappointed in his ability to rally his own troops on Capitol Hill, and accomplish much of anything. But that's anecdotal, and I'm sure you can speak to the "liberal enough" issue better than I.

[Stadium-Armory]

Solid Jobs Growth: 3 Times Is a Trend

When something happens once, it's a phenomenon. When something happens twice, it's a coincidence. When something happens three times, it's a trend. That's an old journalistic rule of thumb. And by that rule, February's employment report confirmed that we have a trend of decent employment growth.

The headline number showed that the economy created a net 227,000 jobs in February. When the economy began to create jobs in significant numbers, analysts frequently pointed out that a job creation rate of 150,000 per month was barely enough to keep up with population growth, and wasn't enough to make a dent in unemployment. Now we're finally getting that growth. February marked the third straight month in which payroll jobs rose by more than 200,000. Gains could be seen in a range of industries: professional and business services, manufacturing, and health care. The construction and retail trade sectors shed positions.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/daniel-gross/jobs-report-trend-meaningful-growth-emerges-141221947.html

[Jumbo]

Most of the democrats in my circle are disappointed in his ability to rally his own troops on Capitol Hill, and accomplish much of anything. But that's anecdotal, and I'm sure you can speak to the "liberal enough" issue better than I.

Good post, hh, and I think (my best analysis from all input of all types) is that it's even more the sense of passivity or "lack of leadership" in "rallying the troops" than even exactly how liberal he has or hasn't been in some cases. Don't get me wrong--many do feel that way too--that he hasn't been "left" enough, and you hear that in terms of keeping some of his promises and supporting the Patriot act/Gitmo and similar matters.

Forgetting the fact that I am not "as left" ideologically as Candidate Obama (I'll use your phrase), I am thinking that there's an image in the minds of many dems that when the GOP holds the cards they really get a lot of what they want and "**** the 'loyal opposition'" and the part of the country they represent (i.e.--"no compromise mindset'"), in a no-holds barred manner. Whereas when the dems hold most the cards, they more often fold like a cheap tent (I'm talking a perception here, not my personal take).

I think that's a lot of the disappointment regarding Obama and much of it, if so, is justified. However, it is also, IMO, that the GOP really has/had long been more skilled at wielding power like a club and organizing their base and getting team play from congress at state and national levels than the dems (perhaps until recently---jury still out). I think the GOP has also been/is more effective in "obstructionist" tactics than the dems.

I think many dems are mainly frustrated that they didn't get that "sense"of winning and being in charge the way GWB's admin seemed for the R's when the shoe was on the other foot.

[Teller]

Forgetting the fact that I am not "as left" ideologically as Candidate Obama (I'll use your phrase), I am thinking that there's an image in the minds of many dems that when the GOP holds the cards they really get a lot of what they want and "**** the 'loyal opposition'" and the part of the country they represent (i.e.--"no compromise mindset'"), in a no-holds barred manner. Whereas when the dems hold most the cards, they more often fold like a cheap tent (I'm talking a perception here, not my personal take).

Right. I fully admit that, of late, when republicans have been in charge, it's been a beat down. Their approach has been very heavy-handed, even as I perceive it. So I can understand, when the tables are turned, the desire of the democrat base to employ the same tactics.

To use an analogy, if the Cowboys blow us out for 3 or 4 years, breaking that streak with a one-point win is great. But as fans, we'd want to see those tables turned, and embarrass them in similar fashion. Tit-for-tat.

The president hasn't done that. No other president in my lifetime has had more (worldwide) political capital than President Obama. And fundamentally, what has he done with it? As far as I can tell, mostly piss off both sides of the aisle.

There was a ton of potential there; a chance for real sweeping change and reform. And while I admittedly wouldn't have agreed with a lot of it, it's definitely been a squandered opportunity, IMO. (See: Carlos Rogers dropping that late pick in Seattle.)

I think the GOP has also been/is more effective in "obstructionist" tactics than the dems.

I definitely agree with that. But I'm in no way, shape, or form, proud of it.

I think many dems are mainly frustrated that they didn't get that "sense"of winning and being in charge the way GWB's admin seemed for the R's when the shoe was on the other foot.

Right again. Though W squandered that in a completely different way. He became heavy-handed with US, and that's when many formerly loyal-to-a-fault conservatives (including myself) cast him off. You have to be one hell of a royal **** up to get the hog to even CONSIDER voting for a black liberal democrat.

[Larry]

To use an analogy, if the Cowboys blow us out for 3 or 4 years, breaking that streak with a one-point win is great. But as fans, we'd want to see those tables turned, and embarrass them in similar fashion. Tit-for-tat.

[Teller]

I've never smiled quite as big as I just did as a result of a Larry post in a political thread.

[Jumbo]

I've never smiled quite as big as I just did as a result of a Larry post in a political thread.

I really enjoyed that, too.

[Teller]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/national/the_bribe_to_silence_wright_io9jneobl3fUF0cb7LpcNM

If this is true -- and I admit the overwhelming majority of links out there are less than reputable -- this is slimy as hell.

[No Excuses]

That read like typical New York Post nonsense. Everything else I found online rerouted to NY Post.

[Larry]

Well, the story doesn't support the claim in the headline. (The title on the browser window. The headline that's actually on the page might fit.)

But it wouldn't surprise me. That some supporter would make such an offer, or that Obama himself would personally ask for "hey, can't you tone it down for six months?"

IMO, it's not like this is some story that's impossible to believe, or anything.

Edit:

I thought that the original pace title was "Obama tried to bribe . . . " But I look now, and it's "Obama team tried to bribe . . . "

Either it's been changed, or I misread it the first time.

[twa]

Sounds like normal politics to me....even tame

It's slimy to put oil on the water?

I've heard accusations of much worse about both camps

[BRAVEONAWARPATH]

If this is true -- and I admit the overwhelming majority of links out there are less than reputable -- this is slimy as hell.

It's possible but I have my doubts primarily due to Edward Klein. He has a track record....

For example:

Click on the link to read the rest.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201205130003

Even Fox Guests Say Ed Klein Isn't Credible -- So Why Can't The Network Stop Talking About His Book?

Let's begin with the obvious: Edward Klein, author of the forthcoming Obama biography The Amateur, lacks anything resembling credibility.

His last offering was coauthored with John LeBoutillier, previously seen pushing various birther claims and trying to build a Counter Clinton Library to push conspiracies like the former president's supposed role in dozens of murders. Their self-published book, The Obama Identity: A Novel (Or Is It?), depicts a CIA agent's fictional (but based on "real stuff") investigation into President Obama, which reveals him to be a Kenyan-born Muslim Manchurian candidate.

Before that, in his thinly sourced, factually deficient 2005 tome The Truth About Hillary Klein insinuated that Hillary Clinton is a lesbian who conceived her daughter Chelsea after being raped by Bill Clinton; the book was widely denounced even by conservatives. That one, Klein claimed, was not a novel.

None of this, however, kept right-wing publisher Regnery away from Klein's latest book, details of which are now being released. On Friday, The New York Post reported that the book claims that Bill Clinton sharply criticized President Obama and urged Hillary Clinton to seek the Oval Office "during a gathering in the ex-president's home office in Chappaqua last August that included longtime friends." Klein supposedly based the claim on interviews with two anonymous friends of the Clintons who attended the gathering. Spokesmen for both Clintons quickly shot down the report, with Bill Clinton's spokesman calling it the "totally false" ravings of "a known liar."

Klein is so radioactive that he taints anyone who pushes his work. But at Fox, no one is so radioactive that their claims can't be aired on the network, which currently employs LeBoutillier and 9/11 truther Andrew Napolitano, and features several hosts and contributors who have promoted birther conspiracies.

And so on Friday, the Fox spent no small amount of time promoting Klein's newest allegations, even as several of the network's conservative employees and guests explained that the author lacks "credibility," is telling a story that seems "too good to be true,"

[Larry]

Sounds like normal politics to me....even tame

It's slimy to put oil on the water?

I've heard accusations of much worse about both camps

Hillary would have had him killed.

(Yes, that was a joke.)

[deejaydana]

It's possible but I have my doubts primarily due to Edward Klein. He has a track record....

For example:

Click on the link to read the rest.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/201205130003

Ah yes the always honest Media Matters. The same group of journalists that take weekly meetings at the WH on what to do and what to write about.

[twa]

Hillary would have had him killed.

(Yes, that was a joke.)

I wouldn't want to be on her bad side

[Teller]

Sounds like normal politics to me....even tame

Let's ask John Edwards how paying people to keep quiet is working out.

Like I said, I don't know if this actually happend. Frankly, I have my doubts. I'm not about to give Wright ANY credibility, and the vast majority of the sources are highly slanted. Still, I stand by what I said. IF this is true, it's bad. Very, actually.

[twa]

Paying for silence is even enshrined in our legal system and falls below paying them to lie imo

but I assume all politicians are dirty

[88Comrade2000]

Besides pounding Romney, Obama should tell America just what he plans to do in his next 4 years.

[ABQCOWBOY]

I agree. The plan of attack I have seen most recently is to again charge the hill on raising taxes for those who make over 250K (Not 1 Million). Obviously, this is not a solution. That solves nothing at all really if the reported numbers associated with that are accurate.

I think it would help the Presidents position for re-election emphatically.

[Larry]

I agree. The plan of attack I have seen most recently is to again charge the hill on raising taxes for those who make over 250K (Not 1 Million). Obviously, this is not a solution. That solves nothing at all really if the reported numbers associated with that are accurate.

Jon Stewart, and the entire chorus of Republican spinmeisters fully agree with you.

World of Class Warfare - Warren Buffett vs. Wealthy Conservatives

World of Class Warfare - The Poor's Free Ride Is Over

[ABQCOWBOY]

Jon Stewart, and the entire chorus of Republican spinmeisters fully agree with you.

World of Class Warfare - Warren Buffett vs. Wealthy Conservatives

World of Class Warfare - The Poor's Free Ride Is Over

Yeah, he's a funny guy, not Obama, Stewart. However, the current plan to raise taxes on only 250K Million and Billionaires would raise something in the are of 85 Billion? We spend that in less then 2 weeks in this country. Yeah, still don't see it Larry. Once that increase is passed and the 85 Billion is raised and subsequently spent in like 8 or 10 days, what's the rest? Serious question. I don't really understand how that's going to solve the problem.

[Duckus]

Yeah, he's a funny guy, not Obama, Stewart. However, the current plan to raise taxes on only 250K Million and Billionaires would raise something in the are of 85 Billion? We spend that in less then 2 weeks in this country. Yeah, still don't see it Larry. Once that increase is passed and the 85 Billion is raised and subsequently spent in like 8 or 10 days, what's the rest? Serious question. I don't really understand how that's going to solve the problem.

Conservatives are desperately trying to cut Food Stamp programs in this country. For what reason? To save less than 2 billion dollars. We are cutting programs that feed the poorest people in the country to save 2 billion dollars to help solve our debt problem? Raising $85 billion is nothing, but cutting 2 billion will save the country . . . . . how does that work?