Gays are internet leftwing fringe according White House Official

[hotatlboi]

Oh goody, the return of one of the little group that likes to toss out personal insults against JUBers rather than discuss the words and actions of elected officials and public figures. Back to lowering the level of discourse here.

His post did not contain any personal insults, merely the suggestion as I stated that sometimes your posts are rather obsessive and nonsensical in their construction of Obama (particularly his intent for things).

 

[Apollo]

Could we find a happy medium between obsessive hero worship and obsessive demonization?

Unless he really is Hitler/Stalin like the wingnuts claim, that's likely where reality lies.

I thought he settled on obsessive demonization and intense hatred?

 

[NickCole]

Could we find a happy medium between obsessive hero worship and obsessive demonization?

Unless he really is Hitler/Stalin like the wingnuts claim, that's likely where reality lies.

You go ahead and find a happy medium or whatever makes you feel comfy today; I'm interested in truth, as I have been all along, and I'll let those chips fall where they may.

 

[hotatlboi]

I'm interested in truth

Perhaps it's overconfidence in your "ability" to divine truth by looking at someone then, lol.

 

[jackoroe]

Folks, stay on the topic and let's not get into calling names again.

 

[Kulindahr]

What will the history books have to say 10 years or 20 years down the line. Will he be held in the regards of FDR or will he be held in the regards of Carter (a so so president).

He doesn't even talk as well as FDR did, so my vote is he looks more like Carter -- when what we need is someone with FDR's drive and LBJ's balls, Reagan's ability to inspire, and Jefferson's dedication to individual liberty.

 

[palemale]

You go ahead and find a happy medium or whatever makes you feel comfy today; I'm interested in truth, as I have been all along, and I'll let those chips fall where they may.

Everyone needs to lighten up on Nick. He doesn't hate Obama, he just very accurately has pointed out that Obama seduced the Democratic primary electorate with a teleprompter and pretty words, then did the same to the electorate as a whole. He correctly points out that, had Obama not done this, Hillary Clinton would have been elected president, the skies would have opened up, celestial choirs would sing, we would by now have universal health care, would have repealed DADT/DOMA, ended hunger, cured cancer and have world piece. Stick to your guns, Nick, we are sorely in need of more prophets.

 

[NickCole]

Everyone needs to lighten up on Nick. He doesn't hate Obama, he just very accurately has pointed out that Obama seduced the Democratic primary electorate with a teleprompter and pretty words, then did the same to the electorate as a whole. He correctly points out that, had Obama not done this, Hillary Clinton would have been elected president, the skies would have opened up, celestial choirs would sing, we would by now have universal health care, would have repealed DADT/DOMA, ended hunger, cured cancer and have world piece. Stick to your guns, Nick, we are sorely in need of more prophets.

I have never said or implied any of that, but that kind of personal derision ridicule is an integral part of what Barack Obama uses and inspires his followers to use. It's insidious and destructive, and shows what a total lie the Hope and Change meme is. It's one of the elements that made it very clear to me that Obama would not be a President capable of positive change but, rather, would bring the country further down -- and that's what will happen by the time he's through. It's not possible to be this grautitously nasty towards critics and bring positive change. That kind of tearing down is simply not where building up comes from. And that's why the diminished state of our nation will be not only Obama's fault but also the fault of his supporters who behaved the same way.

 

[NickCole]

Anyone who followed the last admin. would get praise. Hell, Mc Cain would probably have gotten praise... But, Obama is about as progressive as Bill Clinton. It is a bit of a misnomer to say Obama Democrats and Clinton Democrats because there isn't much of a difference between the two. Obama is just a wee bit left of center. He is on where near as progressive as some other members of the party.

There's a world of difference between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Clinton was a "centrist," a ridiculous but necessary position he had to take because there was no other way for Democrats to retake the White House. Bill Clinton pulled together Democrats and we were a unified party; also he used his power to over-ride Republicans when he could, like with his 93 Omnibus Budget Reconcilation Act, and actually worked with Republicans like with welfare reform. Barack Obama is unprincipled, he's not liberal and he's not conservative and he sure as hell isn't progressive, he just does what he thinks will benefit him personally -- and he claims bipartisanship, pretends to work with Republicans when he doesn't need to, and then sends his surrogates to trash the Republican Party. And, further, Barack Obama divided the Democratic Party.

I don't think NickCole is divining anything. It based on observations. Voting present in the senate is fine and dandy, but as President voting Present is not an option. Voting present is not a direction . Yes, he helped the reputation abroad, but anyone would have who wasn't Bush II would have. As we are part of this it is hard to say. What will the history books have to say 10 years or 20 years down the line. Will he be held in the regards of FDR or will he be held in the regards of Carter (a so so president).

Obama will be regarded as neither an FDR nor a Carter. He hasn't the bold principled approach of FDR, nor the generosity and essential decency of Carter. Obama will leave the US and the Democratic Party divided and he will leave the messes he inherited even worse. The economy, the financial industry, health care, our infrastructure, he is making things worse with a toxic combination of neglect and weak or bad choices.

 

[hotatlboi]

Obama will leave the US and the Democratic Party divided and he will leave the messes he inherited even worse. The economy, the financial industry, health care, our infrastructure, he is making things worse with a toxic combination of neglect and weak or bad choices.

You are REALLY starting to sound like a right winger, trashing anything Obama has or might potentially do as necessarily wrong. Your prejudice against the man is truly blinding.

The economy is really the only one in that list that he has implemented ANY policy on yet.

None of us knows how things are going to turn out yet.

 

[Kulindahr]

I have never said or implied any of that, but that kind of personal derision ridicule is an integral part of what Barack Obama uses and inspires his followers to use. It's insidious and destructive, and shows what a total lie the Hope and Change meme is. It's one of the elements that made it very clear to me that Obama would not be a President capable of positive change but, rather, would bring the country further down -- and that's what will happen by the time he's through. It's not possible to be this grautitously nasty towards critics and bring positive change. That kind of tearing down is simply not where building up comes from. And that's why the diminished state of our nation will be not only Obama's fault but also the fault of his supporters who behaved the same way.

When has Obama been gratuitously nasty?

 

[palemale]

There's a world of difference between Bill Clinton and Barack Obama. Clinton was a "centrist," a ridiculous but necessary position he had to take because there was no other way for Democrats to retake the White House. Bill Clinton pulled together Democrats and we were a unified party; also he used his power to over-ride Republicans when he could, like with his 93 Omnibus Budget Reconcilation Act, and actually worked with Republicans like with welfare reform. Barack Obama is unprincipled, he's not liberal and he's not conservative and he sure as hell isn't progressive, he just does what he thinks will benefit him personally -- and he claims bipartisanship, pretends to work with Republicans when he doesn't need to, and then sends his surrogates to trash the Republican Party. And, further, Barack Obama divided the Democratic Party.

Under Clinton Democrats lost the House of Representatives for the first time in decades. Once Republicans took office, Clinton perfected "triangulation," not out of principle, but because it was good for him personally. The only major legislation he could get passed was legislation that fit in with the Republican agenda, e.g. welfare reform.

Clinton's economic policies are responsible in part for the economic mess we are in. He continued Reagan's policy of deregulating the economy, including repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

You say Obama is unprincipled. I would hazard a guess he isn't going to get a blow job in the white house from an intern young enough to be his daughter. He's unlikely to lie under oath about it. And tell me Nick, when he was governor, what principle was Clinton advancing when he signed the death warrant of a brain damaged man who asked the jailers to save the portions of his last meal because he wanted to finish it later?

I love how you say Clinton "had" to be centrist, but when Obama moves cautiously, you condemn his as unprincipled. You are so quick to condemn Obama supporters for being gratuitously nasty, when everything you write about Obama and his supporters is gratuitously nasty.

 

[NickCole]

You are REALLY starting to sound like a right winger,

That's because you think in terms of Right and Left, so my criticism of Obama and Congressional Democrats looks to you like ipso facto alliance with the Right. It's the if my enemies are your enemies we're on the same side way of thinking. All of which I reject. I stand for my principles, I belong to no clique and I own what I say.

You illustrate one of the big problems in Washington and, indeed, our nation today. And it's a problem that Obama said he was going to address and could conquer, but in truth he and his bot supporters (as opposed to those, fewer in number, who voted for Obama and expect him to do as he promised) feed the problem rather than heal it.

The Right doesn't matter at all right now. Democrats have the WH and a deciding majority in both House and Senate. The only meaningful conflict now is, as Glenn Greenwald wrote in his column I linked to yesterday, "between those whose overarching allegiance is to Obama and the Party as ends in themselves, and those who see those things as mere means to more important ends."

I've been waiting for today's level of Democratic power all my life. And I'm 53 years old. Now my party has it and, because of its leaders, it's failing to deliver the things Democrats have worked to achieve for decades. My criticizing those who fail to produce reforms and policy based in progressive principles that Democrats have stood for since before I was born does not make me sound like a right winger. But it is revealing that some Obama supporters think so.

 

[NickCole]

When has Obama been gratuitously nasty?

Man up and respond to my post #16 or don't bother asking me questions.

 

[palemale]

Man up and respond to my post #16 or don't bother asking me questions.

Is this what you consider polite and principled discourse?

 

[NickCole]

Under Clinton Democrats lost the House of Representatives for the first time in decades. Once Republicans took office, Clinton perfected "triangulation," not out of principle, but because it was good for him personally. The only major legislation he could get passed was legislation that fit in with the Republican agenda, e.g. welfare reform.

Clinton's economic policies are responsible in part for the economic mess we are in. He continued Reagan's policy of deregulating the economy, including repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act.

You say Obama is unprincipled. I would hazard a guess he isn't going to get a blow job in the white house from an intern young enough to be his daughter. He's unlikely to lie under oath about it. And tell me Nick, when he was governor, what principle was Clinton advancing when he signed the death warrant of a brain damaged man who asked the jailers to save the portions of his last meal because he wanted to finish it later?

Clinton stumbled plenty and I certainly criticized him when he was in office and did something that deserved it, but what's really behind crap like this from Obama supporters is the division Obama created in the Democratic Party. It's destructive as hell and you demonstrate it very well in these three paragraphs.

Objectively speaking, it's stunning that Obama Democrats are so eager to tear down the most successful Democratic President in our lifetime, who still could be a very powerful advocate for Democratic policies. You don't hear Republicans tearing down Reagan. This is the divisiveness and destructiveness that Obama and ObamaNation brought to the Democratic Party and ultimately to the nation.

I love how you say Clinton "had" to be centrist, but when Obama moves cautiously, you condemn his as unprincipled.

Clinton being centrist did not alter his principles, as evidenced by, among other things, his economic policy and environmental policy and the way he tried to reform health care (his failure at that was not that he gave in to conservatives and special interests the way Obama does).

And yes Clinton had to be centrist to get elected. I don't know how old you are or what you know of how it was before you were an adult, but in the 1980s and early 90s it looked absolutely impossible for Democrats to retake the White House. Following the miserable Carter years and high partying Reagan years, and the mincemeant Bush/Atwater/Ailes made of liberal Dukakis, we were looking to give our right arms for a viable Democratic candidate. Bill Clinton figured out the formula and it was "centrist." But he was and remains a principled Democrat while Obama is a narcissist who runs as a Democrat.

 

[palemale]

I'm 49 Nick. I've been in the political trenches since I'm a teenager, I have the scars to prove it. I've been involved in left-wing politics my whole adult life, and my career is activist, public interest. I've seen a lot of misery, and suffered terrible defeats, as well as gratifying victories. I never saw Obama as the messiah. I enthusiastically supported him, but cautioned people around me that, even if Obama got elected, progressives, unions, environmentalists, etc, would have to keep the pressure on. I'm not happy with everything he has done, but I've been disappointed enough by politicians, including by Bill and Hillary Clinton regarding struggles I've been involved with here in NYC while Hillary was Senator, to know that first and foremost, they respond to pressure only. The squeaky wheel gets the oil, after all.

It seems to me you were unable to put the bitterness of the primary campaign aside the way others on both sides have. I'm all for keeping Obama's feet to the fire, and criticizing him when necessary. I certainly would not do it in a way that gives ammunition to the right. I think we have to recognize that, since Clinton, the right-wing has become completely deranged and dangerous, and would rather leave the country ungovernable then see a democratic president succeed at anything.

 

[NickCole]

It seems to me you were unable to put the bitterness of the primary campaign aside the way others on both sides have. I'm all for keeping Obama's feet to the fire, and criticizing him when necessary. I certainly would not do it in a way that gives ammunition to the right. I think we have to recognize that, since Clinton, the right-wing has become completely deranged and dangerous, and would rather leave the country ungovernable then see a democratic president succeed at anything.

The right wing was like that during the Clinton presidency and in fact before then. If you're 49, a Democrat and have been as involved as you claim, you should know that. Obama and his supporters implied it was the Clinton's fault, that if Hillary were elected it would continue but if Obama were elected it would end. Now of course the tune is changed to convenience Obama's failures.

You and some other Obama supporters can continue to try to brand me as bitter or an Obama hater but the truth is in reality, and reality is showing that what I've said about Obama is true. Stay tuned, it will continue to unfold thus. Obama is failing at everything that isn't handed to him -- his unearned Nobel Peace Prize is so perfect for him -- for the reasons I've been making clear since the primaries. It has nothing to do with me, it has to do with the kind of man Obama is, his decision-making process and the choices he makes.

 

[naked gent]

Objectively speaking, it's stunning that Obama Democrats are so eager to tear down the most successful Democratic President in our lifetime, who still could be a very powerful advocate for Democratic policies. You don't hear Republicans tearing down Reagan. This is the divisiveness and destructiveness that Obama and ObamaNation brought to the Democratic Party and ultimately to the nation.

Nick other posters pointing out the double standard you use when judging Clinton vs. Obama does not constitute an eagerness on their part to tear down the 'most successful democratic president in our lifetimes' it only illustrates that Clinton can be made to look bad when viewed through the lens you use to view Obama's presidency.

 

[NickCole]

Nick other posters pointing out the double standard you use when judging Clinton vs. Obama does not constitute an eagerness on their part to tear down the 'most successful democratic president in our lifetimes' it only illustrates that Clinton can be made to look bad when viewed through the lens you use to view Obama's presidency.

The comparison is ridiculous.

Obama was elected with the biggest mandate Democrats have had since LBJ's landslide in 1964, he has a decisive House majority and a filibuster-proof Senate majority. And yet this Democratic president and his overwhelmingly Democratic Congress won't enact basic elements of the Democratic agenda.

And despite his power and continued popularity Obama caters to special interests and lobbyists, including Big PhRMA, and whines about Fox News and criticism from the left.


Another new, and typical, example of what Obama is doing with his Democratic majority power:

Ex-Lobbyist Confirmed to CFTC

Meet the newest addition to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. If you've been reading Mother Jones recently, then you already know quite a bit about [Republican] Scott O'Malia. Like the fact that he once worked as a top in-house lobbyist for an energy company, Mirant, that manipulated California's market Enron-style. Or that, while on this company's payroll, he lobbied against a bill to expand the CFTC's authority to police derivatives. Or that the Senate Agriculture Committee, which reviewed his nomination, declined to ask him any specific questions about his pro-deregulation lobbying on not one but two occasions. ... the Obama administration has succeeded in undermining its own agenda.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2009/10/ex-lobbyist-confirmed-cftc

Except, of course, ObamaCo isn't undermining its own agenda. Obama lied about his agenda, that's all.