Liberals Betrayed: What has Obama Done for the Liberal Who Elected Him?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by schizo, Mar 13, 2010.

  1. schizo

    schizo

    Seriously, I would openly embrace the lukewarm centrist "one for all, all for one" brand if it was about making real compromise among the two political factions. But the truth of the matter, as far as I can tell, is that this is just a convenience used by the incompetent politicians to opportunistically score points. Unfortunately, Obama is no exception to this rule. Going back to the healthcare reform, Obama merely outlined what he wanted included in the bill and shifted the responsibility solely on the shoulders of Congress, thereby removing himself almost completely from the decision process. It's no wonder there's a stalemate.

    It's this kind of lukewarm "let's wait and see" attitude that I and many liberals find worrisome to say the least. Be that as it may, I truly hope that he can deliver on his promises. I can tell you that Obama is a shrewd politician and he knows that he cannot abandon the liberal camp, for we are the only ones who will likely stay with him thick and thin. How he demonstrates himself in the coming months will prove crucial in my mind. I feel there will be a great commotion on the left if Obama continues to disregard the vow he has made with us.
     
    #21     Mar 13, 2010
  2. What exact policies/changes are you looking forward for him to tackle?
     
    #22     Mar 13, 2010
  3. A major part of the problem we see with the president, and other elected officials is the process of being elected requires a lot of money and support of the party.

    In order to get that money (assuming you are not wealthy enough to finance an entire campaign yourself) is to make promises to benefactors.

    If you look at Mitt Romney, he clearly had the money to go it alone, but he still looked to raise money from supporters to finance the campaign. In Romney's case, since he didn't fit the right wing republican profile, i.e. was not a Christian but a Mormon, the party didn't get behind him. Had Romney been a card carrying born again Christian...he might well be president today.

    What does that have to do with Obama? Obama had to make a lot of deals with supporters and party members to get the nomination and beat Hillary.

    Remember the super delegate nonsense, that even after Hillary started to beat Obama in some of the important states, the super delegates refused in many cases to support Hillary.

    So Obama made deals, made promises, and when he got elected he began to pay off those promises.

    The solution?

    Eliminate the two party system, or open up the system to multiple parties, change the laws to prevent lobbying before the election...essentially remove the corruptible element before the election so that when someone is elected, they only feel obligated to the American people...not the special interest groups that help them get elected.

    McCain would not have been any better, instead of health care we might be in a bigger war zone in the middle east, possibly with troops fighting in Iran...

     
    #23     Mar 13, 2010
  4. schizo

    schizo

    I'm not asking Obama to tackle a new set of challenges. Just follow through on the damn promises that were made to the voters on the campaign trail. After all, Obama gave a bold promise that, if elected, he would bring change to Washington and that the days of the business as usual would end.

    By "change", I would hazard to guess that it's a change from the Bush era. But what has happened since? He promised to close down Guantanamo and allow the trials for the prisoners to be held in the civilian courts. He has since back pedaled on that promise. Before becoming the POTUS, Obma blasted Bush for the illegal wiretapping. But as soon as he steps into the oval office, what happens? That's right, Obama's DOJ defends the same policy their boss once detested. Even the mission that he avidly undertook to secure Afghanistan is dubious. Just what is the real purpose of withdrawing troops from Iraq only to have them shipped to Afghanistan? Why are we there in the first place? Is it for the sake of nation-building as I think it is? Where does Osama bin Laden fits into all this? Obama seems to have forgotten why we got into Afghanistan in the first place.

    But the biggest ticket item that scored him the pass into the White House is his pledge to provide universal health coverage for all Americans. But what the hell has happened since? The public option is nowhere to be seen and we have a watered down version that is practically indistinguishable from the same garbage that we currently enjoy to the detriment of 46 million uninsured Americans (according to no other than the White House itself). Now the Chief Executive of this mighty nation is trying his hardest to pass this much compromised bill. I ask you: What for?

    As I already pointed out, Obama had full support of both the House and the Senate when he took office, enough to override the Republican filibuster. It's a completely different story now. Just what the hell exactly happened? He's given control back to the ragtag Republicans he beat in the election all in the name of bipartisanship by sitting back complacently and merely watching the damn bipartisan charade like an idiot. As a result, he ended up only empowering the right-wing faction while losing confidence from the left.

    On the day Obama was hailed in as the POTUS, he arrived on the scene with the bigger-than-life mantra of Hope and, well you guessed it, Change. I guess we're entitled to a second helping of Obama Kool Aid!
     
    #24     Mar 13, 2010
  5. jem

    jem

    it is not the republicans who got in his way -- its the kooky democrats and his lack experience at being a leader.

    there was a guy on this board who said he new obama. he predicted Obama could not make strong timely decisions. he said he liked to avoid making decisions by trying to build consensus.

    A better prediction could not have been made.

    leaders lead - obama has shown no leadership.
    he let pelosi and reid destroy his presidency so far. he should wise up.
     
    #25     Mar 13, 2010
  6. Ricter

    Ricter

    Bush got to act like he had those big balls because he was not in any substantive way opposed to the economic elite of this country. In other words, he was swimming downstream anyway. Obama is probably actually opposed to the concentration of power that is extracting wealth from the middle class, shrinking it, and growing the ranks of the poor, but he's been safely contained by that power.

    Those who believe this is all about socialism vs. capitalism are years out of date, capitalism has won, decisively, and has moved into a monopoly state. Don't let the seeming borders around this corporation or that government department fool you, they are non-existent to the wealthy.

    Lol, left vs. right, black vs. white, white vs. hispanic, working class vs. welfare poor, they're all dogs now, battling under the dinner table for scraps.
     
    #26     Mar 14, 2010
  7. This thread is just too damn funny.
     
    #27     Mar 14, 2010
  8. jem

    jem

    Obama looks like a lap dog who made promises to Wall Street, Hollywood, Reid and Pelosi.

    Change could have been made if he had the guts to do what is right.

    Capitalism is not winning - cronyism is winning.

    We need leadership with balls to to change that.
     
    #28     Mar 14, 2010


  9. Sorry to be so blunt, but that is the biggest load of crap I have read in a while...........capitalism has won?? LOL

    Mr. Obama has pushed forward the socialist/marxist cause 20 years in his first year........at this rate we will be Venezuela by July.
     
    #29     Mar 14, 2010
  10. Which corporations have had their power and influence reduced under Obama?

     
    #30     Mar 14, 2010