Except for the fight for healthcare reform.
Except for the fight to get troops out of Iraq.
Except for the fight to create a consumer protection agency.

Nope. No fight at all in him.

Well, he is not belligerent and crude, but that doesn't mean he can't play the game against those who are.

SilentStrider: Except for the fight for healthcare reform.

Largely left to Congress with no visible action or guide from the White House.

SilentStrider: Except for the fight to get troops out of Iraq.

Yeah, because people were really fighting to keep the troops there.

SilentStrider: Except for the fight to create a consumer protection agency.

Left his first nominee dead in the water without any support.

SilentStrider: No fight at all in him.

There isn't much. And he's lost my vote permanently for the NDAA. That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat.

Colbert 2012.

SilentStrider: Except for the fight for healthcare reform.
Except for the fight to get troops out of Iraq.
Nope. No fight at all in him.

Did you mean to adhere to the Bush timetable to get us out of Iraq?

Or did you mean signing the bill that would give the government authority to lock yourass in jail indefinitely?

He has plenty of stomach for a fight, he just seems to understand that some fights aren't worth fighting.

If I lived in a swing state I'd vote for Obama because the GOP is still worse. Luckily I live in California, so I might as well do a 3rd party protest vote.

/Obama did do good things, but did some really bad shiat too.

GAT_00: Largely left to Congress with no visible action or guide from the White House.

and was passed.

: Yeah, because people were really fighting to keep the troops there.

been paying attention to the GOP debates? Didn't Perry say he wanted to send troops back?

Left his first nominee dead in the water without any support.

and she's now running for senate, with a decent chance at winning and turning a red seat blue.

NDAA. That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers.

ok that I won't try to defend.

GAT_00: That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat

So what would you have him do? Veto it and have it overridden? I disagree with it as much as everyone else, but there was no way he was going to prevent it from becoming law.

SilentStrider: and was passed.

As a half-assed POS, which I and many other people think could have been a little less half-assed or POS if the White House had used more political capital.

SilentStrider: been paying attention to the GOP debates? Didn't Perry say he wanted to send troops back?

Because Rick Perry has *so* much power, he dropped out of the race today.

SilentStrider: and she's now running for senate, with a decent chance at winning and turning a red seat blue.

She's having to run for Senate because the job she'd be great at was denied because the President wouldn't lift a finger for her.

GAT_00: As a half-assed POS, which I and many other people think could have been a little less half-assed or POS if the White House had used more political capital.

capital they didn't really have. Remember what happened when Clinton tried to push too far too fast?

Because Rick Perry has *so* much power, he dropped out of the race today.

And was in the race at the time he said it. And I'm sure he's not the only one in the republican party thinking it.

She's having to run for Senate because the job she'd be great at was denied because the President wouldn't lift a finger for her.

and you don't think she'd be more powerful in the senate?

cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat

So what would you have him do? Veto it and have it overridden? I disagree with it as much as everyone else, but there was no way he was going to prevent it from becoming law.

How is that even a question? Of course the thing should have been vetoed. The President said himself that he has serious reservations about it. He's just too chicken to actually fight against it.

SilentStrider: Remember what happened when Clinton tried to push too far too fast?

HCR took over a year to pass. If it had gone any faster, we'd have reached molasses speed.

SilentStrider: And I'm sure he's not the only one in the republican party thinking it.

None of the rest of them said it. We have a Republican House that fights the President over everything they can. I'm pretty sure they'd fight him if he gave them a gigantic cookie, biatching about the cost. They didn't fight for Iraq to continue. That says volumes.

SilentStrider: and you don't think she'd be more powerful in the senate?

As one in a 100 in a body where 60 are required to do anything? Not for a second.

Given the GOP field today, he won't need to fight much anyway.

GAT_00: cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat

So what would you have him do? Veto it and have it overridden? I disagree with it as much as everyone else, but there was no way he was going to prevent it from becoming law.

How is that even a question? Of course the thing should have been vetoed. The President said himself that he has serious reservations about it. He's just too chicken to actually fight against it.

How is that a fight against it? The damn thing passed like 91-9. Then the Republicans can use the fact that he vetoed a Defense bill against him in the election, and they get their bill passed anyway. It's a lose-lose situation.

Grand_Moff_Joseph: Given the GOP field today, he won't need to fight much anyway.

THIS.

Rule 1: when your opponent is forming a circular firing squad, there's no need to step in and offer pointers.

/off to see what gary johnson's been up to

cameroncrazy1984: It's a lose-lose situation.

Ah yes, this sounds familiar. The majority want it, so the minority is clearly in the wrong. Never mind the damn thing is illegal as hell. Never mind it will allow the indefinite detention of American citizens. He'd lose the vote so he should sign it into law.

Seriously? This is what you call a defense? This is absolutely absurd. I hope to hell you don't actually believe that. And if you do, and you support him for doing this, you've proven better than I ever could why I shouldn't support the President for a second term.

Any more apologists around? There's plenty of you around here who think the President actually fights for things. God forbid what you'd call it if he actually fought for something. I'm guessing irrationally partisan.

Obama hasn't even begun to campaign yet.

Someone's just looking to generate page views.

GAT_00: Left his first nominee dead in the water without any support.about to become a senator.

She'll be fine.

make me some tea: Obama hasn't even begun to campaign yet.

Someone's just looking to generate page views.

That is technically incorrect, as he has declared his intentions to run again and participated in primaries. I am aware that's not the point you're making, but by definition he is campaigning.

SilentStrider: Except for the fight for healthcare reform.
Except for the fight to get troops out of Iraq.
Except for the fight to create a consumer protection agency.

Nope. No fight at all in him.

These things I will acknowledge he did well. Though I'm very critical of Obama, I'm not going to give him sh*t for doing health care first, or how the bill came out. Social change never occurs over night in America, and in time we may move towards a single-payer system.

However, this part was a dealbreaker for me:

Former admirers say he was too weak on the banks, failing to declare war on those who had caused the 2008 crash. The clues were there in his senior appointments. While some liberals had fantasised about a dream ticket of Nobel laureate Paul Krugman and former labour secretary Robert Reich, Obama filled his two key economic posts with Larry Summers and Timothy Geithner, both schooled by Robert Rubin, former co-chair of Goldman Sachs. Obama did legislate on financial reform, but the bill did not go far enough, with no restoration of the Depression-era Glass-Steagall act, which had previously separated casino and retail banking. Nor was there any action to cap the pay of top executives, even in companies majority-owned by the US government. It's not that Obama fought and lost on these issues. In most cases, he did not even fight.

Obama defenders, PLEASE explain to me how anyone who calls himself a liberal can justify such an economic team. There's no intransigent Republican party to blame for this. He assembled his own cabinet. All of his chiefs of staff have ties to Goldman and Wall Street. Why why why?

what_now: GAT_00: Left his first nominee dead in the water without any support.about to become a senator.

She'll be fine.

Do you or do you not think she would have been more powerful and effective as the CPB head? Your boy and his truck would have been challenged no matter what, and the state party would know damn well to put a real live person up this time if she hadn't decided to run.

Obama defenders, PLEASE explain to me how anyone who calls himself a liberal can justify such an economic team. There's no intransigent Republican party to blame for this. He assembled his own cabinet. All of his chiefs of staff have ties to Goldman and Wall Street. Why why why?

Best I can come up with is he's in over his head, and listening to people he shouldn't.

Maybe he figures it out. We're still pretty much stuck with it unless you want to trust Romney.

cameroncrazy1984: How is that a fight against it? The damn thing passed like 91-9. Then the Republicans can use the fact that he vetoed a Defense bill against him in the election, and they get their bill passed anyway. It's a lose-lose situation.

Or, he could have held a press conference, said something to the effect of, "This piece of legislation is deeply un-American and unpatriotic. It would allow your government to do x, y, and z to Americans on American soil. It violates the constitution in this way yada yada yada. Contact your congressperson with your outrage." And THEN he could have vetoed it.

I have realized that Obama is simply not very left- he is has some fundamental liberal values but on certain issues he is a moderate, if not a moderate Republican. Fine. But don't expect liberals to vote for him then. He also is not a fighter in the vein of FDR. For all we want him to be a bully, he WILL NEVER BE THAT WAY. As a long-distance runner, he has his eyes far in the future. Maybe that's a good strategy for middle-of-the-road policies that don't much change the underlying problems in our socio-economic and political structures. Okay, but I don't get all the butthurt launched at liberals who are critical him. Are we supposed to bow down and vote for him just because he's not derpy like the rest of the field?

GAT_00: She's having to run for Senate because the job she'd be great at was denied because the President wouldn't lift a finger for her.

You don't know a damn thing about what your talkign about. The GOP simply shut down the process.

It wasn't just Elizabeth Warren. It wasn't just the his technology people. It wasn't just transportation.

Let me tell you a story:

Obama's nominee to be the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Health (the guy who is in charge of all military hospitals) was a four star general, a Dean of a major medical school, and a vascular surgeon. This is a man who set up field hospitals in Iraq, Haiti and Kosovo. He was named one of the top surgeons in the country.

They held his nomination up for MONTHS.
This is what they did to a totally non partisan position, to an incredibly qualified man.

why? Because fark Obama. That's why.

And you're annoyed that he didn't get a woman who has them pissing themselves in fear nominated to an agency that has them terrified?

Before he pulled her name, the Massachusetts Democratic party told her she would win. And she will, and she will much more powerful

what_now

Yeah, on the whole Elizabeth Warren and appointments issue I am completely Team Obama. The Republicans have been utter dickwands on the issue of voting on nominations. There really was nothing Obama could have done about that. I'm kind of glad she's running for the Senate now. It may propel her to bigger and better things and lord knows we need more liberals like her, Bernie Sanders, Russ Feingold, etc.- who are very progressive and incorruptible, but can also connect with people on a fundamental level.

The only ones who are disappointed are the far left and the so called progressives. The rest of us actually listened to him when he said he was a moderate.

As many pointed out, his first batch of legislation was indeed historic. It's actually the envy of his two predecessors.

1) Ending of DADT
2) Economic plan that is SLOWLY getting America on the road to recovery
3) Cut spending (with help from congress)
4) Lowered taxes
5) Changing tactics on hunt for OBL thus killing him
6) Attempting to close GITMO
7) Ending torture as an intelligence method.
8) Helped our NATO allies protect Lybian citizens resulting in overthrow of Qaddafi

GAT_00: Do you or do you not think she would have been more powerful and effective as the CPB head? Your boy and his truck would have been challenged no matter what, and the state party would know damn well to put a real live person up this time if she hadn't decided to run.

Her hand picked deputy is running the CPB. But you're missing the point, the Consumer Protection Bureau Exists!!

This is a huuuuge step forward. Elizabeth Warren is not the only person who could have run that.

However, she's probably the only person who could have beaten Brown, because he has a TON of money, and he's done absolutely nothing, so he doesn't have a record to run against.

My congressman may have run, but he's a bad politician (good congressman). There was no one else that could have taken Brown and the GOP machine in this state.

eddyatwork: I'll say it right out. Obama is a pussy. He keeps trying to act like a peacemaker and negotiate with the republicans when they've made it blindingly obvious that they aren't about to work with him. Hell, they were willing to shut the whole farking country down and trash the economy rather than budge on their views and he still tries to pander to them.

If I were Obama, I'd have a good old time showing the republicans what obstructionism really means. Any bill with a republican's name on it would be automatically vetoed without reading. The republicans are so fond of blocking things, I'd happily give them a taste of their own medicine.

For a long time I thought it was a strategy Obama played at trying to negotiate, be cool, try to seek a middle way at all times, etc. Now I realize that that is just his personality. Whenever he gets "fiery" you can tell he is uncomfortable with the persona. It's just not in him. We think politicians are completely empty suits, but they're not. They have their own traits and tics and peccadilloes.

coco ebert: Okay, but I don't get all the butthurt launched at liberals who are critical him.

They want the left to be in lockstep exactly the same way the right is, so they can counter more effectively when they mock the right for marching in lockstep. FWIW, I'm fairly convinced based on cameron's irrational insistence that everyone on the left support everything Obama does that he is DNC of some kind or another.

what_now: And you're annoyed that he didn't get a woman who has them pissing themselves in fear nominated to an agency that has them terrified?

He said he wouldn't make a recess appointment for her.

cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: cameroncrazy1984: GAT_00: That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat

So what would you have him do? Veto it and have it overridden? I disagree with it as much as everyone else, but there was no way he was going to prevent it from becoming law.

How is that even a question? Of course the thing should have been vetoed. The President said himself that he has serious reservations about it. He's just too chicken to actually fight against it.

How is that a fight against it? The damn thing passed like 91-9. Then the Republicans can use the fact that he vetoed a Defense bill against him in the election, and they get their bill passed anyway. It's a lose-lose situation.

Not to mention that it expires next year

Darth_Lukecash: The only ones who are disappointed are the far left and the so called progressives. The rest of us actually listened to him when he said he was a moderate.

About time this one showed up. It also doesn't address the topic at all: that he doesn't fight for positions.

SnakeLee: Not to mention that it expires next year

Because just like the Patriot Act, we're certain a future Congress will kill it.

Darth_Lukecash: The only ones who are disappointed are the far left and the so called progressives. The rest of us actually listened to him when he said he was a moderate.

I think that's both true and not. On the campaign trail he was very moderate on some things and much more progressive on others. I don't think it's fair to say that we should have known he'd fill his economic team with neoliberal, pro-Wall Street advisers, or that he would sign something like the NDAA.

GAT_00: He said he wouldn't make a recess appointment for her.

They refused to recess!!

He would have had to wait till RIGHT NOW to get her appointed. And that means she would have missed the filing deadline in Massachusetts. Stop. You cannot have her. She's OURS.

GAT_00: They want the left to be in lockstep exactly the same way the right is, so they can counter more effectively when they mock the right for marching in lockstep. FWIW, I'm fairly convinced based on cameron's irrational insistence that everyone on the left support everything Obama does that he is DNC of some kind or another.

I'm just starting to think that as a social democrat or democratic socialist, I am just too far to the left for American politics and that there is no place for me. That's fine, I guess. I still love following American politics but I feel very isolated in terms of how I view the role of government, equality, and justice.

what_now: GAT_00: He said he wouldn't make a recess appointment for her.

They refused to recess!!

He would have had to wait till RIGHT NOW to get her appointed. And that means she would have missed the filing deadline in Massachusetts. Stop. You cannot have her. She's OURS.

He openly refused to do anything for her. Please don't pretend he fought for her.

coco ebert: I'm just starting to think that as a social democrat or democratic socialist, I am just too far to the left for American politics and that there is no place for me.

I'm probably to the left of you. Someone still needs to articulate the left flank, or it just goes away altogether and we shift even further right.

GAT_00:

There isn't much. And he's lost my vote permanently for the NDAA. That little signing statement has no effect and no ability to prevent a future President or even himself from using it's powers. No more. I will NOT vote to continue this shiat.

Colbert 2012.

So you'd prefer that funding to the troops get cut off during a war?

And have you read that portion of the Bill?

Darth_Lukecash: So you'd prefer that funding to the troops get cut off during a war?

To keep American citizens from being to be detained without reason? The kind of thing people say all the time Americans fight to protect? Absolutely.

GAT_00: I'm probably to the left of you. Someone still needs to articulate the left flank, or it just goes away altogether and we shift even further right.

I'm reading a lot of labor history in the U.S. these days for my research and I really start to get down thinking about what's going on with working people in this day and age. I just hope Occupy Wall Street and other offshoots can keep the pressure up and turn this into a real social movement.

ooooooooo they are turning on each other.

*throws a porterhouse on the floor*

Obama is alright. He kept some things I like from the prior administration, but he also kept most the bad things too. And he is just as bought.

Someone sounds concerned

Sorry man. Obama could be throwing kittens and orphans into a woodchipper every day, and he would still come out looking more sane and less evil than the current crop of Republican candidates.