The level Obamaism has risen to....

[RadioRaheem84]

I was arguing with an avid Obama supporter about how his team has compromised the health care reform bill and left the power to still sit in the hands of the insurance companies. He went ballistic and insisted that Obama has a great amout of opposition, even among members of his own party. He said that the provisions regarding the 'public option' (itself a compromise on the single payer system Obama supported during his campaign) would (and should) probably be left out in order to ensure a victory for the next time reform comes up.
The level of defense this guy put on was astounding. He seemed like a really intelligent person too, conjuring up all sorts of 'big words' to propose that I didn't know what I was talking about criticizing the President like that. Apparently, It was arrogant of me to suggest that Obama keep his campaign promise and because I didn't have a solution for how Obama should convince the Blue Dogs and the GOP on the public option issue. It seems politics is all about compromise to him and that's what the Prez was doing, was compromising. Even he admitted that the bill was not enough to help all Americans get covered but he stuck by the compromise as the best solution thus far. He found my comparison to how the GOP acheived so much of their aims, even with an opposition in Congress, as lauding over "my way or the highway" politics.

Cheers to the Obama crowd, where total compromise is the way to govern.:thumbup1:

[Anton Neverov]

Well most Americans have banked on Obama for solving problems. And as they see that fade some leave others became fanatics. Kinda like Nazis.

[The Red Next Door]

He is being a pussy.

[Uncle Ho]

Consesus among the peoples of the earth is not a good thing, but we must never give up even a single step to the bourgeoisie and their political lapdogs, including President Obama.

Compromise effectively destroyed the Western left, reducing it to a bunch of neoliberal capitalists pretending to care about the proles they smash into dust, and we must not allow this to happen to ourselves.

The day we give even one step or one word to the fascists is the day we lose utterly.

[BorealStorm]

He is being a pussy.
I've never been fond of the idea of comparing a woman's reproductive organs to weakness or lack of ability to act like that.

Tell me you mean cat when you say that.

In other news, Obama is as moderate as I'd feared. I wish he'd act a little more different from a Authoritarian Right Republican. But as it stands, he's only a few steps different. Even as a Socialist I'd say that Ron Paul is several steps in a better direction than either Hillary or Barack.

Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader would have been a much better President.
As usual, we didn't have a very left choice this election and were stuck with moderates.
But even worse is the fact we have an inactive left moderate this time. I get the feeling Hillary would have even managed to do more change, and she's about exactly the same politically as Obama. Minus a few censorship and LGBT policies.

[Uncle Ho]

We had a choice, we always do, it's just Americans are so apathetic with regards to politics.

[Omegared]

I have had similar conversations with Obama supporters. I guess most of them are better of left in the dust of the past because many will find any and every excuse to defend his (in)actions. I do not know why many people insist on being so blind when he clearly is no different from the rest of the capitalist-class presidents of the past.

The idea of Obama or most other presidents of any country winning a noble peace prize is fucking joke!!!!!!!!!!!!

Expanding war = peace????? does not com-FUCKING-pute

[BorealStorm]

Oh, but indeed we did have a "choice" in the matter of we could have nominated and elected either Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader.
I'm saying we lefties didn't have much choice because of being surrounded by Apathetic Americans left us with not much choice but to vote for someone who wasn't going to get nominated or elected or vote for what we saw as the "lesser of two evils" in hopes we could sway the political scales in a slight way.

All the more proof that we need to get out our message more. And fight fervently against the Corporations that would have us and real left candidates silenced.
I'm getting pretty tired of an Independent party vote not effecting as much as it should.

[GPDP]

Sadly, the biggest problem isn't even Obama's opposition, his utter lack of a spine, or his deeply bourgeois worldview. I'll let you guess what's actually the worst of the current political situation in the states.

If you said "I'll take 'what is the lack of a strong, leftist, progressive movement,' Alex," you'd be correct.

Where are all the liberals who were out protesting Bush's wars and acts of brazen imperialism? They've since drank the Obama kool-aid, have donned suits and ties, and are out there preaching "compromise," "pragmatism," and "bipartisanship." When a Republican president is killing both the economy and helpless people around the third world, they are out there demanding his impeachment. But when a Democrat, and a highly marketable one at that, does the same shit, they are quick to drop their protest signs and instead surrender themselves to the forces of reaction and the weak knees of their party and its head, because god forbid they raise their voices against their Messiah of Hope and Change!

With the liberals and reformist progressives all but capitulated, and the revolutionary left weak and disorganized, the ground has been ceded almost completely to the lunatic far right, who use the extra space left to them by the spineless liberals to force even more concessions out of Obama and the Democrats (at least those not already squarely on the side of the status quo).

In a certain sense, Obama's presidency has turned out to be even more damning than a third Bush term. At least Bush had a sizable and mobilized opposition, one which has since dispersed or gone dormant or inactive out of fear of hurting their precious Democrats and their current rock star president.

[Revy]

I've never been fond of the idea of comparing a woman's reproductive organs to weakness or lack of ability to act like that.

Tell me you mean cat when you say that.


Well, it's just like the "****" debate. He could just deny the sexist nature of saying "pussy".

[BorealStorm]

Well, it's just like the "****" debate. He could just deny the sexist nature of saying "pussy".
I would love for him to try and do so. Though with explanation.
And somewhere other than this Obama thread.

**** I haven't understood as much. As far as I'm concerned it can certainly be seen as less sexist and at least more reclaimable than pussy. If you use the word **** wrong, it's very disparaging towards women. If used right, it's about the same as calling someone a cock or even better.

Pussy in this usage seems to strongly imply that "vagina = weakness and inferiority", whether meant that way or not. By the way I find it equally problematic and sexist to compare the penis to jerkish dominance by calling an overbearing jerk a "dick".

I don't find any word particularly offensive. But just about any word can be used offensively given the proper comparison or implication.

[Orange Juche]

(itself a compromise on the single payer system Obama supported during his campaign)

Obama didn't support single payer during his Presidential campaign. Years ago, before anyone really knew who he was, he was a vocal supporter. But in recent (and more relevant in his career) history, he stopped supporting it. So, he didn't fall through on a campaign promise here.

[Anaximander]

The deadlock of representative democracy. Bi-partisan.. with "two" (I'm reluctant to admit the Democrat/Republican dichotomy) parties the effective managers of the country, doesn't bi-partisanship amount to one party?

"Progressive" politics in America is weak. If the liberals do not "compromise," they would be selling out their entire vision of liberal capitalist democracy; the land of commodity enjoyment, where the workers and bosses are smiling, holding hands, all the way to the grave.

Fuck Obama.

[ZeroNowhere]

Indeed, those reactionaries are perhaps Obama's biggest allies. The crazier they act, the more reasonable and moderate Obama seems. This also helps liberals who struggle to oppose a sitting Dem president, a position that most would rather not take, primarily against a historical figure whose name adorns their rear bumpers. But it's still early. As the shit water rises, it'll be harder to ignore the stench. Then again, many liberals can convince themselves that overflowing sewers are beautiful fountains, so horrid conditions may be denied for ideological need, or blamed solely on the right, whose power and reach is so vast that it forces Democrats to act against their better nature.

You know the lyrics.Perrin called it.


In a certain sense, Obama's presidency has turned out to be even more damning than a third Bush term. At least Bush had a sizable and mobilized opposition, one which has since dispersed or gone dormant or inactive out of fear of hurting their precious Democrats and their current rock star president.The problem being that most of that sizable and mobilized opposition were Democrats, and anti-Republican-war rather than anti-war in general. So really, I'm not sure that them deciding not to protest is too much of a loss.

[Stranger Than Paradise]

Oh, but indeed we did have a "choice" in the matter of we could have nominated and elected either Dennis Kucinich or Ralph Nader.
I'm saying we lefties didn't have much choice because of being surrounded by Apathetic Americans left us with not much choice but to vote for someone who wasn't going to get nominated or elected or vote for what we saw as the "lesser of two evils" in hopes we could sway the political scales in a slight way.

All the more proof that we need to get out our message more. And fight fervently against the Corporations that would have us and real left candidates silenced.
I'm getting pretty tired of an Independent party vote not effecting as much as it should.

It's all the more proof that electoral politics are a sham. There is nothing to be gained by working within the bourgeois governments of our world. We must send the message out at every available turn that electoral politics is not the answer for our class. We cannot hope to change society through reform and we cannot allow our class to believe we can.

[Kukulofori]

Point out how insistent he was on the bailouts and economic stimulus, while not even caring about healthcare.

[RadioRaheem84]

Point out how insistent he was on the bailouts and economic stimulus, while not even caring about healthcare


I did. He said that was meaningless populist rhetoric. It was shifting the debate in his words. Apparently, it was brave enough of Obama to introduce such a progressive piece of legislation in front of a Democratic party with such a diverse set of beliefs. I am telling you this guy was razor sharp in his defense, as if he's been waiting to gnarl at any opponents of Obama. He never flinched in his defense. It was as if he was entitled to defend a man who was unfairly being criticized. Anytype attempt by Obama to actually ram legislation through would be brazen and GOP-ish ini his eyes. Any proposal for him to "grow some balls" is an approval of the Bush Administration's tactics.

I asked him, so in essense you don't believe a public option can truly be passed in the Senate and House? He said, no. And then I asked, do you really think Obama should have at least pushed for it? He said no knowing it couldn't and that its better he tried to compromise to make some sort of health care reform. Anything more would've been 'macho politics'.

[cb9's_unity]

Obama needs 50 votes. There are 60 democrats in senate. Tell him to do the math.

'Good' presidents don't make excuses, they just get shit done. Even with a democratic super-majority on his side he has effectively allowed the republicans control the debate. I understand that the blue-dogs need some conservative support in their states, but if Obama made a better argument for health care then all of this would be null and void.

[GPDP]

Obama needs 50 votes. There are 60 democrats in senate. Tell him to do the math.

'Good' presidents don't make excuses, they just get shit done. Even with a democratic super-majority on his side he has effectively allowed the republicans control the debate. I understand that the blue-dogs need some conservative support in their states, but if Obama made a better argument for health care then all of this would be null and void.

At some point, however, we need to get to the crux of the issue here: why exactly are Obama and the Democrats under-performing?

I believe there are three ways to look at the problem:

1. Obama and many of the Democrats mean well, but are under such intense assault by the Republicans, their right-wing base, and Big Business, that any effort for far-reaching change is hopeless, and thus we must settle for compromise.

2. Obama and some of the Democrats mean well, but they are merely naive and overly cautious, and place too much faith and emphasis on "bipartisanship" and slow, step-by-step reform, and thus lack the necessary spine to confront their opponents, which means we have to help push them towards more meaningful change ourselves.

3. Obama and most Democrats, save a minority of more progressive-minded individuals like Dennis Kucinich, are not only spineless, but indeed thoroughly bourgeois in their outlook, and have little if any semblance of a progressive outlook, which means if any change is to come, they have to be mercilessly forced by a militant mass movement to enact the necessary reforms.

I tend to lean towards the last option myself.

Not only can we not leave it to Obama to lead the movement towards reform, we can't even count on him to try. I don't believe for one second he's merely spineless - he's part of the fucking problem. He's an enemy that has to be shown we're not ready to give up and just accept mediocre reforms - we want fundamental structural changes, and we're willing to fight tooth and nail to get them.

And as revolutionaries, we, of course, should not stop there. The fight for reform is but one strategy on the always-present class war. And part of that war means confronting Obama at every turn.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Obama needs 50 votes. There are 60 democrats in senate. Tell him to do the math.

'Good' presidents don't make excuses, they just get shit done. Even with a democratic super-majority on his side he has effectively allowed the republicans control the debate. I understand that the blue-dogs need some conservative support in their states, but if Obama made a better argument for health care then all of this would be null and void.

Most democrats in the senate aren't liberals at all, but liberal conservatives. Also, they need 60 votes in order to derail any filibuster attempts, which would be made on any health care bill, and more than likely on this one if it makes it to a floor vote (which is not guaranteed).

This bill is weak as hell, but this is all you really should have expected. No sense in *****ing and moaning, at least it's something.

Note, Obama promised to get everyone insured, not single payer. This may very well be to the benefit of insurance companies since now you have to use one.

By the way, isn't it odd that healthcare is practically exempt from any antitrust legislation?