the backlash on Obama is based mostly on lies and fairy tales dreamed up by the likes of Fox, Limbaugh, tea baggers and World Nutz daily.

Sadly therefore when the left criticizes Obama for legitimate purposes (Larry Summers comes to mind) they get thrown in with the RW crazies for being critical.

When the "far left" uses the RW lunatic's same talking points, yes, they will get thrown in with the RW crazies.

There are many examples here on DU where these folks were certain that -

Last edited Sun Sep 15, 2013, 12:31 PM - Edit history (1)

being used on sites like Red State dot com.. et al; ,,,, Sometimes i wonder how "pure" their credentials really are! .

and the bill went to Obama and there were actually posts indicating he would not sign it!

The left should continue to feel free to criticize Obama, but in more nuanced, diplomatic and (dare I say it?) even respectful ways that don't serve the interests of the right wing. That isn't because people shouldn't ever be angry; it's about not undermining your own cause by letting your voice be appropriated. There are many legitimate ways to register disapproval and propose alternatives that don't also undermine the one essential guy now keeping the barbarians outside the gate.

Does Obama gyrate toward compromise and "New Democrat" positions? Yeah. Should people protest in mryiad ways? Of course. Should they allow themselves to become tools of those representing repressive interests? Nope.

Obama may be imperfect and unsatisfying, but he's not the enemy. Treating him like one only helps to ensure a never-ending parade of our true enemies taking more control over this country. In war, it is euphemistically called "collateral damage." Killing Obama politically is exactly the wrong approach. So don't get mad, and don't seek to get even; instead, get a move on.

We do not believe this President to be "unsatifying.

The mission of the Barack Obama Group is to discuss information and news about the life, career, accomplishments, and presidency of Barack Obama; to provide a haven for those members of Democratic Underground who support the president and his policies; to discuss President Obama's policy positions, speeches, interviews, and other public appearances; to discuss President Obama's political campaigns; and to discuss the causes which President Obama has championed, including health care reform and ending the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Those who have a generally negative view of President Obama and his administration, support his defeat in the 2012 presidential election (in primaries or the general election), or who are generally supportive of those who do, are not welcome in the Barack Obama Group.

Please post your thoughts in GD.

Obama didn't steal a presidency, twice
Obama didn't fuck over the federal judicial selection system
Obama didn't tank our economy
Obama didn't let 4,000 people die in a terrorist attack on our soil
Obama didn't fuck up recovery for a major American city after a hurricane.

Let the screeching begin.



Sid

We support the President and his policies here. if this offends you, please take your comments to general discussion. Thank you.

He doesn't stick around for debate and discussion. He doesn't engage. He posts and runs to scoop up his advertising hits. Note how despite the time that has passed, he has not made a single reply in this thread, let alone any reply of substance.

P.S. He isn't always supportive of the president.

P.P.S. Personally, I think Obama is a great President, especially considering the ridiculous, relentless obstructionism of the Republicans.

I have talked to him. that was written at a difficult time in his life. he has since matured and has decided to support the President one hundred percent. Now, I'm not a host or moderator but i do know how to grab a hold of one when I need to. It's great that you respect the President, cool but don't judge the owner of the blog. he's a cool guy when you sit down and talk to him.

Same people who praised Putin's op-ed and encouraged all to read it despite where it came from.

people will not reject this essay. This is the BOG. If you wish to talk negatively about the President, take it to general discussion.

which is the opposite of your OP thesis statement (and title); in my opinion.

Last edited Sun Sep 15, 2013, 06:48 PM - Edit history (1)

No matter what happens, I always have faith that he's doing the right thing, which might take longer sometimes, but he gets there.

Let's all wish him luck on the debt-ceiling-budget fight coming up...

....and now I see that they're simply extremely unhappy with everything. Sad.

they have a very shallow interpretation of sameness.

The perpetually outraged will always find something to moan about.

Sid

they are unhappy with ANY government....many are Anarchists and that explains that! (some even proudly proclaim it).

or that the left is involved in a self-interested position to "keep the money rolling in". What money?

On the other hand, there is some basis for the argument. I think rather that the inability to support Obama or effectively work within the government is a symptom of "permanent minority" status. That was pretty well solidified during the bush years. When a faction or an individual has no power or responsibility, it is free to form its ideologies and worldviews without the need to ever work out or live with the consequences.

For instance, letting the banks and corporations fail was one desire of the left during the big recession. They could justify that by looking at the roles of some banks in creating the problem, and then that their failure would be just reward. But what would be the consequences? GM and Chrysler and several other US corporations would have been bankrupted. Their employees (union and otherwise) would have joined the unemployment lines. The void would have been filled by foreign manufacture. On the banking side, what would a complete financial meltdown look like, versus one that was turned around quickly by the stimulus programs? What was the real bottom for our economy in free-all? For the vast majority of people, it would be much worse than the slow recovery that we have had. Obama, in a position of responsibility, never had the luxury of advocating for "just let them fail".

I think of it as the difference between the freedoms of powerlessness and the responsibilities of good government. One can freely believe all sorts of absurd and ineffective things if one never has to implement them and live with the consequences.

Things could be better, especially if we had a congress that was in any way effective, but that itself is the result of the choices of people at the voting booths. Powerlessness breeds and spreads malaise and discontent (a habit of both the left and the right), both of which lead to poor voter turnouts and (in practice) more republicans in congress. The antidote is education, which the left has been particularly poor at providing.

I truly loved this OP, as it explains a lot of the frustration I have with certain factions. I still remember being in Florida, having Nader voters yell at me after elections day, because they had heard the folks on right wing talk Radio brag about how they used the Naderites to make sure Gore Lost. Of course, their yelling at me was pre-emptive, even though I was holding back my "are you happy now" speech. As a note, I have heard all versions of the "Nader did not cost Gore the election" speech, and I will not ignore the simple math. Yes, a third party vote may be just fine in California, but as a resident of that one swing state, I KNOW I cannot treat voting as a game.

So when Obama turned out to be less leftish, I held my breath. After all, a lot of the Socialists still hate FDR with a passion, because he "saved capitalism" rather than let it die so that we could have that Fourth Communist International Comrade Trotsky promised us. Social Security was slammed as not being strong enough, yet it matured, so I was willing to see if ACA would bear the same fruit.

HOWEVER, the problem is, Obama turned into Bill Clinton, which is to say, someone who really, really thinks the Right is just misguided, the idea that "there is nothing wrong with America that cannot be fixed by what is right with America." The bad part of that is, it prevents us from healing the really deep flaws, namely the money worship and sacrament of war. Until Money and War are seen as tools, and not our reason for being, we can and will drift rightward, because we are playing the right's game on their turf, where they have the table tilted rightward. Obama has proven that he is not interested in replacing the table, he may do about 60 percent of the right thing, but only after a LOT of PRESSURE is placed, and even then, he always tries to curry the favor of those mythical "centrists" that the right has successfully compromised.

So,I have no problem putting pressure, because that is what works, that includes criticism,and my wallet. However, just because I see that the DLC is full of shit does not mean I do not see where people will use the FRONT of criticism just to snipe at everything not them.

Let me be real Blunt:

Jane Hamsher, I look forward to you making excuses for Hillary Clinton when she governs to Obama's right, doing things you would have made cute Racial jokes about Obama for doing.

Glenn Greenwald: All your civil liberty crap will mean nothign when the companies you like to worship do everything the Feds do and far, far worse. Until you apologize for your defense of Citizens United, which downgraded the very value of a person to just another corporate asset, I will not take you seriously, even if you drunkenly stumble into truth.

Medea Benjamin: I admired you until you made that valentine to Ron Paul. Care to explain to women why you had to enable one of the strongest Anti-Choice advocates? You could have easily called RP that "broken clock right twice a day" without a Valentine.

Arriana Huffington: You sure love giving Grover Norquist and Mark Penn space to bash Obama. If you think that I will forget the days when you were the Belle of the Right Wing ball, you are wrong.

Ted Rall: The supposed hard left communist that whines that the internet ruined his payday, and who slammed OWS and the Egyptians because they did not kill people. Who made use of the right wing slurs like calling Obama an example of "affirmative action."

I could go on and on, especially with Ralph "I have no problem taking right wing money" Nader.

And it is not that I do not see we need a hard left, but sadly, we have a lot less Bernie Sanders, people who try to explain to people what is happening, and a LOT more Dennis Kucinich, someone who will gladly take a payday on Fox network because it gives them a point to slam Obama, even though they hear Karl Rove popping champagne in the back room, because we load our circular firing squad again!

BushCo. appeared moderate in his primary "No regime change type wars of agression"
Obama appeared moderate from the beginning "There are no red states or blue states only the United States.."

But that's where they veered.

Once Bush got in he thumbed his nose at the left. And vigorously pursued his neo-con PNAC agenda, while pampering his whacky Christos-fascist base to drown out voices of discontent. Forced out every moderate (the first was Paul O'Neil)

Once Obama got in he did not ignore the idiots on the right and also thumbed his nose at the left. His Chief of Staff called them "fucking retards". He decided he had to prove he wasn't just a lefty community organizer and bent over backwards to deliver the white flag to the frothing Republicans on the other side on issue after issue.

You know very well there was nothing but rapturous support from the left when he was first elected. He had the political capital and then some to ignore the backlash on FOX News (It didn't help because they just made up stuff to fill in for any REAL progressive stubbornness on his part) and push for things like Single Payer. If he would have achieved a Public Option...THAT is the moderate alternative most on the left would have accepted. In fact even if he had FOUGHT for it he would have garnered respect. At one time he said he would accept losing a second term to fight for what at the time was assumed, a public option.

You paint the moderate left as extremists. Because, in the case of healthcare, they only wanted what every other western democracy has - a Single Payer system....and even THEN were willing to accept a Public Option compromise. How is this extreme or anything like the birther/tea bagger racists onslaught from day one?

There was an incredible opportunity historically when he was elected to truly move the county forward, and Obama decided that it was to his benefit to play the Washington bubble game instead. You come across as rebuking those that can't just accept that at least he is better than having Dick Cheney as President. Sorry I expected a little more. Just because the GOP has slid off all the way into la la land to the far far right, does not mean Obama had to then slide right to fill in the gap behind them. He, and the country, missed a great opportunity. Of course many are hurt and sad about that.

they want "radical" and if they don't get their "radical" they will commit all kinds of acts of poutrage!

to even hope for a quasi-public medical insurance system with a public option....not even as RADICALLY SOCIALIST as Canada and every other western democracy that offers its citizens a single payer system and regards health as a right and not a privilege.

not having that is ALL Obama's fault right? Not a single Republican would dare stand in the way...

"He decided he had to prove he wasn't just a lefty community organizer and bent over backwards to deliver the white flag to the frothing Republicans on the other side on issue after issue."

This is Posted in the Barack Obama Group.We area Group not a forum. You have been at DU since 2005, you know the groups rules. Your comments are better suited to GD.

Please take your negative comments to general discussion. Thank you.

If you want to post negative views against the President and his policies, take it to GD please.

I need to remove BOG from my subscriptions.

Did so and self deleted.

people say he hates America and is purposely trying to destroy it. Why would anyone want to even live in a country that he hates, much less be president of it?

Conversely, I always found it interesting that they cheered Reagan when he said "Government isn't the solution to our problems, it is the problem." Really, Ronnie? So you want to be in charge of the problem?

Ronald Reagan said more about hating America than Obama ever has.

they can go there and read it. We don't need the same thing re-posted over here too. I don't own DU and I am not a moderator, so if I am presumptuous to say this I'm sorry. But I think that comments solely intended to promote another site and get hits for that site should be banned, especially when that site is constantly bashing progressives and I thought that DU was supposed to be a safe place for progressives to make comments without being constantly harassed by right wing talking points.

If you don't like a link, DON'T CLICK ON IT. You're not the admin so stop pretending like you are an admin. I happen to like that sight and I enjoy the people who hang out over there. They are hard working democrats who love and support the President.

a mod? I pretended no such thing. And as far as not clicking on it goes, I couldn't have known that the OP was a reposting from that blog until I had already clicked on it. So I think that your criticisms are totally unfounded.

Edit - I did not realize that this thread was posted in the BOG. I wish there could be some way to make that fact more obvious so that people like me won't mistakenly post in that group.

I rather you do that then to continue to post your negative thoughts in the group. Again, if you want to trash talk the President, take it to general discussion please.

anything.

In the past two weeks, I have seen links to The Daily Caller (Tucker Carlson's RS site) and The Blaze (Glen Beck's RW site) posted here as legitimate sources for news stories.

The first thing I see when I log-on to DU is a click-through ad about impeaching Obama, and another claiming to know Obama's 'dirty secrets'.

So complaining about links to a site that actually supports the Democratic president is rather ridiculous - but somehow not surprising.

about the naysayers. They have ALL of General Discussion to trash talk the President, but they feel the need to come into our little area to drain our happiness.

about the mean old BOG HOSTS not allowing them to spew their hate in this group.



Sid

I read the links someone posted and was shocked. Speechless even

ATA has become a daily read for me, for that very reason. I do however like Skinner's responses.

sheshe~

You have to consider what kind of person knows they can literally say anything they want about Obama in GD and elsewhere, but feels compelled to post in the ONE small corner of the site where they are not welcome to do so.

That says more about your strange expectations of DU than anything else. You don't want some point of view promoted? You believe in suppressing views you don't agree with, even without the umbrella of Democratic?

And again I need to repeat that when I made my initial comment I didn't realize that the OP was posted in the BOG.

Please kindly trash the group so you don't have to read it. We want positive blogs and articles about the President in our group. If you don't like it, please don't comment here. Take your negativity to general discussion please. Thank you.

in my mind one of the best and most liberal DU'ers we have. Although he only posts once in a while these days. It's Titled "I'm Proud To Be a Liberal" http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x779649 I hope he doesn't mind me using it.

I believe us liberals have reasonable expectations and your post is far off the mark. I believe our expectations are what DU was founded on. It has grown more centrist since 2008. I also believe the color of President Obama's skin is often used as excuse to protect him from criticism of his policies. Even you cite "the black guy" in the White House. He's done some good things and he's done some things that fall short. I love Jimmy Carter but it doesn't mean he's perfect in my eyes and can do no wrong. Although if there was one president that was almost as good as FDR it would probably be Carter in my mind. Obama could have enacted a New Deal after the economic crisis but instead chose to deal with the banksters and give them a free pass. So be it. It is what it is. But when you write that we on the left can never be happy it is simplistic and silly. Most of the progress the US has made in the previous century was pushed for by we on the left. The fight never stops no matter who is the president.

that shows the juxtaposition of the hard left and the powers that be and how we can coexist. It's the story of a federal agent who lost his life.

http://blogs.laweekly.com/arts/2013/09/burning_man_temple.php "The Day the Man came to Burning Man"

This is the BOG. We love and support his policies and we support this President. I can't speak for Cha, sheshe OR any other moderators here but if you want to be negative towards the President, take it to General Discussion.

reason he consistently remains in the mid 40's in job approval. Nearly 80% of Democrats still approve of his performance, and that number is usually higher with "Liberal" Democrats.

As celebrated black author, Zora Neal Hurston once said, "All my skin folk ain't my kin folk". That sentiment applies to Democratic family as well.

If it were left to me, I'd permanently ban every single last one of them the instant they start their crap. No modeling patient behavior for them because they'll ALWAYS push to the limit. Don't need to name names... the mods can tell who they are easily enough.

You've touched on a subject close to my heart. The Far Left no longer claims me because I'm a solidarity Democrat in relation to this president. Luckily they don't get to define me - I know what I want and what I believe, they don't have a say in it. I'm sure President Obama wants more for us than any miracle worker could accomplish (especially by himself w/o supporters showing up to vote!), and I see no reason at all to castigate him for working with and living in reality as it exists NOW. Regardless of what we see as ideal, we need to keep our feet on the ground and our shoulders to the wheel WITH HIM.

Maybe I should change my sig line to "BAN THE TROLLS!"

There is absolutely no reason to give the concept credence.

This article sums it up well. With permission, I would love to include in my siggie because I still believe that racism (both psychological and deliberate) plays a very important role in how this president has been treated. I believe that it is the underlying cause of ODS.

I will go to my grave believing this.