Obama back on stride? Prelude to 2012, or just for Mid-Terms?

[Jess]

Without differing views there can be no debate, that said...

You asked about or inferred to a seeming pull back of support for Pres Obama by the very people who voted him into office and seem upset or surprised to witness this. I can only speak for myself and from watching a wide variety of news sources ( not just liberal/ Democratic OR conservative/ Republican, but both) when I say I think it is because the voters feel lied to. Here is why I think most of middle America feels that way, just based on what I see going on.
A) Gay people feel betrayed because of the lack of actual action/ support for the ending of ENDA/ DOMA/ DADT/ Equal Marriage rights. Mr. Obama and speaker Pelosi among other prominent Democrats, made it very clear that he would fight relentlessly for the repeal of these discriminations and has failed to do so.
B) The Latina/ Hispanic population feels betrayed because Mr. Obama promised immediate action on immigration reform within "the first 90 days " of his presidency. Then later stated via AP while on Airforce 1, that it was "not a good time for his party". Then, we have AZ and all of it's malarky blowing up and further enraging folks who are already waiting for the Feds to take some promised action on reform.
C) As mentioned, older baby boomers lost their ass and have no chance of recovery within the current economy.
D) Middle America feels completely overlooked in any ability to affect change and begin lashing out at any "emotional" issue that comes down the pike. Gay marriage/ Islamic cultural center/ idiots burning holy texts.

I think the greater problem with the whole system is like stated above, most of us more moderate voters can have little affect if we truly vote for the better candidate. Mostly because they aren't in one of the two major parties.
If the informed voter had looked at President Obama's voting record while he held office in senate, they would have found him to be a very pragmatic, middle of the road legislator who rarely voted against anything that BOTH parties didn't agree upon. His votes were missing on any "hot topics", nothing very controversial. His record actually reflected what a lot of liberals complained about in justice Kagen. That she was too "moderate". Makes perfect sense to me that she was his appointee ( and I do not disagree with his choice).

I think a lot of voters placed a great deal of hope on an image and not on facts and unfortunately it always comes back to bite us in the end. It doesn't surprise me at all that a great portion of the fringe liberals who voted him into office are now very vocal about their disapproval. The issues that got him voted in are very "real" very serious human rights issues.

The economy will not be fixed until issues of Union exploitation and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs and taxes ( or penalties) placed upon businesses who take jobs from Americans then expect those same Americans to buy their products or services happens. Encouraging small business is fine, however, with so much of our population struggling to just survive, who is going to support these small businesses when too often their products cost so much more than mass manufactured ( in China, for example: read: Walmart), are the only thing affordable? Add to that the new issues in providing insurance that small business is facing and you won't see a great many folks willing to risk what savings they have or any accrued equity in taking out small business loans.

I say Union exploitation in the sense that today's Union's are no longer necessary in my opinion. My grandfather was a coal miner who was shot and had his legs broken and watched other miners lose their lives in an effort to reform their industry. At that time, Unions were very much needed. Today's Labor Laws demand those safety measures and fair wage and make Unions nothing more than a lobby to create a wage that forces businesses to look for outside sources to fulfill their labor pool. Mind you, this is just my opinion. I see Unions actually harming their members more now than doing them a service. Take the Mott strike for example and the Union folks praying for it to resolve as they are losing money and using up their savings waiting for something to happen. Seriously, how much money does someone expect to make for canning applesauce? It isn't about safety or fair labor, it's about the Union organizers wanting more money.

I am just as dismayed by current politics and the very angry tone of our world right now. We argue amongst ourselves about stuff that on the bigger scale is pretty petty. It's almost as if we "look" for something to be angry about because we are ultimately so powerless in the grand scheme of things and yes, we become enraged when we see the folks we thought we going to give us that hand "up" doing seemingly nothing they said they would.

Just my thoughts. Thanks for the thread, At Last.

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Toughy

I don't see any wave of toss out the incumbents going on here. In the primaries, 7 incumbents lost their primary race. 5 were Republicans who lost to tea party supported candidates. 2 Democrats lost.....one because of ethical issues of her son and the other because of his own ethical issues. That's 7 out of a total of 435 House members and 100 Senators. This just smacks of media hype to me.

Yes, the media is feeding this big time! The numbers don't support this at all in the recent primaries.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Electio...ki-R-of-Alaska

My anger is directed at the Senate and Harry Reid. The House has done it's job...........passing most of what Obama wanted in the form he wanted it in. The Senate watered down the House Health Care Bill. The Senate has watered down everything the House has done. There are 372 bills waiting for the Senate to act on. If those bills are not acted on in the 111th Congress, then they die period. They will all have to be re-introduced and passed in the 112th Congress.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/11...use-and-senate

Pelosi has led a pretty good charge in the House. She is one congress person that seems to take all the ridicule she gets and just keeps on trucking! Yes, the Senate is a pile of mush and a disgrace.

Frankly, I want Reid out as majority leader, but not see him lose to the non-brain he is running against. There are other Dems in the senate that would be a more effective leader.

I hope Obama and every Democrat running will act like Obama has acted the last day or two.

I'd like this too, but with follow-thru!!! Will we just get the usual re-election politics begining the day after the mid-terms? We have some big problems going and a very sluggish economy.

Polls don't mean much right now. I pretty much ignore them all.

Yes, many analysts make a case for looking at the regional polls in which there are races, not the national polls.

Originally Posted by Jess

Without differing views there can be no debate, that said...

You asked about or inferred to a seeming pull back of support for Pres Obama by the very people who voted him into office and seem upset or surprised to witness this. I can only speak for myself and from watching a wide variety of news sources ( not just liberal/ Democratic OR conservative/ Republican, but both) when I say I think it is because the voters feel lied to. Here is why I think most of middle America feels that way, just based on what I see going on.

A) Gay people feel betrayed because of the lack of actual action/ support for the ending of ENDA/ DOMA/ DADT/ Equal Marriage rights. Mr. Obama and speaker Pelosi among other prominent Democrats, made it very clear that he would fight relentlessly for the repeal of these discriminations and has failed to do so.

Yes, I have been discusted with this too. And the reasons for inaction- the reaching across to the GOP!!!


B) The Latina/ Hispanic population feels betrayed because Mr. Obama promised immediate action on immigration reform within "the first 90 days " of his presidency. Then later stated via AP while on Airforce 1, that it was "not a good time for his party". Then, we have AZ and all of it's malarky blowing up and further enraging folks who are already waiting for the Feds to take some promised action on reform.

Again, I agree. however, I hope that when this is taken on, it is not like how health care reform went! And I want a means for undocumented people here to be able to gain citizenship.

C) As mentioned, older baby boomers lost their ass and have no chance of recovery within the current economy.

Very true, i'm a living example!!

D) Middle America feels completely overlooked in any ability to affect change and begin lashing out at any "emotional" issue that comes down the pike. Gay marriage/ Islamic cultural center/ idiots burning holy texts.

I think the greater problem with the whole system is like stated above, most of us more moderate voters can have little affect if we truly vote for the better candidate. Mostly because they aren't in one of the two major parties.
If the informed voter had looked at President Obama's voting record while he held office in senate, they would have found him to be a very pragmatic, middle of the road legislator who rarely voted against anything that BOTH parties didn't agree upon. His votes were missing on any "hot topics", nothing very controversial. His record actually reflected what a lot of liberals complained about in justice Kagen. That she was too "moderate". Makes perfect sense to me that she was his appointee ( and I do not disagree with his choice).

I think a lot of voters placed a great deal of hope on an image and not on facts and unfortunately it always comes back to bite us in the end. It doesn't surprise me at all that a great portion of the fringe liberals who voted him into office are now very vocal about their disapproval. The issues that got him voted in are very "real" very serious human rights issues.

Yes, they are and I feel anger, too. Yet, I think about what could happen if the fringe gains in the elections. But, I am so sick of voting against someone or something, instead of for a candidate!

The economy will not be fixed until issues of Union exploitation and outsourcing of manufacturing jobs and taxes ( or penalties) placed upon businesses who take jobs from Americans then expect those same Americans to buy their products or services happens. Encouraging small business is fine, however, with so much of our population struggling to just survive, who is going to support these small businesses when too often their products cost so much more than mass manufactured ( in China, for example: read: Walmart), are the only thing affordable? Add to that the new issues in providing insurance that small business is facing and you won't see a great many folks willing to risk what savings they have or any accrued equity in taking out small business loans.

As much as I hate to say this, I don't think manufacturing will ever come back in the US. There is a chance for developing manufacturing, but this still leaves a huge population out of the mix and out of luck. I don't know if people are willing to pay the costs of unionized labor any more in this country. I really don't. And can they?

I say Union exploitation in the sense that today's Union's are no longer necessary in my opinion. My grandfather was a coal miner who was shot and had his legs broken and watched other miners lose their lives in an effort to reform their industry. At that time, Unions were very much needed. Today's Labor Laws demand those safety measures and fair wage and make Unions nothing more than a lobby to create a wage that forces businesses to look for outside sources to fulfill their labor pool. Mind you, this is just my opinion. I see Unions actually harming their members more now than doing them a service. Take the Mott strike for example and the Union folks praying for it to resolve as they are losing money and using up their savings waiting for something to happen. Seriously, how much money does someone expect to make for canning applesauce? It isn't about safety or fair labor, it's about the Union organizers wanting more money.

I do see the role of labor unions having been diminished in many ways. My background is union-made, too. It hurts. My worry is that without them, will more workers be exploited, or work in dangerous situations because companies cut costs on safety? I don't have these answers. it does feel like unions have become big business themselves, in many ways. The days of unions being formed and run by workers, are over.

I am just as dismayed by current politics and the very angry tone of our world right now. We argue amongst ourselves about stuff that on the bigger scale is pretty petty. It's almost as if we "look" for something to be angry about because we are ultimately so powerless in the grand scheme of things and yes, we become enraged when we see the folks we thought we going to give us that hand "up" doing seemingly nothing they said they would.

Feeling powerless about sums it up. I still stay involved on the local level and give time during election cycles, but, yes, I get very frustrated.

Just my thoughts. Thanks for the thread, At Last.

Thanks for posting! I agree that the small stuff needs to be put aside. I have often wondered what it would have been like to be a fly on the wall during the initial economic crash meetings. I am still amazed at how many big time economists didn't know what the hell was really going on. And now, I don't have a lost of trust going on with the powers that be. Doesn't make for good sleep!

Sorry for any typos- goofs... not doing spell check- have to get some stuff done today!!

[Jess]

At Last,
I totally agree it has gotten really depressing to continue voting against something you feel strongly about instead of "for" a brilliant plan.

Thanks again for the thread!

[AtLast]

Originally Posted by Jess

At Last,
I totally agree it has gotten really depressing to continue voting against something you feel strongly about instead of "for" a brilliant plan.

Thanks again for the thread!

Yup, very sad. Right now, this seems to be the case and things that need to be dealt with are lost in this mess. I used to have respect for our political process, no longer true. Now, I do have a hard time believing that injustices will be corrected and we will see a thriving and open society.

[Rockinonahigh]

Im not to shure what I think cause so much has gone wishy washy,I understand the prez got a bag full more dirt than he bargained for when he took office,but the house and senate as well as anyone else needs to think of the country insted of being a party person red or blue.The big co's got bailed out and some have paid back the $$ some still working on it...the working class is strugeling to get by on what they can,the middle class is not doing as well as before,the rich may not be as rich as before but shure aint hurting as far as I see it.what craps me out is what he has done to the disabled ppl who arent geting the help they need cause of so many cut backs.Many states have cut back services for disabled to the point that you nearly have to be in dire need to get help for what you need..then it has to go thrue meeting after meeting to see whats going to happen...if it happends.Last year there was no cola for the disabled..it aint much when you get one but it helps..whats going to happen next year..who knows.Then there are the single ppl who cause they arent married with a family dont get the tax breaks on homes they are buying...its all crazy to me.

[AtLast]

Obama: Boehner has 'no new ideas'


http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz0zCMcVH7U


http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0910/41901.html


By KENDRA MARR | 9/8/10 4:14 PM EDT


PARMA, Ohio – President Barack Obama, fighting to preserve his party’s control of Congress, laid out his battle plan on Wednesday, drawing sharp distinctions between his vision to rebuild the nation’s economy — and the struggling middle class — and Republican economic policies, which he said triggered last year’s financial meltdown.

“A lot has changed since I came here in those final days of the last election, but what hasn’t is the choice facing this country,” said Obama, speaking at Cuyahoga Community College, just outside of Cleveland. “It’s still fear versus hope; the past versus the future. It’s still a choice between sliding backward and moving forward. That’s what this election is about. That’s the choice you’ll face in November.”

In a speech billed as a rebuttal to House Minority Leader John Boehner’s Republican economic policy speech last month, Boehner became Obama’s main target. Calling him out eight times in his 45-minute address, Obama clarified what he was for and what “Mr. Boehner” and the GOP is against, including ending tax cuts for the nation’s top earners and closing loopholes that allow corporations to avoid paying taxes.

In a blunt critique to Boehner’s economic policy speech in Cleveland last month, the president declared, “There were no new policies from Mr. Boehner. There were no new ideas.”

Following the president’s remarks, Boehner issued a statement calling on Obama to “[freeze] all tax rates, coupled with cutting federal spending to where it was before all the bailouts, government takeovers, and ‘stimulus’ spending sprees.”

Though he was in Boehner’s home state, Obama spoke to a friendly audience, which rose to its feet and applauded him several times. Once they booed Boehner, and a few in the crowd shouted “no” in response to Obama’s assertion that Republicans would let insurance companies go back to denying care and allow credit card companies go back to unfairly raising interest rates on their customers.

If Democrats want to beat back widely anticipated Republican gains in November, it will be because of voters in places like this. Obama fired up his base in Cleveland’s Cuyahoga County in 2008, picking up 60,000 new Democratic votes. He’ll need them again for the 2010 midterms.

Touting his own economic plans, Obama alluded to three new proposals to jolt the struggling economy: a $50 billion federal investment to overhaul the nation’s railroads, highways and runways; a big tax break for businesses that conduct research and experimentation; and tax write-offs for companies’ expenditures on hiring, equipment and expansion.

Those measures carry a $180 billion price tag; Obama was careful to avoid calling it an economic stimulus plan, given the current national mood against government spending and the massive national debt. Republicans have nevertheless hammered the president, comparing his plan to the $814 billion emergency spending package he pushed through Congress last year – a measure the GOP leadership has declared a failure.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories...#ixzz0zCMx2yA6

[AtLast]

After the past week's Congressional antics on the bill with the repealing DADT, I am just furious with the Administration and many Democrats!

What I am really wondering about, however, is not Obama, himself, but his close advisors.

Any thoughts?