home

On Campaign Promises

As I have written many times, campaign promises are not worth the paper they are written on. And of course, politicians lying about what they said on the campaign trail was first seen in the time of Pericles. Obama was not the first and will not be the last. His broken promise and dissembling regarding the public option was not HIS first nor will it be his last (NAFTA renegotiation anyone?) Which leads me to my point, They All Disappoint:

The best show on television [was] "The Wire." [. . .] At the finale to Season 4, the new mayor of Baltimore, where the show is set, is faced with the dilemma of doing "the right thing" and doing what he perceives is the right thing politically (the plot point involves "eating sh[*]t" so the Baltimore schools get money it needs vs. what's right for his shot at being Governor. You know what he does.

Afterwards, his close aide, who fought the campaign with him, discusses this with the chief of staff of the former mayor, saying "can't believe he left the money on the table." The former COS responds "they all disappoint." And indeed, they do. They've all disappointed, even Lincoln, FDR and Bobby Kennedy.

As citizens and activists, our allegiances have to be to the issues we believe in. I am a partisan Democrat it is true. But the reason I am is because I know who we can pressure to do the right thing some of the times. Republicans aren't them. But that does not mean we accept the failings of our Democrats. There is nothing more important that we can do, as citizens, activists or bloggers than fight to pressure DEMOCRATS to do the right thing on OUR issues.

And this is true in every context I think. Be it pressing the Speaker or the Senate majority leader, or the new hope running for President. There is nothing more important we can do. Nothing. It's more important BY FAR than "fighting" for your favorite pol because your favorite pol will ALWAYS, I mean ALWAYS, disappoint you.

In the middle of primary fights, citizens, activists and bloggers like to think their guy or woman is different. They are going to change the way politics works. They are going to not disappoint. In short, they are not going to be pols. That is, in a word, idiotic.

Yes, they are all pols. And they do what they do. Do not fight for pols. Fight for the issues you care about. That often means fighting for a pol of course. But remember, you are fighting for the issues. Not the pols.

Speaking for me only

< On The Health Bill, The Truth Will Out | College Football Bowl Game Predictions and Open Thread >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    So? (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 08:41:55 AM EST
    Yeah, I'm there....so?  See, I'm a little thicker skinned.  I only cried a little, so? So what if I did most of it talking to some poor guy at Democracy Now? I recovered quickly.  I'm back in my lobby by tenacious pest saddle.  Leaving though soon. Happy Holidays everyone.

    Happy Holidays MT n/t (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by cawaltz on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:38:54 AM EST
    Happy Holidays MT (5.00 / 2) (#8)
    by Jackson Hunter on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:39:03 AM EST
    I lurk at DK for the sheer schaudenfreude of it and I have seen you there fighting the good fight.  I'd try but I would have a hard time being civil there since there are so few rules, I'd be HR'ed out of there inside of an hour.  You must have the patience of a Saint!

    Jackson

    Parent

    It's because of my son (none / 0) (#12)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:57:42 AM EST
    They could all go fly a kite under the orange rainbow, except that is a forum that I can participate in, and it does get a lot of reading, and why should people be able to create a singular reality when they know the net is not a bubble?  Then a voice in my head says, "If you don't say anything while everyone out there considers the internet this magic universal connectedness, you sort of suck".  Then suddenly there I am, blah blah blah blah blah.  The best diary yesterday was this one.  My lowest point yesterday was when I was arguing that all the pressure that could be applied while they are hammering out this crap bill should be applied and grannyhelen brought up saying what we mean, verses shouting Kill It so they improve it.  And I told her that I had altered my standards fighting insurance companies :)  Everyone was fighting so hard against anyone who was for pressuring however we could because it seemed dishonest, and then Obama LIED........his a$$ off.....right in the middle of all of it.  That was pretty freaky.  It was like how the floor of the stock exchange used to be and then suddenly Lehman Brothers collapsed :)

    Parent
    Campaign Promises (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by prittfumes on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 08:58:02 AM EST
    Here's hoping that by the next election cycle, millions of extremely disappointed voters (particularly the young) will understand what they apparently did not in 2008.
    Yes, they are all pols. And they do what they do. Do not fight for pols. Fight for the issues you care about. That often means fighting for a pol of course. But remember, you are fighting for the issues. Not the pols.
    [emphasis added]

    Problem is... (5.00 / 5) (#23)
    by SeaMBA on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:15:45 AM EST
    So many of those people who are disappointed thought they were fighting for the issues.  Unfortunately they confused the messenger with the message.  They were bought and sold just like the politicians.

    I am disappointed because so many smart people got hoodwinked.

    Change you can believe in has become I don't believe this is change.  Not being George Bush is not enough.  That is a ridiculously low bar to set.

    Parent

    Smart people didn't get hoodwinked (none / 0) (#40)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:14:04 PM EST
    I am disappointed because so many smart people got hoodwinked.

    They didn't want to take the time to pay attention, so they went with the D.


    Parent

    Is it not possible (none / 0) (#41)
    by prittfumes on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:35:15 PM EST
    they were paying too much attention ... to the "press"?

    Parent
    Quelle surprise! (5.00 / 5) (#5)
    by Jackson Hunter on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:34:47 AM EST
    I'm not so much disappointed that Obama lied, as you say BTD, it is endemic to the species.  But this is such a stupid, easily refuted lie that it's might be remembered, especially if the polls don't move.  Although I think overall the lie isn't all that big, but it is important.

    What I do advise however is that the Administration not try the spin of "Yes, it was in his campaign literature and platform, but he didn't actually campaign on the issue" line that his most desperate adherents are spouting, because that excuse is not only too long but is also, well, stupid.  Even the so-called "Clintonistas" never parsed like that.

    Just take your victory lap and quite demonizing your left flank with sticks to the eye like this.
    Counter-productive is just too small a word for this.

    Jackson

    Sorry all (none / 0) (#9)
    by Jackson Hunter on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:40:48 AM EST
    for the lousy writing, I'm tired I guess.  

    Jackson

    Parent

    To JH: From a recovering perfectionist, (5.00 / 3) (#13)
    by prittfumes on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:04:04 AM EST
    no need to apologize.

    Parent
    Parsing Obama (none / 0) (#49)
    by norris morris on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 06:12:46 PM EST
    I have just watched a video of Obama speak [with the kind of passion we have not seen since], of being for a public option, among other unkept promises.

     On Obama's website throughout the campaign, and in videotaped speeches about his preference for the public option was clearly made.

    He's on the defensive as he lies about this. If obama really thinks he deserved a B+ than he's living on another planet.

    Mr. Transparency himself met secretly with BigPharma lobbyist Bill Tauzin of BigPharma in July and cut a highly compromised deal that is a  gift to the drug cartel.

    So drug and insurance stocks are soaring, and this
    crapola HC bill is what Obama is telling us is a great bill that gives [by whom?] 30 million people insurance for the first time. Only we are compelled upon threat of IRS fines if we don't want to buy this private insurance.

    Obama let no one know what he was willing to fight for, and he didn't fight at all for anything except the private drug and insurance  cartels.


    Parent

    does it count if they (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by Capt Howdy on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:38:28 AM EST
    are keeping someone elses campaign promises?


    Well (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Ga6thDem on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:51:16 AM EST
    here's the thing: yes, tehy all disappoint and break promises but it's a matter of %'s with me.

    How many HAS Obama kept? I'd guess maybe 25%? that's pretty piss poor. I figure that maybe 50% is a good number.

    It also depends on how core (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by gyrfalcon on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:02:09 AM EST
    to the candidate's premise the stuff is.  Minor stuff I can live with, especially with the presidency, because they really often do find out when they get there that it's not as simple as they imagined.

    But stuff that goes to the very heart of the justification for the candidacy is a whole different order of things.

    On health care, of course I'm pissed about the public option, single payer, Medicare for all, etc.  But I'm through the roof over the secret backroom deals with the pharma and insurance industries, the lobbyists writing big chunks of the legislation, etc.

    Obama's whole premise was he was going to stop that and govern in the open.  We all knew he wasn't really going to do this on C-Span, but the extent of the concealed dealings with industry interests is completely 180 from what and who he said he was.

    Parent

    That's where it helps to have a track record (5.00 / 4) (#27)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:32:58 AM EST
    to go on. You can see if they are prone to exaggerated promises but generally stick to some set of guidelines - and what those guidelines are.

    Parent
    I call BS (5.00 / 2) (#14)
    by jedimom on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:19:01 AM EST
    especially from someone who claimed they did not know about HCR and saw no meaningful difference b/w HRC and Obama on issues

    HRC is a fighter

    she would NOT have gone 'pragmatic a la Obama' and sold us out, she would have started in a different place

    she would not have raised it in an economic crisis

    she would DEFINITELY not leave us with MANDATES and NO P.O.

    HRC was THE PROGRESSIVE candidate, the proof is in the governing (and the donations)

    Pols are NOT all the same. Big Dawg was MILES better than Obama

    We'll never know (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:42:56 AM EST
    But that would have made Clinton the most unique pol in the history of politics.

    Hell, FDR broke promises and lied about it all the time.

    Parent

    Like when he flip-flopped on the FDIC (none / 0) (#18)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:53:05 AM EST
    See (none / 0) (#19)
    by andgarden on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:54:42 AM EST
    Sadly, it is just as impossible to know that (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by ruffian on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:23:57 AM EST
    as it is to know that Obama would have voted NO on the Iraq War authorization.

    Parent
    The MOST progressive candidate (none / 0) (#15)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:35:48 AM EST
    still isnt progressive.

    And, as I recall, she folded like Superman on laundry day back in the early ninties. So much for fighting.

    Parent

    Except, she 'folded" .... (5.00 / 4) (#25)
    by Yman on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:32:01 AM EST
    ... after George Mitchell (Sen. majority leader at the time) publicly acknowledged there were not enough votes to get it through the Senate and stated it would have to wait until the next Congress.  She "folded" after fighting the health insurance lobby and (among many other things) a $20 million "Harry and Louise" ad campaign, as opposed to say, making backroom deals with them and even hiring Harry and Louise to attack the more progressive plan of his Democratic primary opponent.

    So, yeah, ...... she actually fought for HCR in 93-94, paying a heavy price for doing so, as opposed to say ...

    .... hiding safely behind Congress's skirt, quietly ignoring the pleas for his leadership on the issue.

    Parent

    At what point (none / 0) (#31)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 12:29:52 PM EST
    did someone hold a gun to her head and force her to stop being a fighter?

    It's not like the Clinton Foundation needs the money or anything.

    Maybe my problem is that my head is still too full of Elizabeth Gurley Flynn and Mother Jones: women who fought -- righteously and lustily -- their whole lives. And not just until the next election cycle began.

    Parent

    In my experience, fighting (5.00 / 2) (#35)
    by oldpro on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 01:34:42 PM EST
    ...like self restraint...isn't always visible to others and is seldom, therefore, credited.

    There are many ways to fight for one's values, issues...many fields of battle with both strategic and tactical goals.  It is my observation that HRC is that kind of fighter...as is Bill.  It's probably the glue that holds them together with only one motto:  "never give up!"

    Admirable...and all things being equal, I'll take a Clinton every time.

    Parent

    Who said .... (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by Yman on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:02:26 PM EST
    ... she stopped being a fighter?  She's continued to speak out for the need for HCR since 94, despite being burned badly the first time around.  Even before she was elected to the Senate, she was one of the driving forces responsible for SCHIP.  Of course, the CDSers wouldn't even give her credit for that, given their delusional hatred of all things Clinton.

    As for the smarmy "next election cycle" comment, I'm not sure of what your point is.  She's continued to speak out for the need for HCR since she was elected to the Senate, but I'm not sure what you expect from a single Senator with a Republican President in office and Republican control of the Senate and/or House for much of that time.  It's not like she's failing to lead as President (with a Democratic House and Senate), while cutting backroom deals with the drug/insurance lobbyists and backtracking on her HCR campaign promises.

    Parent

    BTW - How is the Clinton Foundation (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by Yman on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:05:04 PM EST
    ... even remotely relevant?

    If you'd like to make an accusation, why not just spit it out?

    Parent

    Oh, dont go all (none / 0) (#44)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 03:18:36 PM EST
    Branch Clintonian on me now; I dont wanna have to call Janet Reno.

    Parent
    Yeah, ..... (none / 0) (#51)
    by Yman on Thu Dec 24, 2009 at 02:16:49 PM EST
    .... that's what I thought.

    Parent
    And no (none / 0) (#52)
    by jondee on Thu Dec 24, 2009 at 02:56:59 PM EST
    Im not going to get into the pseudo-progressivism that goes into turning a relatively minor civil disturbance into a disgusting, grandstanding, tough-on-crime military exercise.

    You're wasting your time.

    Parent

    Actually, .... (none / 0) (#53)
    by Yman on Thu Dec 24, 2009 at 08:01:14 PM EST
    ... I was referring to your refusal to explain your Clinton Foundation comment.  But it's funny you mention the Branch Davidians, ...

    ... given their many similarities to the Clinton-haters.

    Parent

    Btw (none / 0) (#17)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:44:15 AM EST
    Whats progressive about sounding like you're one step away from strapping on an Uzi and moving into a settlement if the hard-right board of AIPAC tells you to?

    Parent
    Mike Gravel didn't fold when faced with threats (none / 0) (#46)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 04:02:35 PM EST
    olf prison in the Pentagon Papers case.  Who's this "MOST progressive candidate" you're talking about?

    Parent
    She would not have gone pragmatic (none / 0) (#29)
    by BobTinKY on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 12:01:48 PM EST
    she would have started there.  And she was, and remains, easily the most hawkish of the 2008 Democratic candidates.  Obama would do well to stop listening to her on foreign policy instead of putting her in charge of it.

    Big dawg was an Eastern Establishment Republican when it came to policy, as is HRC.  As is Obama. Maybe someday we'll have someone from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.

    This bill might not be so bad for most people.  We're going to get it in any event.  I have a hard time believing these Senators would vote for something that would doom them politically, which would clearly be the case if all the negative commentary were true.  Political survival is their one, and usually only, true talent.

    Pols being pols and all.

    Parent

    Some were promises, but (5.00 / 6) (#20)
    by Stellaaa on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:55:02 AM EST
    do "voter projections" and fantasies count as promises?  All the people who imagined all the qualities and political tendencies in Obama, is he responsible for delivering?  The delusional "progressive brigade" needs to get a reality check up.  

    Frankly, for me he is what I expected and what I heard from him.  He personally, did very little for healthcare reform.  He spent a summer playing golf with Swiss Banking Executives and let the right wing voices build up and get momentum so he could pass this vapid and probably harmful program.  The jig was up.  I still remember his promise for the community activist C-Span hearings, transparency promises and how they gobbled it up.  I am still waiting for the great activist to roll up his sleeves, get some butcher paper and colorful markers and do some citizen participation into the healthcare reform.  

    By the way, healthcare industry spent 130 million to get this thing, once they are embedded and making their profits, what will it take to take it away?   Once it's in, it's in.  

    Pols lie (5.00 / 3) (#21)
    by my opinion on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 10:56:32 AM EST
    True. Bank robbers rob banks. True. Neither is right. Both will always happen. Just saying pols are pols, pols lie, or pols do things you don't like is weak because your argument is to just define the subject of the argument. All you are saying is "it is what it is".

    The way to judge a pol or anyone is through their actions. Therefore, I argee with fighting for issues.

    You can't fight for ANYthing... (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:32:07 AM EST
    ...in this country without a giant pile of money. Oh you can try, you may even make a little progress here and there, but in the end you will lose.

    This country is owned by corporations. From top to toes, owned like anyone else owns a car or a pair of shoes.  We are owned like property.  Until that ends, you can fight all you want, you will almost always lose because money matters in this nation more than people, and has for some time. If you ain't got a pile of money, you are a steaming pile of sh*t to the pols. Issues or no, you better have money or a very good lifeboat.

    Which is why several (none / 0) (#39)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:12:41 PM EST
    people have said over and over again that until campaign reform happens, nothing will change. Obama took and spent more money on his one campaign than anyone ever before. He treated himself like a King, and now he's behaving like he doesn't have to answer to the voters.

    Parent
    I agree that it should be issues that (5.00 / 2) (#30)
    by Anne on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 12:19:16 PM EST
    drive us, but when we go to vote, aren't most people voting for the candidate they believe WILL fight for the issues that are important to them?  And how do we come to that belief?  By listening to candidates tell us what they are going to do, what plans they have, what their philosophy is on war, on health care, on crime and justice, on the environment, on energy and the economy.  If we don't like what we hear, if the candidate has a record that doesn't comport with what he or she is saying on the campaign trail, if it's all slogans and bumper stickers and lacks real understanding of the issues, we don't come to that belief that the candidate, if elected, will push the issues that matter to us.  

    If we can't believe anything the candidates say in their campaigns, how else do we choose?  By personality, good looks and charm?  There's not usually a swimsuit competition, so that's out.  

    The mistake people make is that they don't bother to look behind or beyond the optics and rhetoric of the moment; they might, if they could get more help from the media, but for some reason, the media believes it has to choose a candidate to support and one to malign, and walls off anything that might interfere with their choices.

    Now that the reality of governing is setting in, Obama does not want to be reminded that anything he might have said might be the reason people voted for him, and he certainly does not believe he is beholden to them for votes cast on the basis of his message (cash is another matter, apparently: money talks); this "it's not my problem if that's how you heard and interpreted something I said" attitude just isn't working for me, and shouldn't work for anyone else.

    With apologies to Lynn Anderson:

    I beg your pardon,
    I am entitled to the rose garden.
    Along with the sunshine,
    Heavenly music makes me feel just fine.
    When I fake it, you gotta take it, so live and let live,
    Or let go.
    I beg your pardon,
    I am entitled to the rose garden.

    I could promise you things like health care that sings,
    But you don't find roses growin' on Reid and Nelson.
    So you better take a pill, son.
    Well, since sweet-talkin' you has made it come true,
    I am laughing my ass off with Axe and Rahmmie,
    "Please keep lookin' for that pony!
    So smile for a while and let's be jolly:
    Betrayal shouldn't be so melancholy.
    Stand back and let my good times be mine alone.

    I beg your pardon,
    I am entitled to the rose garden.
    Along with the sunshine,
    Heavenly music makes me feel just fine.

    I beg your pardon,
    I am entitled to the rose garden.

    I have sung you a tune that promised you the moon,
    And you're still sadly waiting for it all to come true,
    But, please don't boo-hoo, there's still something that you can do.
    You better leap before you look, and buy my next book,
    So keep writing those checks, and hope I'll decide to pull you out,
    I'm really good at just talkin' it out.
    So smile for a while and let's be jolly:
    Betrayal shouldn't be so melancholy.
    Stand back and let my good times be mine alone.

    I beg your pardon,
    I am entitled to the rose garden.
    Along with the sunshine,
    Heavenly music makes me feel just fine.

    We need this to be about us, but we are being "led" by someone who thinks it is all about him.

    Awesome! (none / 0) (#32)
    by prittfumes on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 12:34:19 PM EST
    Excuse me, but imo this bears repeating:
    The mistake people make is that they don't bother to look behind or beyond the optics and rhetoric of the moment; they might, if they could get more help from the media, but for some reason, the media believes it has to choose a candidate to support and one to malign, and walls off anything that might interfere with their choices.


    Parent
    Sure, all pols break promises ... (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 03:57:18 PM EST
    but Obama has broken both the spirit and letter of his promises by allowing himself to not only become the lackey of banks and insurance companies, but to do it in such a stupid way that even the dumbest dumbbells in dumbtown can see it.

    And, unlike Bill Clinton, nothing in Obama's history suggests he has the ability to pivot and comeback from this.

    Obama's remaining ace in the hole is the even more idiotic way the Republican Party is acting.  But that's a thin reed to balance a political future upon.

    In short, Obama's allowed ... (none / 0) (#48)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 04:18:32 PM EST
    this edit to seem credible.

    Parent
    Obama says he KEPT EVERY PROMISE (none / 0) (#2)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 08:57:39 AM EST
    on HCR. His campaign promises, ALL of them, are represented in this bill.

    Well (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:04:58 AM EST
    He's lying. Not the first pol to do that.

    Parent
    That's right....he lied about lying (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 02:08:20 PM EST
    And, that is the case on more than just the HCR issue.


    Parent
    Frankly Speaking (none / 0) (#11)
    by samsguy18 on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 09:53:21 AM EST
    I am fed up with the lies, spin and manipulation from our politicians..... Especially from this administration. As they play games there is a large contingent of Americans whose lives have been decimated and have lost all hope.

    You can't fight for ANYthing... (none / 0) (#28)
    by Dadler on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 11:33:52 AM EST
    ...in this country without a giant pile of money. Oh you can try, you may even make a little progress here and there, but in the end you will lose.

    This country is owned by corporations. From top to toes, owned like anyone else owns a car or a pair of shoes.  We are owned like property.  Until that ends, you can fight all you want, you will almost always lose because money matters in this nation more than people, and has for some time. If you ain't got a pile of money, you are a steaming pile of sh*t to the pols. Issues or no, you better have money or you better be extremely bouyant.

    Dont let the bastards (5.00 / 1) (#33)
    by jondee on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 12:46:33 PM EST
    get you down, Dadler.

    He who laughs last, laughs best. And those f*ckers dont even know how to laugh.

    Parent

    The American Revolution has failed (5.00 / 3) (#43)
    by Cream City on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 03:06:21 PM EST
    and we have to face it.  The Revolution was not just about overthrowing the king.  It was about recognition of the newly rising non-nobility in English(-American) society, the mercantile and artisan class that soon was to be labeled the middling classes and then the middle class.

    But campaigns in this country again have become just opportunities for largesse to win political power -- and the largesse has become so large that it no longer is within the power of the middle class to wield such fiscal influence.

    It is time for another American Revolution -- and look, the current president is the opposite of the one needed to lead it; he likes to get in bed with Republicans, corporates, and the like.

    So first, what is needed is another revolution in the Democratic Party.  Like the one seen in the '60s that now also has been dismantled, thanks to Donna Brazile (whose very existence in leadership, as a woman and of color, is owed to that '60s revolution, but the country and the party now are full of ingrates uneducated in even recent history).  But I don't see that internal revolution happening anytime soon, with what we saw last year from the followers in the party as well as the leaders.

    So -- when I see any hope for change of the system from within, I stick with it and try.  That hope does not exist now, so then all that I can do in an unfair system is opt out and go on my own, and do all I can to take care of my own.

    That's the death of liberalism.  Let's hope that it is not a corpse but only in a coma.

    Parent

    It is all about the money (none / 0) (#34)
    by Militarytracy on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 01:03:21 PM EST
    And it is broken because of it.  Whenever anyone says that they'll fix that though and people put them into power, that money looks like it could possibly belong to them and the original idea evaporates.  I feel set up right now too.  I don't know how, but I feel that way.  We have to have election finance reform.  We really have to have it.  I don't think we are gong to get healthcare reform now.  Since I had no other choices, I did want to believe that the Demcrats could be a bunch of bought off losers and somehow we could get some healthcare reform that could help people.  I don't think so now.  How can you tell people that they have to accept mandates forced upon them by this bunch and the President telling huge whopping lies?  How did that photo come to be though?  I guess if you both have a (D) after your name all photos are harmless even if you cutting questionable deals. What I do know is that no Republican and anyone backing them that could benefit will drop any possible investigations, and even our President had secret meetings in this to point out.  What I do know is that since money runs D.C. there isn't any hope for the rest of us.

    Parent
    Everyone Campaign-Lies Evah is only satisfying ... (none / 0) (#42)
    by Ellie on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 03:03:16 PM EST
    ... when New, One-Party, Post-Partisan Hopey Changey Transparency isn't the main plank of an inexperienced candidate running on trust-me gossamer like "talent", "brilliance", "judgment".

    People have a right to expect a shred of those qualities at work, even one example of it.

    NTM, the toxic argument of We Hate Her/Them and They/Them and Her Hate Each Other that wended through the speechifying -- and offered as idiotic "proof" of Obama's bona fides -- was little more than an attack on political opponents for simply being opponents.

    Broken record: oBots bought him, he pwn3d them now but guess who's increasingly paying for it?

    I want my uterus back.

    The "He campaigned on" double standard (none / 0) (#47)
    by Ben Masel on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 04:06:14 PM EST
    On public option we're supposed to just forget, yet, often the same folks, seek to stifle dissent from the Afghan escalation with "you knew when you voted for him."

    He blatently lied during the campaign (none / 0) (#50)
    by Inspector Gadget on Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 08:54:24 PM EST
    and got a free pass. Public funding!

    For anyone to think he cared how many more lies he got caught on is laughable. They voted him in despite the proof he wasn't good for his word.

    We didn't just predict he would be a lousy POTUS, we predicted he could blow it to a level where we won't see another D administration for decades.


    Parent