So I didn’t get near the Obama fundraiser in LA last night, though I certainly put in a good effort. I seem to have gotten on the road too late and toward Exposition Park much too late to do anything about it. So I missed a very perturbed Barack Obama endure heckling from the LGBT community. I had heard that some pro-gay rights advocates would be in the audience at the fundraiser for the DNC and Sen. Barbara Boxer, but I didn’t know they’d take it as far as they did. But they were loud and unrelenting, and it clearly got to Obama. The video is here. And a partial transcript, which doesn’t really do it justice:
THE PRESIDENT: — you know, California has been a leader in promoting hybrids and cleaner burning fuels, and appropriately, you have in Barbara Boxer a subcompact senator with a seemingly inexhaustible supply of energy. (Applause.) She’s passionate about fighting for jobs, jobs with good wages, jobs with good benefits. She’s passionate about fighting for California’s families. She is –
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell!”
THE PRESIDENT: We are going to do that. Hey, hold on a second, hold on a second. We are going to do that.
AUDIENCE: Yes, we can! Yes, we can! Yes, we can! Yes, we can!
THE PRESIDENT: Here we go. All right — guys, guys, all right. I agree, I agree, I agree. (Applause.) Now –
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Inaudible.)
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no, no, listen. What the young man was talking about was we need to — we need to repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” which I agree with and which we have begun to do. (Applause.) But let me say this: When you’ve got an ally like Barbara Boxer and you’ve got an ally like me who are standing for the same thing, then you don’t know exactly why you’ve got to holler, because we already hear you, all right? (Applause.) I mean, it would have made more sense to holler that at the people who oppose it. (Applause.) [...]
AUDIENCE MEMBER: It’s time for equality for all Americans!
THE PRESIDENT: I’m sorry, do you want to come up here? (Applause.) You know, the — all right, because can I just say, once again, Barbara and I are supportive of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” so I don’t know why you’re hollering.
Now, the problems that we have here put a further strain on folks in this state, forcing painful choices about where to spend and where to save. And the challenges folks have been facing here –
AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Inaudible.)
AUDIENCE: Yes, we can! Yes, we can! Yes, we can! Yes, we can!
THE PRESIDENT: Barbara — I just — everybody, I just wanted to confirm — I just wanted to confirm — I just checked with Barbara, so if anybody else is thinking about starting a chant, Barbara didn’t even vote for “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” in the first place, so you know she’s going to be in favor of repealing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.” (Applause.)
As John Aravosis said last night, this has been an ongoing public relations disaster for this White House. The strains with the gay community started last year, and they basically haven’t stopped, despite the bone or two thrown the way of the LGBT community. The President insisted that he supports repealing DADT and has “begun to do that,” but everyone can plainly see that the Pentagon’s one-year study has blocked progress, and by 2011, the majorities needed for passage simply won’t be there. For months since the President announced at the State of the Union that he would get DADT repealed this year, the White House strategy has been non-existent. Congressmen like Barney Frank have asked for answers and received none. The President can run but he cannot hide on this issue.
GetEQUAL, the group who basically put together this protest, represents a segment of the gay community which is simply fed up with broken promises. They have basically been radicalized, and this won’t stop. I think Aravosis is right to call it “ongoing civil disobedience.”




92 Comments

Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About FDL News Desk
Always remember, with Obama, the people who get the goodies are NOT the people who worked their asses off to get him elected.
First of all, I cannot believe any self-respecting fact appreciating blogger or journalist would actually with a straight face reference John Aravotis of Americablog. You are kidding right?
Secondly, public relations disaster for the White House? Yea, um, probably a good idea to quit reading that Americablog garbage. It’s making you sound anything BUT informed. You should check out this Huff Post piece Why Obama Was Interrupted in Los Angeles–it was posted last night about the interruptions of President Obamas speech:
No, my friend, if anything I’d say a strong backlash is bubbling up against LGBTs and those folks in that community who have insisted on employing teabagger tactics as their mode of choice in fighting for equality.
Yup – LGBTs have been totally had by Obama.
The Blackberry Bubble is cracking.
Yeah, those “teabagger tactics” are so ineffectual. They’re almost as worthless as volunteering your time, money and energy to campaigns and expecting
youra corporate tool of a president to deliver on his promises.laker, I hope you are wrong. Homophobia is a terrible thing right behind racism. I remember when individual freedoms came from being an American. Today one must be a white Christian straight man. This is not my America. Equality is equality and I marched with King and saw it become a reality that black Americans were equal. I’m not quite old enough to have marched for suffrage, but I would have done it in a minute.
Who knew the LGBT community was racist.
I for one would like to hear Rahm Emanuel’s thoughts on this.
AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen David Dayen and the Firepup Freedom Fighters:
Now if the phony, latte-drinkin’, “liberal” feminists would take a lesson from our gay brothers and sisters and heckle the hell outta Obama and the California pseudo feminists like Boxer and Pelosi on choice we might get rid of “incremental” politics, Rahm Emmanuel, NOW and NARL all at once and maybe we could get sumpthin’ done in Congress.
It is time to push hard from the real left grassroots and let politicians like Obama know that they’re toast if they don’t grow a pair and stand up for those who got ‘em elected, ‘cuz they’re probably toast anyway.
KEEP THE FAITH AND PASS THE AMMUNITION,WHERE DOES IT SAY WE NEED TO HAVE GOOD MANNERS?
So a backlash is bubbling up against us rowdy LGBT types? Most of us are pretty used to being targets for hatred and violence. If demanding equal status as citizens from the very people that promised to provide it is making them so uncomfortable that their devoted followers are ready to do some bashing, it sure as hell won’t be the first time. Say it LOUD, I’m gay and I’m proud.
David, for you to post this thread, is an act of courage. With so many progressive bloggers so desperately refusing to acknowledge just how far to the right Obama is moving, as a former supporter, I’m glad that progressives are showing up to rag on him.
Most of what we get is some progressive bloggers using the crazies (how many chickendicks were at those walk-around-strapped rallies? Not enough to worry me, is all I can say.) as red herrings to drag across Obama’s trail to cover his doing rehab on the republicans after we helped him stomp them in the election.
There are threads on progressive blogs, about the wingnuts wearing guns, and on the same thread, not a peep about the fact that last May, Mr. Centrist signed the bill making it possible for them to carry in our national parks. That’s not just shitty blogging, it’s very dishonest blogging, and it needs to stop.
Again, thanks for putting this up, and thanks to the demonstrators at Obama’s speech AND to the posters on here, for busting Obama’s feckless ass. :o)
You are defending poor President Obama’s broken promises. Did you believe him the first time around, and do you still believe in change you can believe in hoping for.
We are going to do that. Hey, hold on a second, hold on a second. We are going to do that.
THEN FUCKING DO IT AND QUIT FUCKING TALKING ABOUT DOING IT!
Obama, of course, would LOVE to do this, but first, he has to get Dawn Johnson confirmed… ohwaitaminnit…
We’re going to do it, maybe, if you give me a second term.
And whatever John Aravosis’ credentials are or are not, it IS a PR disaster. In point of fact, what those hecklers were saying, was:
“Mr. President you promised leadership; not followership. If you don’t even TRY to deliver on that, then we’re going to remind you of it.”
Which is something that we should all be saying, as we head for the mid-terms.
“This is a guy who spent more time picking out his dog, Bo, and playing with him on the White House lawn than he has working for equality for gay people.” – James Pietrangelo II
Obama deserves a lot more heckle time.
No idea how Obama got the support of so many progressive gays. He gave no indication that he gave a damn about gay issues. In fact he gave many indications that he thought the issues were not important. Did people listen to his rhetoric about gays when he was stumping in conservative states.
Our gay brothers and sisters are not alone. It’s always very crowded under the Obama bus.
This is an easy question. The alternative was McCain/Palin.
Yeah, why ndidn’t the Gay community vote for McCain and brilliant Sarah Palin. They love them. I have my issues with President Barack Obama, but after hearing complaining people who act like he should be thankful that they voted for him, after hearing all this crap, all the issues just go away. Let’s get Bush back after the Black man raises our taxes, give us another war and make the rich richer.
Yep, getting in Obama’s face can be just as ineffectual as:
Hey! Hey! LBJ!
How many kids
Didja kill today?
Never. Give. Up.
June, 2009:
Speaking at the National Press Club yesterday, Cheney reiterated his support for same-sex marriage. That officially puts him to the left of President Obama, who has endorsed civil unions rather than marriage, for lesbians and gays.
Right, because you were oh so won over by him in the primaries. Oh right, anything but that other bitch, right. I gather you’re a man.
[Modnote: please find a better term than "bitch" please. Thank you.]
I have no idea what the fuck you’re talking about. I am a gay man and I supported Hillary Clinton in the primary. Are you suggesting that I should have voted for McCain because Obama wasn’t progressive enough.
TrademarkDave @ 13:
Those caps speak volumes about what was needed. If he had gotten behind the good things he campaigned on; if he’d used the pulpit to remind everyone that the repubs and conservatives who were trying to block every aspect of any attempt (if he’d made one…) to salvage something from the 8 years of their fuckups, are the identical people who’ve nearly ruined us, then the voters who gave him that landslide, would have rallied to him for fighting the good fight, and he could have made history.
Instead, he basically turned his agenda over to congress, certainly knowing what the result of that would be.
Americans do not like a wimp-president…no matter how handsome or articulate he may be at TALKING.
It’s not too late, but I’m afraid that when the numbers for the mid-term polls start coming in, we’ll be smelling the fear-sweat from Obama and the dems, and that is going to make them move even further to the right.
Biden said recently, that we’ll have a nominee to replace Stevens before the mid-terms. That’s going to be a pretty good yardstick for where we’re headed.
Its nice to see groups starting to reject Obama’s overwhelmingly empty rhetoric.
We should judge our elected officials by the actions they take, and not the BS rhetoric they try to feed us.
This is a guy who went to hide in the gym and shoot hoops during gay pride in Chicago. Yup, a big fan of gays.
Not necessarily. But do you still believe Obama is a progressive President. Did you really believe he would be much different from McCain. I didn’t and I’m no genius. He’s exactly the Republican lite Potus I thought he’d be.
I never thought he would be a progressive President. I’m not sure why you decided to pick a fight with me on this or to attempt to paint me as some sort of woman hating asshole. But yes, I voted for Obama in the general and yes I think that having him in the White House is infinitely better than McCain and Palin.
Sorry mod. Need to stop borrowing those progressive words from the campaign.
He didn’t turn over his agenda to Congress….he used select Senators (Baucus) as his sock puppets to get around breaking all of his promises….easier to blame Congress, what could he do? Didn’t have the votes, yo!
He campaigned on a Progressive agenda because that is what it took to get the Dem nomination, knowing he would NEVER govern that way. It was all calculated. Where was Rahm Emanuel during his campaign? He’s a phony and a liar.
[citation needed]
Wow. I don’t see that. At all.
Obama after the rally:
“Uppity gays”.
Yeah I read that piece and you have no idea WTF you’re talking about. that article agrees with David.
You have any proof of that? If so please show it because I think you’re a lying agent provocateur.
And yeah man..those tea baggers are completely ineffective…other than you know..having gotten their message repeated everywhere in the MSM.
It’s about time the left got angry
[Modnote: please don't call fellow commenters liars, thank you.]
People who are concerned about Obama’s ongoing effort to legitimize and institutionalize government by and for corporations at the expense of our jobs, economy, and lost liberties should be shouting him down every time he steps up to a podium to deliver yet another pack of lies wrapped in a smile.
Good for GetEQUAL. Progressives showing some spine.
FIFY.
Somewhat on/off-topic, here’s an update on Harold and Clay’s situation as reported last weekend:
http://firedoglake.com/2010/04/18/sunday-late-night-harold-clay/
Word is getting around. Their story is being picked up by several blogs, who have provided email addresses of the local paper and for the county board of supervisors. Keep spreading the word, folks!
Goes right along with my 38.
Really? The majorities needed to get the things you want won’t be there? And what is the usual solution to that problem? Could it possibly start with admitting that disparaging the majorities you need to solve the problem you feel most important, is equivalent to voting against your own best interests?
Wow. I thought only the lower middle class did that, by voting with the millionaires. Turns out, it’s an American tradition, isn’t it?
What you’ve got to remember are the class issues involved. Obama is quite comfortable snowing the boogies of the HRC — who can be bought for glass of champagne at the White House.
Speaking as a veteran of the Gay Rights movemtn I can say quite authoritatively that we have gotten NOTHING from the “Mainstrea.” We’ve had to do it all by ourselves.
Repealing DAT would be a nice gesture. What reeally counts isENDA.
Besides, why should we fight to support an illegal and immoral war for oil and corproate profit.
If you seriously believe we “fighting for our freedoms” and hunting down Al Queda” over there then you’ve drunk the Kool-Aid and asked for more.
Yup!
Real mature.
With all due respect… well, here we go again. We on the left are damned if we do, and damned if we don’t. On April 15, a number of bloggers here got angry at us dfh bc we were NOT protesting against against the tea party rallies that day (although there was a group, apparently, called “The Other 95 Percent” who DID protest against the Tea Party rally in Wash DC with a decent showing of protesters, but surprise, surprise it simply wasn’t reported in most of the rightwing media).
Now that the “uppity” gays have decided to protest against BHO – and why should they NOT do so?? I don’t care what kind of platform BHO ran on or what he said or didn’t say during the campaign. WHY should they NOT protest????? – suddenly people here are decrying so-called “teabagger” tactics and saying, what?, that LGBT’s should just go away quietly and not do anything bc what? Someone’s offended or something??
I started this by saying “with all due respect” bc I don’t think derrick was one of the posters decrying that we here at FDL weren’t out protesting the tea party rallies on April 15.
But I seriously do not get that commentary about how the LGBT were causing people to turn against them bc they had the “nerve” to protest loudly at BHO’s event in Los Angeles yesterday.
Hey, I happen not to be gay, but I’ll say it loud and proud: YOU GO! Go out there and protest against this flim-flam Prez, and if I’m able, I’ll stand loud and proud next to you protesting for YOUR civil rights! And no, I don’t find what they did appalling or abhorent. Employ whatever tactics necessary within the spectrum of civil disobedience.
I totally support their actions 100 percent and am glad that BHO was publically called out for his b.s. Hope to see more of it.
As I read through these threads, I see many different viewpoints on the definition of “progressive” even though this is a “progressive” site. “Progressive” does not mean “Liberal” or “very liberal”. Progressivism uses liberalism towards acquiring ultimate power because it is the most effective vehicle to do so. All of you know that Obama didn’t have to do much to get all the liberal groups in his back pocket.
Now, you’ll see that Obama will work towards fractionalizing America into many different groups and pitting them against each other. Maybe you’ve already seen this a little. Of course, many won’t be pleased with Obama, but it won’t matter. He will have the reigns and they will all be divided. That said, lesbians, gays, and minorities will be amongst the easiest targets for the administration to deal with… this is not because of their actual sexual orientation or skin color. What rational person cares about those items really? People are just animals, so what use is it to get hung up on whether a dog is white or a different color… all are pretty much equally useless, no?! It is simply about acquiring and maintaining power, and these groups are easy to divide from the rest and throw under the Progressive bus that is well on its way.
Thanks for your help in furthering the Progressive movement whether you’re with us or have been an unknowning stepstool! I am aware that it may not look like or end up working for many of you like you imagined, but in the end, it is for the most good for Progressives.
Go Team! More please.
Call it whatever you want … teabagger tactics, civil disobedience, even “uppity.” This is what needs to happen. There’s no daylight between supporting Obama and getting *nothing* and worse for all those campaign promises and what will happen if we stop supporting Obama. Except maybe progressives will get some respect by NOT supporting Obama. Eventually. Otherwise we are being exploited and manipulated. Yeah, McCain might be worse. But Obama is no change we can believe in. And worse: Obama is an agent of the status quo. The only way to fight that is to reject it, no matter how uncomfortable rejecting Obama may be. They are *counting* on progressives “having no where to take their vote.”
That game is over.
Huge props and thanks to the courageous LGBT organizers, activists, and supporters in California for getting this ball rolling in spectacular form.
Oh and by the way, informed Congress watchers *know* that no vote, not one single *&^%# vote in Congress (such as Boxer voting against DADT) means diddlysquat. The voting record is a construction to be used in campaigning to sway voters … which is what Obama did last night. Because he is, after all, a very *talented* campaigner.
Wow…where was the screening of this crowd?
It would have been nice to see some of this dissent at President Obama’s health care townhall meetings…you’d have thought progressives were delighted at the White House’s health care reform bill, for all the objections raised at Obama’s health care speeches. Nothing but row after row of rapt, adoring, applauding and cheering folks at those events, eh?
Looks like the LGBT crowd had no intention of being muzzled on this one…maybe they paid attention to what was done to progressives during the health care reform debate.
I also saw somewhere ~ Buzzflash, I think ~ that Obama said that Boxer might lose if people didn’t start getting on board with support for her!!!! It’s gonna be really funny to see him whip and chide the base he has dissed.
Boo Hoo.
People are very confused about HRC ~ many Democrats believe there is *some* good in the bill where this is (probably) not and it will take time for the other shoes to drop. The LGBT movement on the other hand *knows* that they have been shafted from the beginning. They have been processing this and debating what to do for months. They are way ahead of people who have focussed on HRC as their main issue: meanwhile, “we” are in the middle of processing and understanding how we have been played on HRC.
They must be…right?
I saw those chickendicks. I HAVE A GUN. LOOK AT ME. To stupid to be embarrassed? Shit – I have a gun too. Most the people in my building have a gun.
Guess some folks think this October 11, 2009 article has gone done the memory hole:
“Because Someone’s Got To Liberate the Veal Pen….”
or this February 15, 2010 video journal:
‘What Happened to “Yes We Can?”‘
Nope. All members of the Veal Pen deserve to be mercilessly held accountable. That includes Obama.
Feeling behind on the issues? Catch up here at FDL, AmericaBlog and PamsHouseBlend, or even at this archive of articles by The Advocate.
and it ain’t over yet: GetEqual military veterans, including Autumn Sandeen, chained WH fence. http://ow.ly/1AOwy
Laker,
I agree that progressive and liberal aren’t the same thing. I’d like to read more from you on this. Could you write about the difference and your definitions of the two? Thanks.
DADT is the public option of the LGBT community, the real source (re: single payer) is to repeal DOMA. Obama will continue to head fake towards something, but frankly i really don’t think he gives a hoot in hell about either issue. With healthcare one might argue that he did care about it somewhat and maybe, just maybe, this was the best deal, but with LGBT issues I think he is every bit as tone deaf and dumb as the average GOPer.
So true, its all just noise. With a small minority of people agreeing with or being a part of the tea party, who cares what they have to say? They are just a louder version of the GOP, only they have even less of a clue as to an agenda.
The Democratic Party operates best when it points to a boogy man on the right to keep the base in line. While the GOP does best when it is a victim of the mean old liberals. To me it’s a lose-lose for progressive issues when we focus on “dog bites man” sort of stories.
Go Team!!!!
Instead of razzing the right and the left regarding the LGBT community, why not locate a person who could run for senate, the house or the white house. A fiscally responsible person who stands for individual rights for all of us.
Until this problem is over and our manufacturing base is back, we are all responsible for the layoffs and home foreclosures. We all allowed the congress to step over their responsibilities and we even allowed a corrupt President to take us to war illegally. I will not accept a redistribution of wealth to solve the problem. We need leadership in all phases of our government from our cities, all the way through our Supreme Court.
I want all Americans to live their own lives, marry who they love, and stop the labels. I had hoped Obama would be the leader but the religious right refuses to allow a black man to lead America. No one can say this tea party is not racist.
As a straight African-American I 100% support our sisters and brothers in the LGBT community did. Obama is full of it.
Early in his administration the black farmers who are owed money was about to get screwed by him. They threatened to protest and he fixed (maybe) the funding. I’m not entirely sure they received all the money due that he promised he would take care of while campaigning for their votes.
This is a great lesson.
And: if they had fallen in line, been bowed by the threats, and joined the Veal Pen to support the first AA President … they would have received the results of this classic bait and switch maneouver … NOTHING … when they were PROMISED action and worked for Obama’s election in good faith.
And IFT they had recieved nothing but abuse for their protest what would have been the difference? More name-calling? Lovely ~ that reflects only on the name-callers. It’s time to give up the fear of being called a few names!
There are some pretty lame posters around here. Just dump DADT and get on with life. If you are a bigot, there are plenty of countries where you can go and pick on people not like you all you want, but we do NOT need it here. Remember that the people that started the civil war were not heroes, but traitors to the Constitution of the United States.
Read it, I think you will find it interesting.
[modnote - please don't diss fellow commenters, discuss the issues not the commenters.]
He’d call them f****ing retarded, and tell them to go to hell.
Then around election time, he would openly wonder why they didn’t come out and vote.
The Teabaggers and the Religious Right are irrelevant to Obama being a leader. The real problem is that he chooses to NOT be one. The fault is his and it’s about time people stop trying to apologize for him and demand accountability.
Yeah, if you allow your behavior to be influenced by a bunch of people waving poorly spelled signs around, spouting off about things that have no basis in fact, you have no business running a 7-11, much less a whole country.
Thanks for your interest. I do think it is fairly important (or it should be to some here) to understand the difference. Then, these people could make a better decision about whose side they are on, and the actions of the president may start to make a little more sense. Unfortunately, I have to go, so I’ll have to elaborate on this for you later.
I think Obama is doing a very good job and he is leading exactly according to his (and Progressive) principles. Those who think otherwise, which, ironically, seems to be most here, must not really be Progressive.
Tzimisce @57:
“The democratic party operates best when it points to a boogyman on the right to keep the base in line.”
Now why couldn’t I have thought of that? Coulda saved some bandwidth. :o)
Christ, I am so sick of seeing Sarah Palin’s jingo-idiocy used to cover Obama’s feckless ass. A poster over at another bloggers site got after her for dangling rightwing idjits in front of her readers like “shiny objects”. It’s true. Like a lot of progressives, I think she was so desperate for Obama to get a “win”, that, never mind HCR: if Obama had told Reid to drop a bill into the Senate hopper to put George Bush up on Rushmore, she might have gotten behind it.
I swear to god, if Palin runs, I’ll send her $20. There is no democrat who can do as much damage to republicans; who can scare the living shit out of a lot of independents and even some repubs, as can Palin.
She’s our ace in the hole. The last thing I want her to do is be hectored into moderating her views. I will dance naked if the GOP is insane enough to nominate her, and so should all of the diehard Obama protectors; she and her ilk are the best thing that Obama and the democrats have going for them.
Run, Sarah, run! :o)
Laker@66:
“I think Obama is doing a very good job.”
A few quick questions, please? Thanks. :o)
Do you approve of Obama’s increasing the number of troops in Afghanistan by 30,000?
Do you approve of his opening up more coastal areas for oil exploration?
Do you approve of his telling Reid to kill the Dorgan amendment, which would have re-opened importation of inexpensive, generic, foreign drugs?
Do you think that the health insurance industry deserves to have an exemption from anti-trust laws? (Part of the HCR deal was that a move to strip them of that would never make it to the House floor. It didn’t.)
Were you in favor of a pubic option, to at least counterbalance the 30 million new customers forced into the arms of Humana, Blue-Cross-Blue-Shield, etc?
Do you think that the people whom Rahm Emannuel described as “fucking retards”, ARE fucking retards?
In advance, thanks for your answers.
Perhaps I’m not a progressive even as I see myself as a liberal.
In addition to the DADT issue here, the fact that we have more troops deplyed in wars now than under bush must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that the ineffective Obama forclusure plan has helped virtually no one and foreclosures went up must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that we have an administration loaded up with Goldman Sachs and Wall Street people must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that after 30 years, a democrat is restarting nuclear power must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that we have a dem president openning up off-shore dilling must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that we have a health insurance reform that is a republican plan must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that we have a president who still tortures people at Bagram must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that Obama says he can kill Americans overseas without due process must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact we should bailout black, brown, and poor white who are rapidly falling down the economic ladder but are considered special interests, unlike Wall Street financers must mean I’m not a progressive.
The fact that I criticized Bush when had his frequent vacations and golfing in his first year, and now I criticize Obama for doing even more in his time than bush in his 8 years must mean I’m not a progressive.
And of course the fact that I’m an effing retarded liberal must mean I’m not a progressive.
“The teabaggers and religious right are irrelevant to Obama being a leader.”
Best and most relevant sentence on this thread.
Although, I think it’s fair to say that IF Obama had fulfilled half of the expectations we’d hoped for, the wingnuts would not have had the vacuum in which to cop so much media-time, and to appear to slightly-higher-double-digit-I.Q.’s, to BE relevant.
psalongo; thanks. There’ve been so many sellouts, that I can’t remember them all.
(you forgot your close snark tag there)
Don’t think so hard, Laker
You might sprain something.
Obama is so goddamn smart. Except he ain’t
I get you, smart guy. I know what you are.
Straight as a corkscrew. Mr. Inside Out-ski.
Up is down. Black is white. Well, I think you’re half smart and I think you’d sooner join a ladies’ league
than support a single progressive piece of legislation.
Whoa. I read about this on Huff Post-and the first comments were how the protests weren’t “helpful.” YEAH, pointing out that Obama is a total fraud is not helpful I guess.
In other words, sit down, shut up, we can’t “hurt” this great progressive president that has done SO MUCH for us. Be patient, you will get your crumb.
If I was there and Obama mouthed out he supports repealing DADT-I would have said, yeah just like you supported the public option right?
The writer here Dayen points out the crucial fact that makes it the sham that it is-a “study” for a year then the votes won’t be there. JUST like the health care. Pretend to be for something and then delay it to death.
Obama is such a fraud it makes me sick to my stomach to ever listen to anyone defend him on any progressive site. Obama is “for” all sorts of liberal things until it he signs them away-like oh-women’s rights with the health care bill. Like civil liberties. He is a stealth player though. Some even believe him while he’s signing their rights away-because he loves you, he really really does.
After all he says it right? So it must be true.
Obama will simply throw the gay community a bone by appointing Elena Kagan, a lesbian to the Supreme court. But because she wants to put a bullet through the head of our civil liberties, no left-wing libertarian, gay or straight, should want Kagan on the Supreme Court. Not only does she want to turn our country into an authoritarian police state, she also wants to keep our country in a never-ending battle against the Muslim World.
In fact, Kagan is such an enemy to our civil liberties and such a friend to our warmongering neocons that she’s a fascist wet dream come true. Even though most right-wing fascists tend to be staunch opponents of reproductive rights, most of them are willing to overlook the fact that Kagan is pro-choice and thus won’t object to her be appointed to the Supreme Court. Kagan will also be a wet dream come true for Obama in that she’ll support him in his endeavor to keep all of his presidential powers that he unconstitutionally acquired from Bush intact, enabling him to get away with being just as big of a fascist as Bush was.
Is it not possible to debate without labels? I have no label and it pisses me off. Our civil liberties should be sacred and every single AMerican given equal rights. No woman should ever be forced into giving birth to an unwanted baby. No man should ever be forced into marrying a woman to save face in a family. When Bush 41 tried to move America into a One World Order Empire, I walked out of the GOP. The Bush family does not have a patriotic background and it cost him his election. Bush 43 tried for the Empire to be built around Jesus Christ. This left me nowhere. As a label I am simply pro-choice in everything and want a leader who will stop these illegal wars for oil and drugs.
No current political party can represent me and I am angry old woman!! I want a congress that represents the right (if not religious) and the left. The way it is today we all will be fighting a Crusade in the Middle East and then in North America. What do I tell my great grand kids???
I just wish an anti-war group would heckle Obama like this gay-rights group did in California!
Thanks tanbark.
I just don’t understand some of these Dems who think that playing to Repug hatred is going to save their skins by making us forget their abject betrayal and failure? So we’re supposed shell out cash, work for their re-elections and then get nothing in return. Sorry, but that’s bull. We do actually expect something for our vote and I don’t mean the absolute bare minimum. I just wish this man would wake up and choose to follow the destiny he is capable of.
Thanks. I’m glad you got my point despite my spelling and grammar errors :)
Excellent comment, Cynthia…and, now that I think about it, it’s astonishing that this hasn’t already happened, given ongoing events in Afghanistan. What’s the explanation?
Please tell me that it isn’t hypocrisy…
Thx for saying that bcz he truly does not seem to understand this. Obama has alienated gays, blacks, latino’s, college students, union workers, civil libertarians, and the elderly, because once he got elected he showed all of these groups his middle finger. Now I know in DC he gets the polite applauses even if he does the opposite of what he said he will do but out here in the rest of the country some of us are pissed off with his deception! I pray for the man but I will never vote for him again.
I’ll go a step further and say I’m not so sure that putting an end the military’s don’t-ask-don’t-tell policy will necessarily be good for gays. After all, there a very large percentage of Christian evangelicals in the upper ranks of the military who strongly believe gays are Soldiers for Satan. So, I wouldn’t put it passed them to keep gays in very dangerous positions on the front lines of war and never allow gays to move up the ranks where they are free from danger. I think that gays would be better off just avoiding the military altogether. Then again, I think everyone, straight and gay alike, should avoid the military!
Heckling, or supporting it, always shows just how classy a person is. Right, my little teabaggy wannabes?
Bravo, GetEQUAL!
This is how liberal activists are supposed to act!
No, we’d be teabagger wannabe’s if we only wanted one side to get to heckle.
Since THEY have been doing it (while walking around with loaded firearms, in some cases…) based on a bunch of lies and bullshit, the fact that some progressives are doing it based on Obama’s truckling with the rightwing idiots (such as signing the law making it possible for the afore-mentioned peckerheads to walk around in our national parks while strapped…) seems only fair, and not at all cut from the same cloth as the people who want “to keep government hands off their medicare.”.
:o)
Haven’t heard that one since grade school. I aspire to be better than teaklanners.
Liberalism or conservatism encompasses broad ideals that guide perspectives. For example, liberalism is concerned with social rights / civil liberties while conservatism is concerned with traditions / stability (and seeks to avoid anything challenging these).
Progressivism is more of a practical approach (rather than that which stems from ideals) that can use EITHER platform as a means in which to carry out the agenda. This is perhaps too simplistic, but think of it as a mixture of two components. The first is the sincere belief that people do not know what is good for them. Seriously, think of the normal everyday person… should these people even approach a ballot box to weigh in with their opinion? Of course not. The second component is a Machiavellian approach to the phrase “He who dies with the most toys wins.” Both parts are the guiding principles behind what drives a Progressive’s actions. It is just pragmaticism.
Bush actually leaned Progressive himself, but he just didn’t have the stones (sensing, I guess, that it wouldn’t have worked) to keep with it.
Obama has liberals votes in his back pocket already, so why should he make efforts to appease liberals if it does not help his agenda? Yes, I read that some won’t vote for him or whatever. These are empty inconsequential “threats”. He could care less. He was already elected on the backs of democrats and liberals. Do you think that the common voter doesn’t think he is a great liberal? Finally, who else are you going to vote for. The average liberal has no leverage whatsoever with Obama, so I suggest you start liking him and the Progressive movement. Another question would be, do you think he is either utterly incompetent or do you think maybe he knows what he is doing (and things just aren’t going your way)?
In order to keep his (and grow the Progressive power) he has to continue to 1) keep dividing and watch people tear into each other, and 2) cobble together greater coalitions of power. You can rip him for not doing what you want (as though he were trying ha ha) or you may call him a liar (which of course he is!), but the truth is that he is executing beautifully (autos, insurance, banks). Just look how everyone is engaged in circular firing squad! It’s awesome! He was groomed for this (and the cards fell right) just like Tiger Woods was groomed for golf (the similar skin color of the two is purely coincidental).
To quickly answer some questions… First from tanbark…
1) Do I approve of Obama’s increasing troops? Sure (and so does he, obviously. Look any suggestion otherwise is just sheer placation.)
2) Opening up coastal areas for oil? Absolutely, lots of money to be gained there.
3) Kill the Dorgan Amendment? Sure – think power & control.
4) Anti-trust exemption for insurance companies? Sure, if it helps his and the movements ends today. Don’t worry, when the insurance companies are no longer needed/helpful for Obama, they will be thrown under the bus, too.
5) Public Option? Could care less how it might help others, but it did seem like a healthy step to single payer (more control). We will get there soon regardless.
6) Are liberals “fucking” retards? I think I could live without the simple word choice – it exudes basic ignorance in my opinion (though I know this is not always the case). But, yes, I would agree with the assessment for most liberals (and conservatives and people in general).
To psalongo:
I think you might not be a Progressive. Perhaps you could piece your impressive list together and arrive to the conclusion that maybe Obama is doing these things on purpose? If not, see Rahm’s description of bleeding heart liberals who believe the administration desires the same things.
Sorry to all of you dreaming for the liberal panacea where we could all hold hands and there would be no war and your social justice would be satisfied, but this is wholly unrealistic. Your vote and activism was needed, so, yes, you were used, but this is the way of the world, no?
Holy Shit, Laker! With those answers, you’re saying other people aren’t progressives?
No wonder you think that Bush “leaned progressive” on some things.
(Could you tell us which ones?)
If you think Obama is “growing progressive power” by doing those things I asked you about, then I feel like I’m discussing geography with someone who thinks the earth is flat.
Have a good one, Mary Poppins. :o)
I don’t care what you “aspire” to be.
I’m more concerned with keeping some pressure on Mr. Centrist, so he doesn’t totally sell us out, and if that involves a little public reminding that we expect him to do the right thing, then, that’s the right thing to do.
Yes, I understand your troubles in getting it, tanbark. Progressivism moves society forward through the acquisition of great power. This control uses liberalism (or conservatism) as a veil because in a democratic society, this control must be initiated within the established system before it can be advanced.
How would you set up autocratic rule in the US? Do you just go in by force? Or, would it be a slow (deceptive) process from the inside so that the sheep 1) don’t perceive it’s growth until it is too late to stop, and 2) actually believe they hand a role in driving it.
I understand that it is more pleasant to believe that everything is hunky dory… yeah, Obama just must not be executing to the plan (rolling eyes). Your denialism is funny to observe. Your expectation that a Progressive will keep their commitments even when it becomes a hindrance towards acquiring more power/control is downright laughable.
Bush leaned (and that’s mild) Progressive with the Patriot Act. Also when he said that he abandoned his free market instincts in order to save the free market with the bank bailout is very Progressive. These are both things that just worked to set up Obama quite nicely! Do you think that the encroachment of rights that the Patriot Act represented is a conservative ideal? Of course, not. Bush, in a progressive way, used conservatives because he had the repuke label, couching it as a necessity for national defense. Of course, in typical us vs them fashion, the left raised hell about it then. Now, thanks to Bush / Cheney, the Patriot Act (ironic name, no?) is in full force for Obama, and now both groups are accepting of it. Do you think Obama has any inclination whatsoever to end the Patriot Act? Ha ha… don’t be foolish.
So, what do you think of the Administration’s closure of Lafayette Park so that the protesters in front of the White House can not get exposure? Is the stifling of free speech a liberal ideal?
Again, I don’t expect you to understand… the average American won’t. Obama understands that which is why I can lay it out there on a public forum (a “Progressive” one, no less), and it is of no consequence. I am just providing a few… those who can see what is right before them… the opportunity to consider how they might best position themselves to take advantage of the Progressive movement that is steadily moving forward.
I don’t know what planet you’re on, but given that that you approve of Obama being bush-lite, it aint a progressive one. If you think that those answers give you the leeway to accuse someone of not being progressive….
“I don’t expect you to understand…” I’m glad you don’t, because NO one would understand the contradiction of Obama’s surging in Afghanistan, meaning that he was steadily moving forward in a progressive direction.
So, you can have the last word, Captain Bizarro. It’s all yours. :o)
[Edited by Moderator: Name-calling or deliberately insulting language to other commenters is not appropriate to this site.]
You clearly can not grasp the concept of what Progressivism is. You continue to believe that Progressive does means “very liberal” or “the new liberal”. It doesn’t, and I have explained this to you. Sure, Obama used the “cover” of liberalism and used libs along the way to gain power. When I say “power”, I am not talking like the power of a regular elected president… we are talking much more than that.
If you continue to not understand and do not get behind the movement (again, it’s all about power and not relatively insignificant things important to you (like the surge in Afghanistan)), prepare for serfdom and/or worse. Actually, I am speaking more to whoever else might read this… I can tell that the peasant level is the appropriate station. You are probably not far from there already.
Read over what I’ve written a few more times, and it might sink in. Have a great day!