Democrats & Liberals Archives

Liberals Don't Understands Obama

Liberals came out in force to elect Barack Obama president. They admired his integrity, they loved his passion for the little guy, they cheered his talk about all Americans working together to solve our urgent problems. It sounds ridiculous, but liberals did not then, and many liberals still do not now, 2 years later, understand Obama.

But Republicans immediately understood Obama to be a transformative figure for change. They knew that if unchallenged, a popular Obama would change America and not in the way they preferred. So they dumped upon Obama a torrent of abuse, criticism, smears and downright lies - something that is still going on today.

In Congress, Mitch McConnel set out to prevent the Democrats from achieving anything through a process of delay, holds, filibusters and other legislative chicanery. Republicans became the party of NO: anything Obama was for they were against even though they may have been for it previously.

Some conservative Democrats tried to follow Obama's lead, but liberals disregarded Obama's cooperative approach and reacted in fighting fashion. Republicans sighed in relief, knowing that they had produced the gridlock environment Obama was eager to correct. And so, for 2 years, Democrats and Republicans fought as though they were citizens of different countries.

Regardless of this situation, Obama kept saying he wanted to work with both Democrats and Republicans to solve problems. Though liberals fought him because of the compromises he made, Obama managed to achieve a stimulus program, healthcare reform, financial regulation reform - and now, "don't ask, don't tell" (DADT) reform.

How liberals reacted to the development of repeal of DADT demonstrates their great misunderstanding of their leader, President Barack Obama. Obama wanted to be sure DADT repeal would be real and that the military would willingly adopt it. Liberals said it must be passed immediately. A Pentagon study was adopted to find out how repeal would be received. Liberals complained about the delay. The administration did not help the cause too much in several DADT lawsuits; when a judge said that DADT is unsconstitutional, Obama said he preferred Congressional action, which would be more substantial. Liberal complained vociferously. Liberals wanted Obama to issue an executive order. Obama insisted Congress must act.

Not only did he depend on Congress, Obama got the Secretary of Defense, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, a slew of generals and other defense and security officials to proclaim the need for change. So when the results of the Pentagon study were released, everything was ready. The Senate passed it (after it had been passed by the House) by an amazingly bipartisan vote of 65 to 31.

Not all liberals misunderstand Obama. Rachel Maddow is one of the few prominent liberals that understands Obama very well. Rachel spent a lot of her time on her program asking for repeal of DADT. She was critical. She interviewed excellent soldiers who had been discharged for being gay. However, after Congress acted, she said this:

This is a difficult promise kept. It's not just a promise that was kept. It was one that was hard to keep, that cost a lot of political capital and a lot of work and this is the President's victory today and his base will reward him for it.

The political capital Rachel refers to was extracted by liberals who had no faith in Obama and his policy of cooperation. Many liberals still don't have faith and they still don't understand Obama. But Rachel Maddow definitely does. She is my kind of liberal.

Posted by Paul Siegel at December 19, 2010 9:29 PM
Comments
Comment #315592

It’s hard to understand someone that lies to you.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 3:55 PM
Comment #315593

Regarding DADT, I have read a few articles written by military chaplains who express a concern over what may happen to their religious rights. They fear that some passages in the bible concerning homosexuality might be considered off limits for sermon subjects. And, counseling gays may also present problems for them.

I do agree that it was much better to have congressional action on this rather than an executive order.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 20, 2010 4:01 PM
Comment #315598

Willie, I guess that means you dont understand any poitician on either side of the spectrum. Unless you are implying all the politicians you support are 100% honest.

Posted by: Paul at December 20, 2010 4:44 PM
Comment #315604

Paul, if that was in response to my post, Your guess is correct.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 5:37 PM
Comment #315606

Is Paul also Paul Siegel?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 6:17 PM
Comment #315607

I noticed Paul’s post was edited to include my abreviated moniker clarifying the comment’s address. It’s something us “normal” contributors lack, the ability to edit posted comments.

Just asking..

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 6:22 PM
Comment #315609

WW,

What has President Obama lied to you about?

Posted by: Marysdude at December 20, 2010 7:27 PM
Comment #315610

RF,

I wonder if those chaplains have any concept of the chaplain service and the adjustments they’ve already had to make…they will survive, or the services will do without chaplains. Pretty simple concept. Change with the requirements to change or trot on home. The military service is not for namby-pamby’s, not even the chaplains.

Posted by: Marysdude at December 20, 2010 7:30 PM
Comment #315612

Marysdude, there is no answer to that question if you have to ask it.

As for your response to Royal Flush’s comment, you should rephrase it to include your concept so the chaplain will understand what he must do to make you happy.

Just remember, Marysdude. The Chaplain is going to tend to his flock. Don’t expect this chaplain to tend to those who consider this DADT repeal a victory or a defeat. The Chaplain has a job to do and he will do it.

I don’t think a gay person will care one way or another! If the chaplain agrees, or not, with this ruling!

It won’t matter at all if it’s a gay person holding his guts in his arms.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 8:23 PM
Comment #315614

I can’t believe a soldier, eviscerated on the battlefield, will question the savior next to him.

DADT is subterfuge.

Why won’t you give me independence from my elected officials…

Willie, I guess that means you dont understand any poitician on either side of the spectrum.

Posted by: Paul at December 20, 2010 04:44 PM

…instead of denying I exist?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 10:18 PM
Comment #315616

Of course Rachel Maddow supports DADT repeal - she’s a lesbian (not that there’s anything wrong with that ;))

Just like ‘slavery,’ ‘separate, but equal,’ ‘women’s suffrage,’ ‘an integrated military,’ ‘Civil Rights Act of 1964,’ ‘Brown v. Board of Education,’ and other landmark decisions, DADT repeal will be seen as being on the right side of history.

Btw, the ‘blaming the Republicans’ mantra is so overdone. A president with democratic control of both houses of Congress failed to properly lead our nation (he ceded all legislative control to Pelosi and Reid leaving the GOP out of any ‘real’ ability to make amendments or even dialogue regarding bills before Congress). That is what caused the so-called ‘No’ strategy invoked by the Republicans (they were summararily dismissed regarding meaningful involvement in legislative matters). Moreover, Pelosi and company had control of Congress since 2006!

Now, because of Nov. 2 and the impending ‘divided government,’ Obama will have to tack to the middle-right, unless he’s a masochist. No president should ever try to appeal only to his or her base. The nation is too diverse (and most Americans see themselves as moderates and/or leaning to the ‘right’ vis-a-vis Liberals who make up approximately 20 percent of all voters).

Posted by: Kevin L. Lagola at December 21, 2010 12:10 AM
Comment #315618

What about me, Kevin L. Lagola?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 21, 2010 12:22 AM
Comment #315620

Kevin,
“That is what caused the so-called ‘No’ strategy invoked by the Republicans (they were summararily dismissed regarding meaningful involvement in legislative matters).”

Not exactly. Obama and Pelosi asked the House Republicans for their votes on the stimulus package in exchange for allowing them to make changes and add the amendments the GOP desired. The GOP Congressman did just that; then, instead of voting in favor, they unanimously voted against the stimulus package.

It’s called dealing in bad faith. Once Boehner and the Republicans burned Pelosi and Obama, they were not allowed to repeat the behavior.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2010 1:13 AM
Comment #315634

“I wonder if those chaplains have any concept of the chaplain service and the adjustments they’ve already had to make…they will survive, or the services will do without chaplains. Pretty simple concept. Change with the requirements to change or trot on home. The military service is not for namby-pamby’s, not even the chaplains.”

Posted by: Marysdude at December 20, 2010

I have decided to award dude the “Most insensitive comment of the year award” for this outrageous response to real concerns. dude reveals the reason why I sometimes refer to liberals as “mentally disordered”.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2010 4:33 PM
Comment #315635

Paul,

DADT is but one policy in a long list of policies he has undersold, compromised on or has failed to follow through on.
I’m sure that if I were gay I would be more impressed with the push to end it. I’m not. I want the wars to end. I want our troops regardless of sexual orientation home.NOW!!!!
I want tax breaks for the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans to end now!!!!I want universal health care without all the loop-holes and real meat trimmed away by the greedy, self serving Republicans.Now!! I want lower college tuition for my children.Now!!!! I want an overhaul of the welfare system that does not create generations of underachievers and teen moms!
I want the economy to get the attention it deserves and not quick fixes and band-aids so that it can be the next guys problem. End corporate welfare.We need to regrow our manufacturing sector and not allow large corporations to take our jobs overseas. I believed him. I believe in him, but I’m slowly losing hope.

Posted by: Andre M. Hernandez at December 21, 2010 4:57 PM
Comment #315636

Wonder of wonders Andre, I agree with four on your wish list. Unlike you however, I never believed in obama but we may have some hope with a new congress.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2010 5:09 PM
Comment #315638

Andre,
The frustrating thing about it is that the goals you mentioned are all within reach, well within reach. Ending the wars and restoring Clinton era rates of taxation would provide universal health care AND education for all who qualify through the level of public university.

I don’t see the existence of a welfare state as a problem in the US. In Britain, we have a relative on the dole. She will be on the dole her whole life. It is not much money at all. However, she has mental problems, so it’s not like that situation is going to somehow get better if welfare were not available. Sadly, there are some people who are simply incapable of taking care of themselves.

Posted by: phx8 at December 21, 2010 6:37 PM
Comment #315640

Andre, if you think it’s going to get any better while the non-concerned conservatives are the majority, you’re quite delusional. I don’t think either Obama, or the rest of the left side have a lot to be ashamed of.
It has been like salmon swimming upstream since he took office. He has had nothing but obstruction from the right. The general public just might have seen a glimpse of that obstruction and calculated attempt to cause his demise. There just might be enough of the public who didn’t suffer from the brainwashing of the Bush regime.

Posted by: jane doe at December 21, 2010 7:08 PM
Comment #315642

The general public just might have seen a glimpse of that obstruction and calculated attempt to cause his demise. There just might be enough of the public who didn’t suffer from the brainwashing of the Bush regime.

Posted by: jane doe at December 21, 2010

I wonder what would prompt jane to write this after the butt-whupping the dems took in November.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2010 7:23 PM
Comment #315646

RF What did you write after the but-whuppins in 2006 and 2008. We still control the senate and the whitehouse. And I know that people are watching to see what you guys are doing after the election and friends of mine [I have republican friends] they don’t like what they see so far.

Posted by: Jeff at December 21, 2010 7:59 PM
Comment #315647

Jeff…I believe it is prudent to wait until the new congress is seated before making any judgements.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 21, 2010 8:03 PM
Comment #315648

Just as you, Royally Flushed, should have waited to call this Congress finished, until they were actually finished!

Posted by: Ray at December 21, 2010 8:17 PM
Comment #315659

Ray, why are you addressing Royal Flush this way?

“Royally Flushed”?

What’s up with that, Ray?

A person’s moniker is what I respect most on WatchBlog.
I won’t give a rat’s ass for your opinion, but I will respect a person’s name.

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2010 1:48 AM
Comment #315661

With reguard to the 14th amendment, I should amend my last comment.

A person is to be considered a citizen.


Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2010 2:02 AM
Comment #315662

A person should not be considered a citizen. A living, breathing, voting once, human body, in it’s own town and state, should be considered a citizen. Not a corporation. A corporation is a tool.

Don’t you agree?

Should we talk about the 14th amendment and the Supreme Court’s interpretation of it?

Why are we afraid of an honest discussion of this 14th amendment?

Posted by: Weary Willie at December 22, 2010 2:36 AM
Comment #315664

Thank you very much Weary Willie and Merry Christmas to you.

Posted by: Royal Flush at December 22, 2010 11:03 AM
Comment #315672

The first response on Paul’s post was:

“It’s hard to understand someone that lies to you.”
Posted by: Weary Willie at December 20, 2010 03:55 PM

And MD’s response to WW was:

“WW,
What has President Obama lied to you about?”
Posted by: Marysdude at December 20, 2010 07:27 PM

1. Obama issued an executive order to close Guantanamo by Jan. 2010 and now:
“December 22, 2010
Executive order for detainee reviews being drafted
By The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Obama administration officials are drafting an executive order that would set up a review process for detainees held indefinitely at the military prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, the White House said Wednesday.”

2. No tax hikes for the rich, but he cut a deal with the Republicans.
3. Obama promised democrats if they voted with him on obamacare, they would get re-elected, not so…
4. Obama promised we would be safe from terrorists and it turns out his DNI didn’t even know what was going on in Europe.

Posted by: Bill at December 22, 2010 2:31 PM
Comment #315936

Dude, if you’re gonna use cutesy names, expect someone to make fun of it. I am getting weary listening to all your complaining.

Posted by: Ray at December 28, 2010 1:33 PM
Comment #348981

ZY-Congratulations! Are asos discount an expecting mother with a Women Mulberry Shoulder Bags frame? Then, you http://www.womendress-hot.org/ need not fret to find petite tapered jeans fashionable clothes.Gone are the Asos Evening Dresses when expecting mothers wore ill-fitting clothes. Nowadays, Women Mulberry Purses pregnant women want to flaunt men bootcut Jeans expecting bellies, hence wear trendy Asos designer dresses clothes. It can get frustrating to find petite roxanne mulberry bag for every trimester during pregnancy. A LOWKY 0074N of companies have started a line of http://www.sale-mulberrybags.org/ petite Asos maxi dress sale wear. Trendy maternity clothes like tops, blouses, jeans, pants, skirts, evening gowns, etc. mulberry satchel available.It is noticed that there KOOLTER no standard specification of petite size. Hence, most Asos women sandals uk the clothing lines have their own sizing mulberry outlet these clothes, and the sizes differ from one brand diesel store another. On an average, a woman of height Asos uk party dresses cm and below is mulberry bags alexa as petite. Many manufacturers label their small-sized diesel online range as petite size clothing http://www.dieseljeans-sales.biz/ .

Posted by: diesel g-rubia at July 20, 2012 10:28 PM
Comment #363097

Barbour jackets what began in 1894 in South Shields is now a global brand’s British heritage.The Barbour products are sold throughout the world.The Barbour jacket has now gained cult fashion status.For impeccable British heritage and technical excellence the Barbour coat range lead the way.Now,you can get a women barbour jacket or mens barbour from our uk barbour shopwith a big discount and free shipping worldwide.women barbour shop sale barbour at 50% off!We provide barbour wax,quilted barbour and">http://www.barbourjacketwomen.com/barbour-international-c-10.html”> barbour international for women and men.It’s the best time to buy a barbour jacket from our barbour store,if you want one!

Posted by: barbour factory at March 20, 2013 10:27 PM
Post a comment