GlennInVenice's Comments (174)

“I understand the system. I understand how broken the system is. I understand that if you continue to abide by the rules of the system you will only fail, like baking muffins with a dented tin.

To succeed you need to challenge the system and use new approaches, abandoning the tried and "true" that has led us to where we are.

For instance, if Obama had defined his minimally acceptable standard for health care reform, it would have set a bar that was never set and changed the conversation. If obstructionists made it impossible to reach that line Obama would not be seen as a failure in declaring that the debate would have to resume after 2010 had changed some of the participants. He would be negotiating from a position of strength and rallying the people on his side. Instead he is rallying the people to support compromise and accept failure as the best that is possible. In the process he has watered down his own brand.”

“Exactly!

Our real enemy lately has been the corporation.

This bill gives them more money to buy more power.

The next time we enter this debate the people will be staring at an even larger Goliath.”

“I think that the failures of this bill, which is a pattern of the failures of this administration, will cause the cyclical return to power of the Republicans. The mandate was for change and we keep getting served more of the same.

The Republicans fought this bill because of their hunger for power and their disregard for the American people.

Passing this fractured bill is an example of the Democrats doing EXACTLY the same thing; wanting to continue their power at the disregard of the American people.”

“Why is it that you cannot talk about the failures of the Obama administration without someone bringing up what is likely the worst presidency in American history?

Is it necessary to compare Obama to Bush Cheney to make Obama look good?

Cheney went on the record in favor of gay marriage at the state level. Of course it is only because he has a gay daughter but that is more than we are getting from Obama on that particular subject.”

“For months when I wrote on this site about my objections to the Obama administration's actions and inactions regarding the rights of gay Americans, I was repeatedly told to hush up and not get in the way of the oh so important health care reform legislation.

Now here we are, months later and the senate and Obama are poised to sign some legislation that is so flawed that even its supporters have to include the phrase "fix it later" when they insist that it should be passed. I see that as akin to holding your nose.

I had to wait on my civil rights for this?

Now I notice that the Obamanots are starting to get restless with the progressives who are objecting to the failure that is represented by this bill. They say that it must be signed so that Obama can get on with the essential work of addressing joblessness in the country.

If the legislation to address the unemployment tragedy is as terrible as the health care reform is, we will be paying $2 of public money to the corporations for every $1 that goes into a worker’s paycheck. On what basis has this administration earned ANY confidence that it can handle the next problem on the stack?

At least were Obama to work at fulfilling his promise to end DADT, enact ENDA, and repeal DOMA, he would be rated on a non-subjective pass or fail. Failure cannot be hidden with objectives as clear as these.”

“To those that keep saying pass it and then we'll fix it, I suggest that the sensible approach is; fix it and then we'll support it. Otherwise health care is not going to make the agenda again until enough time has passed to prove that the 2014 “reforms” were not effective. When will that be? 2020 maybe? How many lives need to be destroyed before we "fix it" because we couldn't do it right the first time? I am not about perfect. I am however against the current bill that is masquerading as a solution.

We have compromised America away until there is almost nothing left of us. If you have no standards for your health care reform, than this is the bill for you! If you are actually looking for meaningful reform on behalf of the people and not the corporations, this bill is reform in name only.”

“Arianna Huffington, thank you for the courage of your convictions and for being prepared to weather the storm that will no doubt come your way just as it did to Howard Dean and the few that dared to speak out against the DNC machine on the eve of their “great victory”.

I am sure that there are some who sincerely feel that this bill has enough merit to be worthy of being passed into law. I also suspect that these are not the ones that will eviscerate you for your post and for your opinion.

I expect that the anger will be hurled at you by ideologues that believe in the ascendance of the Democrats over the Republicans regardless of how the Democrats wield their new found power.

I suspect you will get an earful from those that need Obama to be the hero of our time so much that they refuse to see his actions for what they are lest it remove the luster of their image.

I fear that you will be the target of those who have such diminished expectations of America that they no longer hold her to a standard as they substitute the words of PR for the praise that cannot be voiced with sincerity.

Finally, I suspect that you will become the scapegoat for the guilt of fellow progressives who compromised their positions enabling the continued national erosion of our way of life in the name of pragmatism.”

“Funny, when we speak proactively about Obama's policies we are told that we are impatient, childish, and immature. We are told that Obama is playing a three dimensional chess game that can only be understood when it is done. We are told to give him some room and let him fix the horrible mess.

When we speak after the great one has made a decission we are told to fall in line, support him, and trust him.

When did WE become HIS representative?”

“Arianna Huffington says that we need candidate Obama not President Obama. This is her site. I think lentinelia's thoughts are mirrored by a very large group of people who generally align with the philosophies expounded on HuffPo but not the policies of Obama.”

“Why does the will of the right, who got us into the wars and the recession, factor into the decission? An even more profound question is why is Obama making the decission that a leader from the right would make?”

“I am already there but look forward to having you join me, well, us.

I do not know where our destination lies but I am convinced that it is not with Obama and not likely with the DNC.

Bernie Sanders is a good man.

Just get used to being confused with conservatives or being told that by not supporting Obama you are supporting Palin as president.

Maybe the failure of the DNC is the final step toward becoming a multi-party country at last.”

“It is morraly repugnant for you to lay Obama's decission to be made public tonight on a previous administration. It is Obama and Obama's decission alone. It tells us about this man who is our president and tells us nothing about the past.

Ask yourself why you need to go off on Bush and Cheney again on the eve of a major decission by Obama. When you get to the answer you will understand why I want this man out of the White House.”

“If Christianity would simply put less energy into trying to appear righteous and put more energy into doing acts of kindness, generosity, and self-sacrifice, they might actually begin to attract new followers and regain their status in the world. Instead we get documents like this, long-winded attempts to justify their hatred and bigotry in a modern world that is increasingly, and rightly, rejecting Christianity.”

“You do know that the state and federal rights of marriage go WAY beyond taxation, right?”

“It is bad enough that they speak for their mute God presenting him as a ventriloquist's dummy; I find the fact that they besmirch the good name of Manhattan by using its name in the title of the document most inappropriate. The city should sue for defamation.”

“Thank you for your posting.

I spent time this week collecting signatures to put a correcting measure on the CA 2010 to restore the damage of Prop 8.

Knowing that there are people like you out there helps to give me hope. You also made me tear up a bit.

For what it is worth, I forgive you.

Glenn”

“It reminds me of the old Pepsi Challenge commercials from a previous decade. By getting consumers to focus on the choice of Pepsi and Coke, Pepsi was effectively reducing awareness of the many other brands that were eating into their business.

When I criticize Obama or the DNC for poor leadership I always face of a barrage of "oh you will do SO much better under Palin - NOT" as though I HAVE to support BLUE cause RED is so bad.

There is GREEN! There are other third parties as well.

Parties aside, we need to stop deciding where we stand on issues based on party allegiance. Good policy is good policy wherever it is found. The bad stuff, which comes out in droves from both parties, is not worth ANYBODIES support.”

“Good observation.

Once again our legislatures dole out "one for the people, two for the corporations".

Joe Bidden the other day quoted "Once again it is capitalism for the poor and socialism for the rich".

It is a bad bill with a good name. The GOP are fighting it only because of the possible perception that it is a "win" for Obama. So you got the GOP fighting a bill that aligns with their current ideology and the DNC "compromising" left and right to get bi-partisan support that does not exist for a bill purportedly to meet the needs of the American people who seem to have been forgotten somewhere along the way.”

“Your white gays bashing is over-the-top. I is straight out racism.”

“When I blog about my objection to Obama's contribution to health care reform, the opposition reaches for the old "you want a Republican in office" response. That could not be farther from the truth.

When I blog about Obama not doing enough to shut down the wars, I am usually opposed with "he is better than Bush" or "he has only been in office 9 months" or something like that. While true, I do not see the relevance.

Only when I blog about my concerns that Obama has not been progressing on his gay rights platform and has shown us a great deal of disregard am I told that “white gays are off-the-scale racists”, that “the gay community is swarming with anti-black hate”, and that “we are continually blaming the black church for our plight”.

Is there racism in the gay community? Sure. Is it disproportionate to other communities? It is my experience that by and large gay and lesbian people have been and are fierce defenders of civil rights and justice for all Americans. We skew toward being progressive liberals.

When you talk about gay civil rights you push a button and receive a guttural accusation of racism. I believe that it is actually a projection by those that really do hate homosexuals and think they are a dirty sub-class that they do not want to honor with rights or to be likened to in any way.

Please show me that I am wrong.”

“I understand your posting and sympathize with you deeply.
Exercise may not be a good tool to deal with a current, on-going fight with depression but it is a great tool for helping to stave it off or reduce it.
When you DO feel well enough to begin an exercise regimen (perhaps it is meds that help you to feel that way), make sure that you start it.
I know that it helps me to minimize the down time I experience by breaking my periods of depression into periods of smaller durations with longer periods of up time in between. It is a way of deploying chemicals in your struggle but those that are released by the brain as a result of exercise. At the same time it helps your body, may causes you to have some social interaction, gives you some structure, and provides a sense of accomplishment that is not dependent on any external source.
Try not to be insulted by what is an excellent suggestion and try to utilize it when you are next able.”

“I appreciated your post very much. Thank you.”

“First, as with CA, it was not a decision to not provide a new civil right but to rescind one. Again it was a majority vote on an actual minority right.
To get to the point that it was voted on through ballot measure meant that the state legislature, governor, and attorney did not successfully intervene in stopping mob action on equal rights for minorities. If leaders do not protect civil rights, who will? I can see why people are moved to say “f$#k Maine” as I said “f$#k California” after I was forced to watch my rights put up to the vote all state residents whether they be racist, illiterate, neo-conservatives, white supremacists, religious fundamentalists, neo-Nazis, parents that had kicked their gay kids out of the house, or anybody else that wished to weigh in on my civil rights. This after everybody in the state had to sit through on on-slaught of commercials, billboards, newspaper ads and so forth telling lies about me.”

“Stop with the white gay bashing and get some help.”

“The CA Supreme court granted SSM, saying it was an inalienable right. That was their word, not mine. Inalienable is defined as incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred. This after the CA legislature twice approved it, only to have our Gov veto it (thanks again Arnold, you girlie man) but I digress.

The inalienable right was then put on the ballot as Prop 8. The prop was allowed by the courts, the state attorney, and the state legislature who must have been asleep at the wheel. It turns out my civil right wasn't so inalienable after all. My right was subsequently taken away from me.

The CA Supreme court allowed the CA constitution to be altered and never spoke to the fact that it is now fractured. It contains the equal projetection clause that they based their SSM decission on in the first place as well as the BRAND SPANKING NEW defintion of marriage, making me unequal. (If you doubt it, read their brilliant original oppinion.)

My point? Supreme court decissions and even equal rights and fairness clauses in constitutions are worth squat when they are not defended. They are fluid and, as an interesting new development shows, they easily overturned by a slight majority vote.

Why the courts are willing to denegrate themselves and our constitution is beyond me.”