“From what I've read, most voters didn't blame the economy on Obama, they blamed the 2008 meltdown on Bush. They believed, apparently, that Obama was doing all he could to bring things back from the brink and they wanted to give him another 4 years to keep up the work on the same track instead of the unknown of Romney's fuzzy numbers.”
“As a quote-unquote 'Libertarian' Ron Paul has a lot of 'splainin' to do. He's published racist views, he is pro-life (not pro-choice as a true Libertarian is), says Social Security is 'unconstitutional' (even though the Supreme Court says it is constitutional), and has several other problems that a true Libertarian such as myself gets a little twisted about...”
“I think your take is off-tune. In my opinion, Obama was not outside the health reform, and those who thought he was really progressive weren't paying attention. I think I support the guy now more than I did when I voted for him.”
jgoettsche2000 on Jun 14, 2010 at 22:38:45
“Obama supported single payer when he was a senator, he floated the public option as a step twords single payer when the health care reform debate was starting up. Yet, while 75% of the public was in support of the public option, he chose to drop it because he and the senate had been bought by the insurance industry. He sold out. Progressives flocked to Obama in the primaries against the anointed candidate of the establishment Hillary Clinton, they will flock to his challenger in the 2012 primaries. His politics looks more like multiple catastrophies on the level of Johnson's push to expand the war in Vietnam. Obama has chased away the entire base that gave him the democratic nomination. I expect him to anounce that he "will not seak, nor will I accept the nomination of the Democratic Party" after his initial defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire....just like Johnson in 1968.”
Ezra Riner on Jun 14, 2010 at 20:57:42
“And yes, he WAS on the outside in the health reform debate. HE brought it up when he did but then he deep-sixed single payer without even making the Repugnicans expend any effort to kill it, then turned all his honeymoon credits over to Blanche Lincoln and Max Baucus and telegraphed at every opportunity how happy he would be to ditch a public option just to get SOMEthing through. At no point did he risk anything to get out in front and LEAD. He just pissed away his 70+ approval numbers to let the most regressive Democrats kill meaningful reform... And then campaigned FOR them against progressive challengers!!! As for Bush's extra-Constitutional powers... he has not dropped a single one of them, has in fact stepped up and appealed every judicial setback that could have ended any one of them. And is Gitmo closed yet? And is his response to the latest crisis in the Gulf of Mexico any different than Bush's? Sure he was quicker to NOTICE but no faster to act. In fact, we're still waiting.
You are welcome to your opinion but, just as if you had opined that 2+2 = 5, your opinion is at complete opposition to observable facts.”
Ezra Riner on Jun 14, 2010 at 20:57:35
“I'll confess to having expected actual change when he promised it. In hindsight, that really was foolish.
But there can be no doubting that he is simply conducting politics as usual. The "change we can believe in" was a smokescreen. Did he attempt any meaningful change to TARP? Or even demand any concession at all? Has he made even one move to end Bush's disastrous wars? Has he really moved to put the war funding in the real budget and end the fantasy of emergency appropriations? Is conspiring with Big Pharma to prevent any changes to their cash cow as part of health reform "change?"”