mtmynd wrote:... happiness is a gift to those who accept it with an open heart, not those who feel happiness is a commodity on the shelves of Walmart... sometimes affordable and other times just another dream out of reach of those whose reach keeps them from attaining it. To rely on our happiness thru the cunning minds of Congress will forever be short of it.
well... exactly. that's why the d.c. corporate whore-out needs to be called out. by everyone. obama supporter or otherwise. especially when it contributes to rising poverty. i see atehequa's point. just wait until the next election and
then we'll see something. well, what if the next election never comes? or at least never gets on with what needs to be done?
It takes a smart man to dodge the salvos of lies and deception without giving up his values. But it also takes a smart man to know that money is what runs the Republic. Should Obama fail at his Presidency, it is only himself to blame. Honesty may not interest the thieves, but will always give a man a good night's sleep, ready to embrace the new day as a challenge from life... something Obama from this side of the fence seems to being doing.
it's an incredibly difficult job, and the level of corrupt influence is a big part of that. but i still think you give him too much credit. i hesitate to attribute honesty to a man who has basically broken a lot of promises to this point.
from the thread's beginning, here's the (partial) "list":
Obama failed to end the Bush-era tax cuts for the wealthy, failed to create a government-run health insurance system, and failed in his negotiations with Congress on raising the debt-ceiling to shelter Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. And in a yet-to-be approved deal to avoid default of the US government’s debt, Obama agreed to automatic cuts in social programs and defense spending if a bipartisan panel fails to agree on a deficit-reduction package, or its recommendations are rejected by Congress. Conspicuously missing are tax increases on the wealthy as one of the automatic triggers. The ultra-wealthy will continue to avoid paying their share of taxes, loaning their spare cash, instead, to Washington, to be repaid in full with interest — an attractive deal for the rich, a swindle for everyone else. The upward redistribution of wealth continues as strongly as it ever did under Bush, the only difference being that Bush admitted the ultra-wealthy were his “base,” while Obama doesn’t.
On foreign policy, Obama’s record is no better. He has failed to close Guantanamo Bay, stepped up the war in Afghanistan, extended the war to Yemen, and wages war in Libya without Congressional authorization — which is only slightly worse than the fact that he’s waging war on Libya. All this means that for liberal Democrats, Obama is a clear disappointment. But that sure doesn’t mean they won’t vote for him. And Obama knows it. Liberal Democrats, progressives and even Communists are so terrified of the Republican Party right-wing, that they’ll vote for anyone to the left of it, even if “to the left”, means a long way toward right.
not all of these things are "deal-breakers" for me, but a few are. i never really expected any serious health care reform; we'll never get over that mountain at this point.
but i did expect reasonable and badly needed adjustments to the federal tax structure to end the all-out looting of the bush era and stave off dangerous levels of national red ink. and i did expect him to more strongly shelter social security and medicare, etc. and i did expect him to be more proactive in phasing out guantanamo. from the (partial) list, that would be my (partial) list of sticking points.
i can't say much about the afghanistan escalation-- technically it was part of his campaign. yet endless preemptive "war on terror" (in fossil fuel-rich countries and corridors) is a deal-breaker for me as well. unacceptable. and though he passed some fine regulatory legislation to reel in the abuses of the financial industry, there has been zero follow-through, and whatever increased oversight was passed will likely be staffed by wall street insiders and apologists, as obama makes the necessary deals to get re-elected. but . . . as i almost always ask in these discussions, is it the man, or the system? . . .
and . . . as always, i realize it is much easier to complain and criticize than offer concrete solutions (or to imagine how badly i might get my ass kicked if i tried to do obama's job). and . . . like soo always says, look more inward and do more to affect change in a more
local sense. i get that concept too . . .
unlike many of my "lefty" brethren, i haven't given up on the man completely, mainly because the thought of another one of these bible-thumping republican nutballs in the oval office gives me the shudders. what "choice" is there? concern over upcoming supreme court appointments alone might be enough to roust me out of the doldrums and get me to the polls next year to vote "d." but that attitude is seriously teetering on the edge...
interesting discussion.
