W.E.E. Peeps Thursday Link Sweep

I don't think Baby Edwards will have to worry about running out of Breck shampoo anytime soon.

So that Michelle thing I told you about for SheKos is up: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/1/21/824736/...

something happened to the formatting, because that doesn't look like what I submitted. . .

can't wait to read it

just finished it – I thought you did a great job. you gave a great outline of what the First Lady has done this past year, and pointing out that she considers her children the same after a year in DC – how much that IS a testament to who SHE is as a mother. She is so proud to be their mother, and that's how it should be. she has the same look in her eyes when she looks at Malia and Sasha as Mrs. Robinson does when she looks at FLOTUS.

good column, Muzikal.

Thanks )

BWA HA H HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

[...] W.E.E. Peeps Thursday Link Sweep — Keeping Our Eyes on African … [...]

“Quincy Celestine- the reparations pimp in a Kangol. Chi-town stand up. *snicker*

********************DEAD*********************

WEE know unca Clarence voted to lift the ban on political spending by corporations.
Sotomayor voted to keep it.

What are they going to name this Augusta all caucasian team? WMCJ? “White Men Can't Jump” Lawdy, please!

LMBAO @ that poster!

Can you guys imagine if PBO had accepted Edwards' deal and named him his VP? And I bet my bottom dollar that Elizabeth Edwards knew that this child was his, but went along with the charade out of sheer ambition. See, that's what pisses me off about women who stay with their cheating ass husbands. They do it for superficial reasons like status, money or a shot at being First Lady.

Shout out to Jenny Sanford.

Big up, Muzikal! You really laid it all out on FLOTUS. Thanks for presenting the real Michelle Obama. She does us proud.

***virtual fist bump*** Sepia. Jenny Sanford didn't need “Markie” Mark my Appalachian Trails, Agentina chick” ass

Great insight into the corruption going on in humanitarian orgs. from ZiZi at JJP:

I have seen so much of this nonsense throughout my own travels in Central Asia and the continent of Africa as well as the grim stories my spouse tells me. Ever wonder why humanitarian missions have been going on in some places forever in the same form as when the conflicts or disasters first took place? Like Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Mozambique, Angola, Sudan, Rwanda East Timor, Kosovo, and on and on… Even when the conditions on the ground change the missions continue unchanged. The local population is never empowered to take full charge of the donor assistance. Why? Because in those locations deemed “non-family duty stations” donor countries are roped in almost as retainers. They use these humanitarian and development missions that they support with their nations' tax dollars as training grounds for their own nationals (kinda like right wing think tanks in the US that are really stables to supply the media with an endless army of slicked haired “analysts” spewing right wing pablum with the veneer of reasonableness), who then become the development, humanitarian, and world bank “experts” later on in the top tier of international development organizations.

During these missions to so-called hazard-prone countries, these donor-supported aid workers get extra money and hazard allowances that can double or triple their base salaries. It is a country-club-like network that recruits, trains and distributes the perennial army of western professionals who get catapulted incestuously into the top echelons of the UN, and international non-governmental organizations. Those aid workers (the myriad development studies graduates and civil servants) who join these organizations from the so-called Third world can only vie for the crumbs in jobs, not being nationals of donor countries and thus never having the opportunity to be grandfathered into cushy top positions. I could go on and on, but this is what Yele Haiti is up against.

I get the shivers EVERYTIME I think about when they floated as the ' safe choice', because he was the Southern White Male.

everytime – chills.

the bullet we dodged, is scary.

*fist bump back at ya* And you know, Shanti, I'm not trying to pick on Elizabeth. I can imagine her pain to find out her husband not only cheated on her, but fathered a child in the process. But if it's true that she knew all along, at the end of the day, she co-signed his bs just so she could be First Lady. What happened to dignity, integrity, and self-respect? It really pisses me off that women will let men get away with major isht like this, yet we're ready to cut another woman over trivial things.

I'm still getting my shits & giggles at the silly wabbits, ahem, I mean the true progressives™ who got sucked into his presto-chango conversion from corporate centrist into a fire-breathing liberal but Barack Obama was the empty suit who couldn't be trusted. Schadenfreude really is a dish best served cold. Heh.

That explains why he said that isht during the primary debate! He was trying to send a signal to PBO that he needed him to get the Southern Vote.

THANK YOU!

teeheehee

…The gall of him…knowing what he'd done!

Don't shout out too loud for Jenny Sanford.
She's just like her worthless soon-to-be ex-husband: she won't shut the fuck up either.

I aint mad at Lizzy, both have made their beds so, now they got to……

What up, Admiral? How U B?

i THINK it was Al giordano @ the field that noted majority of the pourage crew where in Edwards camp and his analysis was spot on

Is anyone else watching Matthews? He is grilling Halperin and Heiliman on Edwards not being an intellect, cause Liz said he doesn't read and asking them over and over how does a guy get this far on the national stage with no intellect activity.

I wanted to scream at the TV.

WHITE ENTITLEMENT!!

that's how!!

Nice write up Muzikal….I like how you emphasized that Michelle's core beliefs focus on service…to the less fortunate and those in need of uplift …she inDEED has made the WH and her& POTUS more accessible to regular American citizens.

A couple of things that highlight that you may wish to include is her turning the fountain green for St. Patty's day, their having Wednesday HappyHours for staff, as well as how they democratized tickets to the Easter Hunt on the front lawn. For years, the only folks who got those tickets were those who had mastered the invite access in DC. She and Desiree put ticket access on the internet. Boy did that make them howl.

And let's not forget her most recent greeting of tour visitors…she told them she is not always there..but the very fact that she stepped out and did that randomly makes the visitors feel that much more special.

KUDOS to FLOTUS for her committment to service…it is clear that she genuinely cares about letting those without power& influence know they too are important.

She EMPOWERS the people to beleive in the good of this nation.

Great job.

He knows the answer…

SAME REASON….

1. Glen beck has a show
2. Rush Limboiledegg as a show
3. Sarah Palin can be nominated for VP and have a show
4. Scott P. Brown can be elected
SAME REASON…..

Clyburn: 'Magic number on healthcare reform is 50, not 60'; measure not dead
By Michael O'Brien – 01/20/10 03:42 PM ET

Healthcare reform legislation is “not dead by any means,” Democrats' third-ranking leader in the House emphasized Wednesday.

Majority Whip James Clyburn (D-S.C.) struck a confident pose about the prospects for healthcare reform in the Senate as Democrats scramble to put together plans to pass healthcare legislation after their special election loss Tuesday in Massachusetts.
“It's not dead by any means,” Clyburn said during an appearance on CNBC.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

A Painful History Lesson
Lynching: America's favorite spectator sport

by Eric D. Graham, BASN Staff Reporter
POSTED: Jan 21, 2010

NORTH CAROLINA (BASN) — Legendary jazz singer Billie Holiday described it best when she sung “Strange Fruit”……….
Southern trees bearing a strange fruit
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root
Black bodies swinging in the southern breeze
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar tree

Before Major League Baseball was considered America's favorite past-time, the lynching of Black men was its “most beloved” spectator sport.

Oh yes, between 1882 and 1968 over 4,000 African-Americans were brutally murdered at the hands of violent white lynch mobs in which the towns people would put on their “Sunday's Best” and bring their children along with them and gather around to watch Black men being hung, burned, mutilated, tortured and castrated for their enjoyment and entertainment.

As a result, I suggest everyone go to the website http://www.withoutsanctuary.org by author John Allen and view some of these graphic photographs of our people being hung.
Read the rest:
http://blackathlete.net/artman2/publish/AllSpor...

Hey folks at WEESEEYOU…y'all need to go over to that BSerious post on J&J and break it down for some of them folks that are doggin POTUS about 'broken promises' my ass!!

Post-Racial America My Ass/White Folks Gone Crazy/Ku Klux Klan/Are You Gonna Play With Or Without The Hoods News:

“Would you want to go to the game and worry about a player flipping you off or attacking you in the stands or grabbing their crotch?” he said. “That's the culture today, and in a free country we should have the right to move ourselves in a better direction.”

The stupid burns!

Yeah, I only had so much space. LOL she did a lot of stuff last year, it's impossible to name all of it, so I just tried to get the big stuff )

WRB,

I'm sure it's the usual suspects. Nothing you can say will make a difference to them. Not worth the time. They wake up angry and pissed off.

Maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan, f*ck Jay Leno, he's STILL not funny. But at least Conan (who's not that funny either, but is totally getting the shaft here) is getting a nice severance check.

I'm just curious. Does anyone on this site (other than me) think Obama hasn't been anywhere near perfect in the last year and does actually deserve criticism?

You're right, neither were funny.

ITA. I didn't like his (Leno) little explanation about it being “just being business” and that if your ratings drop, then you get cancelled. If that's the case, then why does Leno still have a job? Jackass. I hope his ratings continue to drop when he goes back to his old spot.

Chad Ochocinco Begins Volunteer Tour

Bengal's wide receiver Chad Ochocinco and ten winners of a contest began a “Tour of Giving” bus trip across the country this morning.

The player and his volunteer force began their trip, called the “Tour for Giving” at Cincinnati Cooks facility at Freestore Foodbank this morning. The Cincinnati Cooks program is a free, 10 week culinary training program for low income people. Students get jobs in area restaurants after completing the training.

Ochocinco and his volunteers did some cooking with trainees. The food they made will go to an after-school program, which provides hot meals for low-income children.

Next, the group stopped at the McDonalds on Buttermilk Pike in Crescent Springs to spend an hour over lunch passing out free snack wrap sandwiches.

This afternoon, Ochocinco and his group will get on charter bus, making stops at different charitable organizations in Cincinnati, Atlanta, and Orlando. At each stop, they'll do volunteer work.

Not all of the people who are taking the trip with Ochocinco are from the Tri-State. Two winners are from New York, and one man flew in from Miami to go along with Chad. The tour ends in Miami.

http://www.local12.com/news/local/story/Chad-Oc...

Can you point to anywhere on WSY where folks have said that Obama does not desrve criticism?

I dont know anyone, nor do they know anyone, who thinks the President has done a perfect job or near perfect job – whatever “perfect” is of course, since its subjective in this regard. There isn't anyone not deserving of criticism. I just think the majority of the people posting here are not bed-wetters and are realistic about the world we live in.

No one here ever claimed President Obama was perfect or anywhere near perfect. But Wee do give him our support as he leads this country.

From Huffin&Puffin:

Coakley Could Have Won If Unions Had Gone In Sooner: Study
by Sam Stein

Democrats could have held the Massachusetts Senate seat if the AFL-CIO and others had been asked to mobilize voters sooner, suggest new polling numbers compiled by the union conglomerate.

Data points provided independently to the Huffington Post show that union voters in Massachusetts were 15 percentage points more likely to vote for Attorney General Martha Coakley if they simply had been asked. The problem was, unions weren't really operating on the ground until the final days.

Coakley ultimately lost the labor vote to Scott Brown by a margin of 49 percent to 46 percent, according to the AFL-CIO's data. More surprising, however, was the explanation as to why union members voted the way they did. According to the data:

“Coakley won union voters who had heard from their union by 10 points, while losing those who said they had not heard from their union by 5 points.”

Had unions been able to reach more people, and moved the vote breakdown to 60 percent for Coakley, 40 percent for Brown, “Coakley would have won the race by 2 points,” the study concludes. (Union households usually vote 65-35 in favor of the endorsed candidate, the survey also notes.)

Skeptics could argue that the problem wasn't a lag in Big Labor's “get out the vote” operations, but rather the lack of enthusiasm that workers had for the Democratic Party. Indeed, another takeaway from the AFL-CIO's data is that the working class simply revolted during this election.

But the dissatisfied union voter was at the very least persuadable. The internal AFL-CIO polling noted that “the union vote moved toward Coakley by at least 5 points over the last week [when unions were on the ground], while her position with non union voters deteriorated further over that time period.” In short: had they been reached, union members would have voted for Coakley. The problem was, not enough were reached in time.

“Union members can't be taken for granted,” said a labor source who confirmed the statistics. And in Massachusetts, “we weren't called in to the emergency till the end.”

Great job, Muze!

Well, there's the whole “fauxgressives” phrase, which seems to apply to anyone who has criticized him on a certain site at any time. Maybe I missed the definition of “fauxgressives” vs. “Progressives”, but there never seems to be any distinction. I said something about the Pres that was critical once, and I was told that I should take my opinion on JJP because there was a post there that I'd like as if I couldn't be critical of him on this blog. I don't think I've ever seen a critical FP post here on Obama.

Not every criticism of Obama is “dogging” him, some of it is legitimate.

So when is it “bed-wetting” and when is it a legitimate criticism?

I can dig that, and I think it's a good thing, but sometimes “supporting” him also includes when he's not doing something right. If all we do is praise the good, how is he going to know what he's doing wrong before it's too late to fix it?

With that being said, I do think he knows what he did wrong last year (and has admitted as much) and will be fixing it this year, but too many people are saying that his presidency has failed (not on this site of course) and then they say it was because “liberals” or “progressives” were too demanding/unfair.

So what's a fair criticism of him?

Thanks ) You guys are more than welcome to use it here if you want

Please leave that particular strawman to the folks over at Daily Kos. Nobody thinks President Obama has been perfect. No one has said you can't criticize him. The difference is in how you approach the legitimate gripes instead of lobbing daily character attacks. The shrieking mimis dominating the netroots still haven't grasped the nuance in determining the difference.

Well, he was #1 (why? I don't know) when he left the Tonight Show, so they are thinking that his “loyal viewers” will start watching it again, and they'll be #1. I think even if I was a “loyal viewer” of that a-hole, I wouldn't watch him anymore because he seems to screw a lot of people to get what he wants and that's not cool w/me. In the 90s he screwed Letterman, and now he's screwing Conan, and he's not that damn funny. If he was his 10:00 show wouldn't have been the huge ball of FAIL that it was.

Daily character attacks? Talk about a straw-man. So what's legitimate criticism? Have you ever seen what you consider a legit criticism on Daily Kos? Or do you see them all as character attacks?

Because I've seen even the most well-researched criticisms against the Pres. on DKos get called somehow not legitimate. What has he done in the last year that you disagree with and consider a legitimate criticism?

Considering that you've been fonting with us both here and at JJP for a long time, I find it curious that you don't know the distinction between “fauxgressive” and “progressive”. The “fauxgressive” term has been used for a loooong time, and has been clearly defined as those who claim to be supporters of Obama and progressive policies, yet their actions are about deliberating undermining Obama and the progressive agenda. They're the same people that you have been complaining about on DKos.

Whenever anyone has criticized the critics of Obama, they have been clear and concise with their analysis. Feel free to disagree with that analysis, but to suggest that we think Obama is perfect and above criticism is flat out false and comes across as a remix of the same ol' “You're an Obamabot/Kool-Aid drinker/cultist” meme that Obama's critics resort to.

I said something about the Pres that was critical once, and I was told that I should take my opinion on JJP because there was a post there that I'd like as if I couldn't be critical of him on this blog.

That's a serious allegation to make, Muzikal. Can you please post a link to when this occurred?

Its bed-wetting when the person fails to realize they are on the outside looking in and are basing their “criticism” on half-information, no information or just dont even care to get any information. Legitimate “criticism” should be based on more than the gut reactions like that of a child. It should be based on more than abstracts which is pretty much most of what is on blogs anyway. Do we seriously deal with the real or talk in a bunch of idealism? I guess it just amazes me how a lot of progressive bloggers get these delusions of grandeur that they are dropping this profound science and really its basic bullshit. This 'the big ole mean corporation' meme…….what the hell is that? “Wall street vs main street”…huh? Its the same damn street….so to me legitimate criticism just needs to be legitimate and not just criticism for the sake of criticizing.

I'd really like it if you could link me to some of these well-researched criticisms.

Two good blog reads today. Al Giordano and Skeptical Brotha. Skeptical is hilarious and Al is on point as usual.

I still don't get it, Obama himself says “Wall St. vs. Main St.” all the time, so is that something you'd criticize him for? I've seen criticism based on actual reporting and not just “gut reactions like that of a child” that were called bet-wetting or hand-wringing. Yet if those same sources are used to praise something Obama was doing, there's no complaint. We NEVER know the full story, so are we to NEVER criticize Obama?

What would YOU personally criticize Obama for from the last year?

HEADLINE: COAKLEY WOULD HAVE WON HAD SHE ACTUALLY CAMPAIGNED

Why did he leave The Tonight Show in the first place?

Wee take action such as phone calls, letter writing etc.

http://weeseeyou.com/2009/11/06/time-to-deliver...

ACTION: Time To Deliver On Heathcare! Call Your Rep. Right Now!

So would I.

Legitimate Criticism: Obama has not been forceful enough in his support for a public option.

Character Attacks: Obama is a weak ass pussy who won't stand up to the Republicans and he won't make Congress vote his way for this bill!

Legitimate Criticism: Obama and his team should have alerted Martha Coakley sooner that she needed to get up off her ass and campaign for Kennedy's seat and not to expect the WH to come in at the 11th hour and save the day.

Character Attacks: Obama is weak, he's a punk, he didn't come to campaign for Coakley until the last minute, Obama should have been campaigning every minute every day in Massachussetts if this seat was so important to him!

Legitimate Criticism: Obama should have announced a draw down plan to Afghanistan instead of a build up.

Character Attacks: Obama is a warmonger JUST LIKE BUSH!

It's legitimate when what you're criticizing is actual, tangible policy beefs. Not what makes Barack Obama tick, not combing through every statement for unforeseen slights or inklings on how the President “feels” towards his so-called base. That's what separates the wheat from the chaff. I don't get upset with someone for thinking that President Obama has coddled Wall Street far too long in his first year. My beef isn't with the Paul Krugman's or Simon Johnson's of the world. It's with the pseudo Che Guevara's who specialize in talking loud and doing nothing. The “let 'em all fail!!! and nationalize everything!” crowd. The “single payer NOW!” clique even though Bernie goddamn Sanders already told their asses his version of HR 676 only has a maximum of 5 VOTES in the United States Senate. Unless progressives, liberals and the like get it through their skulls that pushing the Overton window means each one, teach one through the electorate they despise as too dumb to know better and not kneecapping the officials needed to pass the legislation they want, they'll continue to pout, rinse and repeat.

I used to make a comfy living working in insurance up until 3 years ago. Office was smack dab across the street from the notorious A.I.G. I'm more critical than most of the self appointed keyboard consumer experts on what hasn't been done to date. But when the frustrations lead to pushing narratives that cast him as a puppet of his Jewish advisors including his chief of staff, a corporate whore because his grandmother was a bank manager, a tap dancing pussy with his pants down for the GOP, a sellout willing throw his own mother under the bus for the sake of insurance companies and big Pharma, incompetent, lazy and only good for speechifying. You begin to ask yourself, what else is fueling this reaction? Occam's razor leads me to believe, 2+2 doesn't equal 5.

EXACTLY!!!!! If she would have gotten off of her ass, she couldhave pulled it out. She went for +30 to -5.

Hollar!!!!!!!!!

Bedwetting: Deeds runs a shitacular campaign in VA and loses. Corzine was unpopular anyway and loses. In 2009. Daily Kaos Democrats scream and cry about how “WE'RE GONNA LOSE BIG TIME IN 2010 IT'S ALL OBAMA'S FAULT HE SHOULD DO THIS HE SHOULD DO THAT WE'RE LOSE IN 2010 SAY HELLO TO PRESIDENT PALIN ITS ALL BECAUSE OBAMA DIDN'T DO THIS THAT OR THE OTHER!!!!”

So the “fauxgressives” are people like Jane Hamsher? There's an ongoing anti-FDL backlash going on on Kos now. But that phrase seems to apply to “all” progressives the way it's being used it's like the two are interchangeable. I think I missed the birth of that word on JJP.

I have to see if I can find that comment, until I do I'll retract that last part because it is a serious allegation.

I've seen more of what you are labeling as “legitimate criticism” than I have of what you have as examples of “character attacks”

Okay, I agree those reactions are over the top, as are the ones that say what happened on Tuesday was a referendum on Obama. To the contrary, she had an uptick in the last few days when it came out that Obama was going to stop by and campaign for her.

Obama himself says 'Wall St vs Main St'….he sure does doesn't he? Now how would it sound to the media masses if he said 'what the hell, do you think the million plus employees of so-called wall street all leave their jobs going home to their house in the Hamptons every damn night? get off that shit about the wall street boogeyman and realize its ONE friggin street'…….now that wouldn't go over so well would it? naw, then you'd have the fauxgressives screaming like banchees that he is outta touch with the “regular americans”…who apparently arent those tellers and lockbox employees and account managers at the Bank of America on King Blvd that go home to their house in Decatur every night.

Now, what 'actual reporting' are you referring to that we've criticized? I really need to know if you're talking about something other than an opinion piece.

“Does anyone on this site (other than me) think Obama hasn't been anywhere near perfect in the last year and does actually deserve criticism?”

Perhaps, you do not mean it how you wrote it..but why o why does he need to be perfect at all?
Second what is the yardstick that we should use for whether he deserves criticism?

I will give you mine. He is the 44th President..and on the basis of Presidents historically and the issues he came into office with …NO..he does NOT deserve criticism.
The only other President in history with comparable issues upon inauguration was TRuman.

And in my book Obama stacks up EXTERMELY well and warrants no criticism on that basis.

So, I ask you Muzikal..what is your yardstick for 'deserving” criticism.?

THIS

“The difference is in how you approach the legitimate gripes instead of lobbing daily character attacks.”

YES!!!

The redirection of criticism of Croakley's epic fail to everyone else besides the actual candidate has been nothing short of amusing coming from HuffPost.

Thanks for that, Sepia, it is a good analysis. Was that the entire post, or do you have a link for the remainder?

Like Sierra Leone, Liberia, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Mozambique, Angola, Sudan, Rwanda East Timor, Kosovo, and on and on…

All UN projects, although they are not the only ones involved. And she did not even mention the mother of all UN boondoggles, the UNRWA, helping to keep palestinians in poverty for over 60 years now.

If it were possible to evealuate the UN's humanitarian efforts on the same basis as your typical not-for-profit charitable org (% of revenues spent on direct programs), they would be out of business. Horribly inefficient and corrupt.

I guess in 2005 NBC promised Conan he'd get to host the Tonight Show after a certain number of months.

“Daily character attacks? Talk about a straw-man. “

Strawman?! How the heck is that a strawman. I bet if I asked you to name an issue that you might believe is 'deserved' criticism, you would come up with only the memes that are perpetuated on nightly cable, in their quest to create constant conflict for ratings. Stop with this naivete please.

“So what's legitimate criticism? Have you ever seen what you consider a legit criticism on Daily Kos? Or do you see them all as character attacks?”

O HELL NAW! Please don't tell me you find DailyKos credible. They backed EDWARDS!!!! They did not back Obama initially AT ALL…and THAT is who you believe has criticism of merit…gmafb…they could not even see the difference between Obama and Edwards. They only reason they pick Edwards was because they did not want HRC!! NOT because he was a GOOD candidate..yet they are your reference point for whether this he deserves criticism…COME ONNNNNNN!!

“I've seen even the most well-researched criticisms against the Pres. on DKos get called somehow not legitimate.”

HA! Well based on this statement…henceforth your judgment is suspect PERIOD!!!

TELL IT!!

That is completely false if you are reading DKos.

He doesn't have to be perfect, he never expected his presidency to be perfect, but some people act like he can do no wrong.

I think it's fair to criticize him for thing he promised during the campaign that he hasn't delivered on or started to deliver on. I'm not saying everything should have been fixed by now, I'm saying we should be seeing foundations. One of the things I was critical of in the last year was a lack of transparency, at the end of last year the WH started to do better on that and I acknowledged that.

Co-sign!!

“I think it's a good thing, but sometimes “supporting” him also includes when he's not doing something right. If all we do is praise the good, how is he going to know what he's doing wrong before it's too late to fix it?”

Stop beating around the bush…get specific..what is it YOU believe he is not doing right that warrants criticism…spit it OUT

so you can get the well deserved BEAT DOWN you got coming.

BRING It ON!!

a fauxgressive is someone who self righteously state that HE/SHE has all the right answers and anyone who disagree is a DLC idiot. In spite of the fact that alot of them are naderites and green partiers, while the unions and minorities have been the most loyal and dependable of the democratic base.
They also forget that the so-call independents that voted for Obama were not the naderites, but more centrist in their ideology. Just like the independents were in Mass. Independent voters as a whole are NOT LIBERAL!!!!
Fauxgressives tell black people that they (blacks) only support Obama because he is black and that the fauxgressives are looking out for the black community. In the meantime they blame black folks for losing policies issues (Prop 8). Also if blacks voted solely on color why did more blacks vote for the white candidate over Al Sharpton.
They call Obama DLC and a centrist when he voting record is more progressive than billary. Obama is a pragmatic liberal like most black folks. We want change, but we realize that we live in a fucked up country and it will not happen overnight. We also knew that the brotha would be put under a microscope like no other President and would be attacked. We just didn't realize that it would be our own party. But then again are we really surprised?

SMH, and that is why I don't think it's fair to criticize him. You don't even know what I take issue with and yet I have a “beat down” coming.

Specifically, I don't think in the last year he's done a good job of telling us where he stands and what his policies mean (and that's something that he happens to agree with, go figure).

I'm also not satisfied with the lack of progress on GLBT rights.

No, I'm not looking for posts that call him weak or a sell-out.

Here is Al's post:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/
” Somewhere in America – actually, on every street – there is an Independent voter, or a family of them.

Let's call them Mr. and Mrs. Independent. Contrary to the hype, they are less likely to be small-i independent in the sense of open-mindedness and careful vetting of issues and policy positions than they are prone to looking, election after election, for which bandwagon to jump onto.

And that explains how, on Tuesday, so many of the same Massachusetts Independent voters that cast ballots 14 months ago for Democrat Barack Obama went and did so for Republican Scott Brown.

The harsh reality is that so many of these “Independents” can more properly be called “Bandwagon Voters.”

Imagine Mr. and Mrs. Independent living on one of those streets. In the house to the right of them is one family, devout evangelical Christian, pro military interventions, and desiring of lower taxes.

Mr. and Mrs. Independent consider the family to the right a little bit scary and weird. In the privacy of their home they might even make fun of the family on the right, which reminds them of that of the cartoon Flanders family on The Simpsons TV show. And the Independents don’t generally agree with the Flanders' obsessions against abortion and gays. Still, they share some of the same fear of people of different races (most of the Independents are white), they also resent taxes, respect the military, and they also have to contend with the family in the house to the left.

In the house to the left is a more liberal family. Really, it more resembles the Simpsons themselves. Often, if given the choice between attending a party at either neighbor’s home, Mr. and Mrs. Independent will choose the party in house on the left, as they did in 2008. The Simpsons are generally more fun than the Flanders.

But if throughout 2009 the dysfunction inside the house on the left – the screaming matches, yelling, pouting, expressions of outrage and feigned outrage – spilled out onto the street, it is kind of understandable that this month they chose to accept the invitation of the Flanders instead of that of the Simpsons.

The house in the middle contains the Bandwagon Voters. They will reliably, year in, year out, follow the neighbor that seems like it is having more fun. They’re Good Time Charlies, essentially.

This dynamic – more than any public policy explanation – describes what happened in Massachusetts this week and why it happened.

And this is why we see so many preemptive screeds by the same “progressive” bloggers that have been doing the screaming out in the street all year long. They are now furiously typing to mock the idea that they have any responsibility for the Democrats’ defeat on Tuesday, pointing fingers at everyone else, because somewhere inside their little pea brains they understand perfectly well their role in the dysfunction that scared Mr. and Mr. Independent away this round, and they fear – as well they should – that Tuesday's defeat will fall harder upon them even if their behavior helped create it.

Worse, they’re using Tuesday’s results as permission to scream even louder, disturb the neighborhood even more, yell “I told you so” and make petulant demands that things must be done their way, or else.

And this only makes Mr. and Mrs. Independent more smugly satisfied that they attended the Flanders’ tea party this year instead.

And the continuing efforts at imposed buzzkill by The Poutrage Club of the house on the left only emboldens the Flanders, too. It gives them morale. It makes them more content, in turn, more confident, and therefore more attractive come November.

In that sense, they very much share in the blame that they so desperately attempt to assign to everybody else but them.

That's not “blaming the left.” (I'm many paces to the left of most of those people, and many of you who share in this view are, too.)

It is, rather, identifying the dysfunction.”

x 2

“So the “fauxgressives” “

Let's be clear anyone who calls themselves progressive is simply too scared to claim being liberal. They don't have the courage to stand up and say they are liberal because of how the GOP demonized the term.

But ain't no friggin difference.

So right there you can see the progressives are cowards without the strength of conviction to stand up for what they believe in. They think if they change their name it will be make them more acceptable and credible. It doesn't.
They continue to be the wussies they always were, unable to stand up and fight for the principles, values and policies they believe it and who think changing their name will somehow sucker folks into listening to shyt they couldn't defend from the gitgo.

I can't stand the name progressive. what the hell does it mean?

IOW's…show me a progressive and I will show you a liberal!!

Actually, Jane has gone beyond “fauxgressive” territory and entered into “opportunistic, phoney bitch” land. I still can't believe that heffa wants to join forces with the teabaggers. But I digress….

I understand that some have a fundamental disagreement with Obama's policies. They usually say, “I disagree with x, y, and z” without all of the histrionics and slick comments. However, I'm also aware that there are those who have an agenda and a vested interest in criticizing Obama and seeing him fail.(ex. Hamsher, Tavis, Sirota, Huffington…etc.) I'm also aware that there are those who were never down with Obama to begin with and are just looking for the least little thing to complain about.

BAM!

“but some people act like he can do no wrong.”

AGAIN

What is your yardstick?

What are you measuring him against?

“it's fair to criticize him for thing he promised during the campaign that he hasn't delivered on or started to deliver on.”

Why? Name me a PRESIDENTIAL politician in history that has kept campaign promises. More importantly, Obama told you and everyone else he could not DO IT ALONE, that electing him was not enough. That WE had to send folks to congress that supported the policies that he campaigned on.

Did WE do that?

“I'm saying we should be seeing foundations”

Really? Why? Name me a President in history that you saw foundations on policies he campaigned for, after one year, who did NOT have a Congress to support those policies.

“I was critical of in the last year was a lack of transparency, “

Well, if you are looking for transparency..there is clearly a foundation. You have access to information that is unprecedented. You even have seen the WH visitors list, which no President gave access to previously. You have an entire WH government site on his positions, policies and actions. Additionally, Obama sponsored the BILL and now there is a site where you can go and see how every single dollar
is spent.
What transparency are you looking for that you do not have?

Amen!!

COAKLEY- 19 campaign events

Cosmo Poster Boy- 66 campaign events

SIXTY SIX vs. NINETEEN

Actually, Jane has gone beyond “fauxgressive” territory and entered into “opportunistic, phoney bitch” land.

Tell the truth, Sepia!

SMH, and that is why I don't think it's fair to criticize him here.

Based on one comment? Nevermind the fact that just the other day, WSYers were agreeing with you when you said that Obama needs to get tough. C'mon son!

This is what I mean by “abstract”….what did he promise during the campaign that he hasn't delivered on by the deadline he said he would and the reason for the delay is bullshit to you…what? What do you mean by 'foundations' for those campaign promises that you believe should have started…I need some specifics because I've read these type of criticisms before and like i said, give me something real and not a blogger talking point.

I really am interested because there are a lot of armchair quarterbacks in the virtual world, but damn sure aren't any real get undercenter and face off that linebacker quarterbacks sitting behind a computer every night. That's my main problem with these netroots/fauxgressives right now….they are straight up out of touch.

Arrianna's inner Rethuglican is coming through.

“Let's be clear anyone who calls themselves progressive is simply too scared to claim being liberal. They don't have the courage to stand up and say they are liberal because of how the GOP demonized the term.'

now that's just the God-honest truth.

ding ding, we got a winner!!!

“You don't even know what I take issue with and yet I have a “beat down” coming. “

That's right..I do know. I know because you can't SAY what he warrants criticism for. You want to allude to it, want to caste aspersions, imply & infer, without ever saying anything of substance.

All of which means…you already know you gone get a beat down. Hey, I will refrain from attacking you personally…but you still gone get a beat down on the FACTS!!

“I don't think in the last year he's done a good job of telling us where he stands and what his policies mean”

HA!! you crazy…he told you…you just let the cable networks drown out what he said….point of fact:

“Most striking is that he gave 158 interviews, “far more than any of his recent predecessors in their first year. Ninety of the sessions were TV interviews. Eleven were radio. The rest were newspaper and magazine. The number reflects the White House media strategy that Mr. Obama can best respond to questions in an interview setting.”
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/20/politic...

He also held 42 news conferences, of which 5 were formal.”

But the deal is that no matter how often he is on…the cable network clobbers him..they distort and misconstrue..his statements are outnumbered by the oppostitional press & media…SO
folks like you think he has not communicated his position when he has REPEATEDLY and INCESSANTLY

to the point that if you recall they said he was on TOO MUCH and decline to pre-empt programming!!

You DO recall that don't you? Networks saying they could not forego their regular programing and revenue ads to give time to the

PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

A coalition of watchdog and reform groups gave President Barack Obama's administration high marks for its efforts to increase transparency in its first year.

The report, which measures the reforms undertaken by the administration on lobbying and ethics rules and disclosures, praises the Obama administration for historically strong rules in those areas.

“The cumulative effect of the Administration's actions has been to adopt the strongest and most comprehensive lobbying, ethics and transparency rules and policies ever established by an Administration to govern its own activities,” concludes the group, which includes Common Cause, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters and U.S. PIRG.

The group's report card gave the White House an “A” on its lobbying/revolving door rules, as well as in areas of “open government” and “reverse revolving door restrictions.” The administration received a “B”for its lobbyist gift ban, preventions against lobbyists from serving on advisory boards, and restrictions on seeking stimulus funds. The White House received no grade in its restrictions against seeking financial bailouts.

“The new rules and policies have begun the difficult process of changing the way business is done in Washington,” the groups said in their report. “President Obama deserves recognition and high praise for the ethics, lobbying and transparency rules put in place for the Executive Branch during his first year in office.”

“I can't stand the name progressive. what the hell does it mean?”

Progressivism has been hijacked and redefined so much that it can just stand alone now as a new and improved label for the formerly demonized “liberal.” It used to just mean advocating reforms serving the greater good of society with a bent towards social justice and the limits of corporate influence. The irony is the origins of progressive politics in the U.S. has little to do with the left. It arose through Teddy Roosevelt and thrived with Bob LaFollette. Both Republicans. It didn't mean radical, revolutionary change. It means step by step incrementalism with an emphasis on citizens playing a greater role in their government. You know, the very thing a certain President is being excoriated for now.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN1RYACiXNs&feat...

cuz she's a fake.

“It didn't mean radical, revolutionary change”

Never has!

It has always meant LIBERALS trying to hide behind another name that has yet to be demonized with the American public.

piuhleeaze

Yes, you know it is plantmanix and that other ignoramus.

BWA HA HA HA HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This is an hilarious truth!

Count'em girl!

And this is why we see so many preemptive screeds by the same “progressive” bloggers that have been doing the screaming out in the street all year long. They are now furiously typing to mock the idea that they have any responsibility for the Democrats’ defeat on Tuesday, pointing fingers at everyone else, because somewhere inside their little pea brains they understand perfectly well their role in the dysfunction that scared Mr. and Mr. Independent away this round, and they fear – as well they should – that Tuesday's defeat will fall harder upon them even if their behavior helped create it.

THIS x 2!!!!

Vinson has also updated their photos after a 2-day hiatus, I suspect that they have been very busy. Days 5-7 are now up.

This is the first mention of blood drives that I have noticed.

'Gonave Island' is the Île de la Gonâve, the large island in the bay that PauP is situated on.

Daily update from USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70):

Today, our 7th day in Haiti, has been a busy one. Countless flights to bring supplies ashore, plus we flew more than 20 medevac patients aboard. We also delivered supplies to Father Leriche's Parish on Gonave Island. Many from Port-au-Prince fled to the island after the earthquake, and these were the first supplies the… island has received since the disaster. We also brought back 3 patients for medical treatment.
____________________________________________________

Carl Vinson Receives MEDEVAC Mass Casualties

By MASS COMMUNICATION SPECIALIST SEAMAN HEATHER ROE AND
MASS COMMUNICATION SPECIALIST SEAMAN MEGAN CATELLIER

USS CARL VINSON – At sea –

Approximately 20 medically evacuated personnel from Haiti and USNS Comfort (T-AH 20) arrived on board USS Carl Vinson (CVN 70) at 11:20 EST causing the on board medical team to activate the ship’s walking blood bank.

Volunteer Sailors on board make up the walking blood bank. Those Sailors are willing to provide blood in the event of a mass casualty or other medical emergency. The medical team put the call out over the ship’s announcing system for A-negative and O- negative blood types.

…more…

http://www.facebook.com/USSVINSON?ref=mf#/notes...

Bring it on.
Here is a historical perspective from Doris Kearns:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/...

” In contrast to Kennedy, Obama’s first year has been much more successful. But even more important is that he has shown some of the same temperamental qualities that should allow him to keep learning on the job as Kennedy did. And we have learned a great deal about him.

There’s a fascinating contrast, for Kennedy ended his first year, as troubled as it was, with a public approval rating at 78 percent. The partisan atmosphere was not as poisonous in 1961. I remember hearing a statistic that something like 90 percent of people thought the government would do right 90 percent of the time. Over the decades since, that trust in government has deteriorated. Today, the media delights in charges and countercharges. The loudest voices on both sides of the aisle get the most coverage. Criticism is relentless and it takes a toll on presidential approval.

The most important thing Obama had to confront was the historic collapse of the economy and the financial system, the likes of which had not been seen since 1929. In 1929, because of the insufficient and mistaken steps taken, the economy continued to decline and ended up in the Great Depression. I think most economists would agree that between the combination of stimulus and bailout steps, the economy is on the road to recovery. That alone would be an historic marker of success in Obama’s first year.

Even with the need to prevent economic collapse, Obama has been able to move forward with progressive domestic goals. What has been overlooked is that the stimulus bill includes substantial investments in energy, education, infrastructure, and anti-poverty measures, adding up to the largest social investments since LBJ’s Great Society. On top of that, is the promise of health care. Obama has come closer to achieving a health-care overhaul than any president. If he passes a national health-care bill that has eluded every president since Theodore Roosevelt, it will be an historic achievement.

Finally, in foreign policy, he has set the stage for engagement and multilateralism. He has reset relations with Russia, made overtures to the Muslim world in his Cairo speech, and provided a philosophic discussion of war, peace, and human rights in his Nobel speech.

Beyond those concrete achievements, we’ve learned a good deal about his leadership style. He’s shown an ability to juggle a number of pressing issues. He’s made very few rookie mistakes, the kind that you would have expected from a junior senator. He has revealed a willingness to listen to advice from all quarters. His administration has been remarkably free from internal feuding. He has delivered a number of compelling speeches, revealing an effective use of language. And despite all the challenges, he still seems to be enjoying the presidency.”

what angee said!

Me neither Shanti …not made at Lizzie at all….her plate is FULL and she is dying leaving 2 babies to be raised.

Again, exactly who are these people that act like he can do no wrong? I gotta say, Muze, you've made quite a few accusations sans examples/specifics to back them up.

BTW, I can't but notice the irony of you accusing us of painting all criticism of PBO with the same “fauxgressive” brush, yet here you are painting all criticism of critics of PBO as being from people who think PBO shouldn't be criticized.

I'm also not satisfied with the lack of progress on GLBT rights.

Talk to Congress. They make the laws.

what else is new? I'm boycotting huffnpuff and I mute the tv when I see her azz.

Lawd, you broke it down! I got to play some Phyllis Hyman for you.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G5lxfKTQ0UM

Cantor takes swipe at Steele over RNC's retreat in Hawaii
By Molly K. Hooper – 01/21/10 02:27 PM ET

House GOP Whip Eric Cantor (Va.) took a shot at Republican Party chairman Michael Steele Thursday for holding a GOP retreat in Hawaii.

Cantor, who has differed with Steele over Republican chances to retake the House in 2010, indicated he wasn’t crazy about the idea of RNC members relaxing on Hawaiian beaches when asked whether it was the right kind of image for the party to project.

“Chairman Steele has a role to play in these elections,” Cantor began. “Obviously, I have said that I disagree with his statement that we can't take back the House. So, do I want voters to think that Republicans do nothing but go to beach resorts in January? No.”

The Republican National Committee did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
More here:
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/77391-cant...

Senate passes bill to exempt Haiti donations in 2009
By Tony Romm – 01/21/10 06:44 PM ET

A bill that would speed up tax benefits for Americans who donate to the Haiti relief effort easily cleared the Senate on Thursday.

The bill, which the House approved on Wednesday, now heads to President Barack Obama's desk.

“This is simple legislation that would make a big impact. It will make it a little easier for Americans to contribute to the victims of the Haiti disaster,” said Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), who proposed the Senate version of the bill. “[T]he relief and rebuilding effort in Haiti will require billions. And this legislation is an additional incentive for Americans to contribute to that effort.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/new...

THAT!

Yes…taking a 5 week vacation during a 6 week campaign …says you lose.

The partisan atmosphere was not as poisonous in 1961….Today, the media delights in charges and countercharges.

How true those are, and quite related. It is difficult to discern which is the chicken and which is the egg.

for Kennedy ended his first year, as troubled as it was

Unfortunately, the author does not explain herself here, although the Bay of Pigs and the Vienna Summit certainly made for a shaky first year. JFK's performance at Vienna, it is thought, led to the Berlin Wall as well as the Missles of October.

All right – putting this here too: Jeremy Scahill with Rachel Maddow on contractors in Haiti and the MSM hyping the civil unrest/violence meme so as to justify the use of those contractors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-K-KKJigN1Y

Her inner JJP is coming out.

You HAVE to go see this cartoon!

[Apologies to SG2]

THIS!

I love WSY! It keeps it real and it keeps me sane.

Interesting commentary..I agree with…look deep and you will see Bil&Hill at the core:

“something about this Coakley election doesn't add up. Well, let's see here…

Ted Kennedy's seat. Hmmmm….

Who put the final nail in the Clintons' coffin?

Who has the lack of morality to exploit a man's death for political gain?

Who are some of the first Democrats out and about telling the nation that the party needs to move back to the right?

Lanny Davis. Evan Bayh. Harold Ford.

What do they have in common?”

Scahill – 'the last things Haitians need, yet more unaccountable people in their country with guns'

A dig at MINUSTAH? Or at the US military forces delivering aid there (is Scahill suggesting that the US military is unaccountable)?

If the private security companies are working directly for private companies that are involved in the rebuilding effort to come, it would seem that they would fall under local LE jurisdiction. Exactly who 'local LE jurisdiction' will be in the months to come is a good question.

Private security firms are all over Cent & S America; foreign companies could not do business in a lot of countries without protection for their employees. Kidnappings, that sort of business.

“Specifically, I don't think in the last year he's done a good job of telling us where he stands and what his policies mean (and that's something that he happens to agree with, go figure).”

Musikal, you are a lawyer (or want to be one). You are talking gibberish. On what issue has he not told you where he stands — health care, the economy, the wars, the banking sector? On every one of these issues, he has told me where he stands and I disagree with him on some of them (but still support him with all my heart).

He has told you where he stands. You have not been listening.

He hasn't told you what his policies mean? Where are you getting your information? On the policy decisions that I disagree with, I know his thinking because he has conveyed it very very clearly. I know the alternatives he looked at, I know the numerous calculations that he weighed in reaching his conclusion.

I can disagree but yet respect and honor his judgement. It seems like you folks just want to prove him wrong.

SOB!

Hyping up unrest so they can make money! …. cuz don't cha know “black folks” are “violent savages”! /snark

I LOVE this song, Alex. What do you want to hear?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5RmKBFND9SY

Heyyyyyyy!

lol

and then there “GOT TO BE REAL!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gqKOo-Ih0M

The real looters are the fucking corrupt companies lying about the poor Haitian people are dangerously violent in order to get money! GDMFSOBS!

CLINTONISTAS!!!!!!!!

Bill&Hill busy, Busy, BUSY.

What chu bet the 2012 ticket is Obama/Clinton

BRING IT!

Just a nasty filthy breakdown!

Let's go with the Cheryl Lynn. I'm wearing my velvet polyesther shirt and “band pants” (no belt loops. LOL! I had the biggest fro in my high school. Belt it out, Shanti2, Too Be Real!

LOL! I've got the biggest fro right now! I'm braiding it as I blog…..
and sing. Damn, the WSY community has broken it ALL THE WAY DOWN…..

re-read Rothschilds editorial and that should give you the memo

It's perfectly OK for Mark Sanford to go hiking the Appalachian Trails on the taxpayers dime, and get a lil puss on the side/snark.

Cantor and the GOP don't want Steele, the negroid funnin & sunnin on the beach in January; perhaps it would be better if Steele took his black ass to the beach in July instead…

I be chillin'.

Muzikal thought she could drop that FLOTUS-Michelle Obama link on us, and we'd gush all over it. Cause you know we loves ourselves some Michelle Obama.

What I find absolutely spellbounding is folks who claim they loves themselves some Michelle, and unfairly bash POTUS. How you gonna reconcile that. Michelle is Barack's world and vice versa. You attack one, you attack the other. IMHO.

Perhaps the President should consider the likely, and threatened, consequences of his position. For example, the Massachusetts Biotechnology Council (MassBio) is threatening to “attempt to derail Democrat Martha Coakley's bid to replace Edward Kennedy in the U.S. Senate” unless the Administration provided reassurances that the final version of the bill contains the 12-year data exclusivity period. The article in BioCentury puts the number of biotech industry workers in Massachusetts at about 45,000, certainly enough to influence the election. This position would be a reversal; recently, BIO President and CEO, Jim Greenwood, attended a fundraising dinner for Ms. Coakley, and Robert Coughlin, MassBio's president and CEO, was reported to have warned both Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid that MassBio would actively oppose Ms. Coakley's election if the data exclusivity term was lowered from the present 12 years. Failing to hold the Massachusetts Senate seat for the Democrats would wreck havoc on the legislative calculations for getting a health care bill passed. http://www.patentdocs.org/2010/01/snatching-def...

http://www.veoh.com/collection/chrisTucker/watc...

***doing the Chris Tucker moves ***

Carolinagirl clocked her ass. first, when we where all commenting back at the plantation. She was hating on the President at that site, big time. Now, everything is so cosy and cute here, no confrontation. Yeah right.

I have seen criticism on this site. I don't think it is a matter of he can do no wrong but rather a matter of certain sects expecting expectation within 1 yr, they have never demanded on any other presidents. Even FDR had a couple of years to work with and a watered down social security act that did not cover the basics including people of color. Up till the 40s there folks still waiting on FDR to deliever his said promises including the workers bills of right which has been the basis for any democrat movement. The romanticizing of FDR by some faction in the left does not hold well with the reality of the time or history. FDR had to mend different factions of the left that threatened to leave the democrat party and he did as best as he could and even his best was not enough up until WWII. Thus this illusion on the left of reconciling the past with the present needs to have a line drawn some place.

I think politikfact notes President Obama has fulfilled more promises than other presidents in similar category. I think they are given 4 years to complete their terms or are they not? The other fact is that certain folks on the left define democrats as being intrinsically progressive but maybe they should consider the fact that once you open the tent to a variety of individuals the definition changes and the interest changes.

FDR had people willing to demand change and not blogging about it or being arm chair quarterbacks or lecturing as the left blogosphere does. How many showed up at town halls with regards to health care, instead their excuse was oh the public option was not in the bill. That excuse holds no merit because the right wing came out and make a scene whether the public option was in there or not. They showed up instead some just blogged it out and those of us who actually showed up and defended the merits of the public option were met with silence. Another excuse we have a majority? So what, FDR had 67 senators but still needed people power to shake the corporate interest, there were corporate interest then too that owned the senate from Standard oil to several trust.

The whole issue of corporations etc. is nothing new and is intrinsically part of the US after the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 118 U.S. 394 (1886) ruling of corporate personhood. It has been a struggle to fight against the corporation in ever aspect of life but it has been a losing battle.

A 1906 article title Why the Senate is the Way it is notes the same issue with corporation and the senate..

There could not be a more startling proof of the change that the senate has undergone. The people now seldom think of it as a body of representatives of the States, but rather a body of representatives of great interests. For whenever a corporate abuse is exposed, a senator is hit. Startling as the change has been in the Senates relations to the public, it has been a natural and inevitable change, for it is the direct result of the activity of the corporation in politics. The Senate is the part of the National Government that could most easily be controlled by corporations. The presidency cannot be reckoned on. Even when the party machinery moves regualarly a Rooosevelt or a Bryan or a Cleveland may become a party nominee. The Supreme Court is of life-long tenure and retains much of its proper, dignified sloofness. The House is close to the people, and its memers are elected every two years. Moreover, every rural district of the Union has a representative. The Great interests have more or less control of many legislatures. It is easy, therefore, to select men of their own political philosophy. And the senate is controlled by a few men who have the chairmanships or the important committees. A little group of strong personalities, therefore, can block or change or defeat important legislation so completely as to make the president, the House and the Supreme Court practically powerless. That is, in fact, the condition we are now living.It is all natural, simply, inevitable and there will be no remedy till the payment of money by corporation for any political use be made a detectible and punishable offense.

Hello!

LMBAO@back at the plantation. Alex, I don't forget shit like that either. WEESEE Them!

This site is PBO friendly, and we never made any bones about it.

Bring some shit like that, and we're gonna break it down for ya!

Cool!

LMBAO! I; cant hep it, SG2; folks betta come correct, or stay the fuck home.

Go hide under the covers with a flashlight and Nancy Drew mystery books.

Please stay PBO friendly. I love it here!!!

91 promise kept
33 compromises
275 in the works
87 stalled
15 broken
———————————————————————————-
The Broken Promises per Politifact…
1. Negotiate Health Care reform in Public sessions televised on C-span
2. Recognize the Armenian Genocide
3. Allow Penalty-free hardship withdrawals from retirements accounts I n 2008-2009
4. Create a $3000 tax credit for companies that add job [Credit not in stimulus bill but will see action seen, why/ Congress balks on the idea of given $3000 per individual] Congress did not like the idea of putting the bill in the Stimulus bill in January 2009.
5. End Income Tax for Seniors making less than $50,000[ Not in the stimulus bill or budget, it might be revisited later]End no-bid contracts above $25,000 [not in any of the OMB memo.. Scott Amey, an expert in government contracting and counsel for the nonprofit Project on Government Oversight, said Obama deserves credit for addressing the issue, but it's unrealistic to think he could fulfilll his promise.
"There are certain times and certain circumstances where there's public interest or national security that you have to limit competition, or (a contract) might not be full and open," said Amey, who frequently testifies before Congress on the matter. http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promise...
6. Direct the Secretary of Health and Human services to conduct a comprehensive study of federal cancer initiatives. [NOT been launched but rathed the double federal funding for cancer research, We consulted with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and the nonprofit American Cancer Society, but no one could point us to evidence that this promise is being fulfilled. This promise said Obama would "immediately" direct the secretary to examine cancer-related efforts. The secretary, Kathleen Sebelius, was confirmed in April. If a study begins later, this promise might merit a Compromise rating. But for now, because it was promised "immediately," it's Promise Broken.
7. Allow five days of public comment before signing bills
8. Tougher rules against revolving door for lobbyist and former officials [We found that the administration has granted waivers to several former lobbyists, allowing them to serve. The administration also allows recusals, where former lobbyists simply recuse themselves from discussions concerning whatever interest it is for which they used to lobby. The recusals have not been made public, and we don't know how many have been issued.]
9. Double founding for afterschool programs [When the White House released its fiscal year 2010 budget request for the Education Department, it requested exactly the same amount in 2010 for the program as it had spent in 2009 -- a bit over $1.1 billion.
When the House approved its version of the appropriations bill, it actually added $50 million for the program to what the president had requested. The Senate stuck to the president's amount. When negotiators from both chambers hammered out a compromise, they upped the amount by $35 million, to a little under $1.2 billion. So the amount the president signed into law was about 3 percent higher than the fiscal year 2009 level -- not double, as he had promised.]
10. Urge states to treat same-sex couples with full equality in their family and adoption laws. [He has failed to use his bully-pulpit to lobby on this issue]
11. Allow bankruptcy judges to modify terms of a home mortgage [Obama asked the Senate and HOUSE rejects “cramdown amendment on bankruptcy modifications of home mortages (I think Dick Durbin in frustration noted that the senate was owned by the banks) http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promise... ]
12. Pay for the national service plan without increasing the deficit [Bill signed but no budget offsets… http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promise...
13. Give annual state of the world address [No speech in the first year]
14. Reduce earmarks to 1994 levels
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promise...
During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama said that he is “committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994.”

First, a little background on what earmarks are. An earmark is a requirement that money approved by Congress be spent in a specific way at the request of a lawmaker. Critics have long argued that earmarks are likelier to serve the interest of a particular congressional district or constituent group than the national good. So it's no surprise that Obama, like his 2008 presidential opponent, Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., has targeted them for reform.
But in reality, the president's leverage on earmarks is limited. The rules on how Congress operates are up to Congress. All the president can do, beyond using his bully pulpit, is veto appropriations bills sent his way. That can be effective for saber-rattling purposes, but ultimately it is a blunt tool, and one that presidents tend to be wary of, since using it risks a government shutdown if the existing spending bills expire without new ones in place.

We love having you here too, dannie. Folks betta come correct with their
comments on PBO, or WEE gon bring it! And aint nobody gon check us BOO!
LOL! Webb, Sepia, carolinagirl, SG2, Miranda, and Pbomb where y'all at?

tangible policy beefs. Not what makes Barack Obama tick, not combing through every statement for unforeseen slights or inklings on how the President “feels” towards his so-called base..

You hit it on the wall… FDR dealt with the same shit, nothing new.

Its an intellectual exercise for the left. A couple of months ago, their headline is 45,000 dying from lack of healthcare, run a free clinic from some dude Keith something and their headline after oh my Gosh kill the bill, the today pass the bill.

One of my close prof., he teaches labor law and very active in the 60'S, he has been liberal all his life and gave up on liberalism as an ideology for the main fact like he said, its all lectures and no actually doing something. They lecture after the fact, doing the fact they are chicken littles.

The same crowd that was easily swayed by Edwards are loudest voices.

I'm right here, sista!

I'm co-signing ” aint nobody gon check us BOO”!

Wee got the President's back for real. Ain't no faking & shaking here!

100%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% thank you

Fake as shit!

TriniPrincess, that is what alot of folks don't know HISTORY… UNFILTERED TYPE…..

HISTORY

I find myself going back to read the transitions from Lincoln, Taft, Wilson, Roosevelt, FDR because it just reads similarly to what is going on same issues

The author makes a point of her comparison between JFK and Obama. Can you think of anything else that might have led her to call JFK's first year 'troubled'? It was a bit before my time.

lmao

What planet were you living on at that time?

BWA HA HA HA HA

The 2012 ticket will be Clinton/Obama.

No way! Obama would neVAH agree to that

Imagine the new power folks like MassBio have now with the SCOTUS rulling yesterday.

MN is truly going to feel it. We have 19 corporate HQ's here. Several in biotech and the huge UnitedHealth, that just posted whopping 4th qtr earnings.

He was forced to leave by JeffZucker the NBC head honcho. Zucker who was young and innovative rising star at NBC, figured that Leno would retire in 5 years. So, when he signed on O'Brien to keep him from going to Fox he promised him the 11pm Tonight Slot in 5 years. Zucker called himself keeping his promise to O'Brien when he pushed out Leno. Only thing was he didn't want to lose Leno, so he came up with the phucked up 10'oclock primetime idea that was a bust.

Leno was #1 in ratings…and his followers will be back. Afterall, what's not to like about TonightShow with Leno…his biggest concern is getting ALL the folks he lost to Letterman. Folks did not go to O'Brien who is just pathetic.

I was shocked to learned O'Brien had been on the air 17 years…incredible.

ctfu!

He was “young&inexperienced” and had leapfrogged over the establishment candidate?

Hello Everyone,

As you may know my name is Quincy Celestine and I asked the panel at TSU for the Obama 2010 and Beyond with Chris Matthews about reparations. I would like to get some feedback from you all about your point of view regarding this discussion.

May I ask what other sites you've also requested feedback on regarding your question?

Youtube and Linkd In