Liberals and Liberal bloggers upset with Obama's centrist team

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: quest55720

Originally posted by: TheRedUnderURBed

Originally posted by: Zebo
I'll be surprised if they really even do UHC.

If we could get UHC like every other civilized country out there I would be satisfied that the centrists did a good job. That is more then I expect also.

Are we going to guard the boarders and control illegals like ever other "civilized country" out there that has UHC. Unless that happens UHC will bankrupt this country in record time.

Wtf are you saying? That illegal immigrants would get UHC? I don't see normal insurance companies now freaking out because of illegals. They don't cover them...

Not to mention we already "insure" illegals -- they just to go the ER when they're sick.

 

[OrByte]

Originally posted by: frostedflakes

Not to mention we already "insure" illegals -- they just to go the ER when they're sick.

you say that like its a bad thing. Why, Rush was on the radio the other day saying how helpful ERs are to illegals and thats why we don't need UHC.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

I am liberal and it doesnt bug me one bit 😛

I suspect that it doesnt bug most liberals either... He has to govern from the Center or the country will divide even further. Also, extreme left and extreme right are both kind of loopy.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

The stupidity of this place astounds me.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: manowar821

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

The stupidity of this place astounds me.

its been really bad lately, so i've pretty much stopped coming here.

someday when the bamacre/dave/dissipate/winnar111 moonbats go back into hiding, and sane people come back, i'll start posting again. I might disagree with alot of the people here, but at least they bother to formulate coherent arguments.

 

[Siddhartha]

Originally posted by: OrByte
I can see how Bush supporters would consider governing from the center a bad thing.

Heaven forbid the next administration show some common sense.

I bet Bush supporters consider themselves to be "centrists" and other govering approaches to be fringe, wingnuts, etc..

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Fern
The Left's complaint is that they are "centrists"?

Well, I guess that depends upon where you stand. Further I'm not all that familiar with each's personal views/positions.

I'd have thought the complaint would be more about choosing so many of Clinton's former personnel and/or any with a highly partisan nature (e.g. Rahmbo). These type choices seem to undercut the "change" message. E.g., his economic team seems *neck-deep* in the circumstances that brought us to our current position.

Individually I could name some complaints about his choices, but collectively seems mostly *OK* and I'm willing to give them a chance. If the MSM is to be believed many are rather strong willed people; I'm curious to see how they get along and if any will resign before the term expires. Often, these type people seem to quit if they can't their way.

Cliffs: Too soon to really judge IMO.

Fern

Come on, Fern, don't buy into the idea that "The Left" determines a collective view on something at our big weekly meeting or something. :roll:

I'm at least as far left as the next lefty, and I LIKE Obama's team quite a bit. Don't pretend the disgruntled lefties represent the entire group just because it makes for an easier argument for conservatives.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Siddhartha

Originally posted by: OrByte
I can see how Bush supporters would consider governing from the center a bad thing.

Heaven forbid the next administration show some common sense.

I bet Bush supporters consider themselves to be "centrists" and other govering approaches to be fringe, wingnuts, etc..

Well look at an election map of 2004 vs an election map of 2008, I think it's pretty clear who has broader appeal. The appeal of Bush style Republicans might run deep, but it's not very broad. Obama, on the other hand, seems to appeal to all sorts of people in many different places. That tells me people at least THINK he's more centrist.

 

[Vic]

Conservatives and Right-wing bloggers upset with Obama's centrist team

Fixed title.

 

[Deliximus]

Originally posted by: Vic

Conservatives and Right-wing bloggers upset with Obama's centrist team

Fixed title.

BWAHHAHAA i love that! great work!

the Conservatives and neo-cons are just running around with their head chopped off and looking for scapegoats. Finger-pointing and circular firing squads will be norm for the Repubs over the following few yeas (and more hopefully). HOpefully, the extreme right all die off and so centrist ideals will be dominant.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: OrByte
I can see how Bush supporters would consider governing from the center a bad thing.

Heaven forbid the next administration show some common sense.

and didn't they all say that obama was the most liberal presidential candidate in the history of our country? Didn't they whip the base into a frenzy thinking Obama was a commie? LOL.

 

[feralkid]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: OrByte
I can see how Bush supporters would consider governing from the center a bad thing.

Heaven forbid the next administration show some common sense.

and didn't they all say that obama was the most liberal presidential candidate in the history of our country? Didn't they whip the base into a frenzy thinking Obama was a commie? LOL.

He is...turned me into a newt; wife went Commie and gas prices plunged.

Well 2 out of three ain't bad.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

This liberal is all in favor of his picks. Unlike you people (and apparently your counterparts on the far left), I never bought the idea that Obama was some huge liberal. He's a reasonable centrist, which is exactly what we need right now.

We need a centrist now like we needed on ein 1933. I.e., not much.

Luckily, Obama has praised FDR's aggressive experimentation. We'll see if it's just words.

 

[bozack]

Originally posted by: Don Vito Corleone
You're a class act as always. So I gather you think the rest of us care about your (feigned) opinions, yet mine are irrelevant. This entire thread is dedicated to your own completely insincere recitation of your "opinions" about Obama and his Cabinet picks. The upshot is that the only reason you are bitching about Obama's appointments is that they give you less to whine about than you'd hoped. Sadly, from your perspective, it seems all but inevitable that Obama's own presidency will be infinitely less whine-worthy than that of the boob you voted for in 2000 and 2004.

Don, I am just saying you aimed your response towards me personally...as if I care what you think about my persona or opinions, please.

And while I was bitching in the past, here I am just pointing out that seems like I am not the only one, and this is an example of those on the polar opposite of the political spectrum levelling some of the same criticisms...so I guess it does seem that Obama can bridge some gaps afterall.

And he hasn't even gotten started yet, lets wait and see just how he does.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: bozack

And he hasn't even gotten started yet, lets wait and see just how he does.

I agree with you there, but your sig doesn't.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

This liberal is all in favor of his picks. Unlike you people (and apparently your counterparts on the far left), I never bought the idea that Obama was some huge liberal. He's a reasonable centrist, which is exactly what we need right now.

We need a centrist now like we needed on ein 1933. I.e., not much.

Luckily, Obama has praised FDR's aggressive experimentation. We'll see if it's just words.

We can't afford to "experiment" - especially with failed policies of an old era. Many of the problems we are having today stem from that era, it's insane to think we should try more of them.

 

[Jhhnn]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

This liberal is all in favor of his picks. Unlike you people (and apparently your counterparts on the far left), I never bought the idea that Obama was some huge liberal. He's a reasonable centrist, which is exactly what we need right now.

We need a centrist now like we needed on ein 1933. I.e., not much.

Luckily, Obama has praised FDR's aggressive experimentation. We'll see if it's just words.

We can't afford to "experiment" - especially with failed policies of an old era. Many of the problems we are having today stem from that era, it's insane to think we should try more of them.

Which problems, CSG? What failed policies?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

This liberal is all in favor of his picks. Unlike you people (and apparently your counterparts on the far left), I never bought the idea that Obama was some huge liberal. He's a reasonable centrist, which is exactly what we need right now.

We need a centrist now like we needed on ein 1933. I.e., not much.

Luckily, Obama has praised FDR's aggressive experimentation. We'll see if it's just words.

We can't afford to "experiment" - especially with failed policies of an old era. Many of the problems we are having today stem from that era, it's insane to think we should try more of them.

Which problems, CSG? What failed policies?

SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

Did I say we should stay the course? I opined against "aggressive experimentation" in the mold of FDR as it would likely not work in the short term and put us in even worse shape for the future - just like FDR's BS has put us behind the 8 ball. I am for things which allow individuals to control their destiny and future - not the gov't imposing itself on it's citizens like FDR's BS did.
And no, SS was not a good idea - it established the Federal gov't as the ultimate provider and we've let that mentality go too far. Then yes, you can get into the bastardization of the program by politicians but it still doesn't change the inherent problems with the program.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

Did I say we should stay the course? I opined against "aggressive experimentation" in the mold of FDR as it would likely not work in the short term and put us in even worse shape for the future - just like FDR's BS has put us behind the 8 ball. I am for things which allow individuals to control their destiny and future - not the gov't imposing itself on it's citizens like FDR's BS did.
And no, SS was not a good idea - it established the Federal gov't as the ultimate provider and we've let that mentality go too far. Then yes, you can get into the bastardization of the program by politicians but it still doesn't change the inherent problems with the program.

Without SS, the poverty rate for senior citizens would be something like 50%. Where in your ideological platform is that deemed acceptable?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

Did I say we should stay the course? I opined against "aggressive experimentation" in the mold of FDR as it would likely not work in the short term and put us in even worse shape for the future - just like FDR's BS has put us behind the 8 ball. I am for things which allow individuals to control their destiny and future - not the gov't imposing itself on it's citizens like FDR's BS did.
And no, SS was not a good idea - it established the Federal gov't as the ultimate provider and we've let that mentality go too far. Then yes, you can get into the bastardization of the program by politicians but it still doesn't change the inherent problems with the program.

Without SS, the poverty rate for senior citizens would be something like 50%. Where in your ideological platform is that deemed acceptable?

:laugh: You only ASSume it'd be that high. If it had never come into being - I doubt your made up number would be correct.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

Did I say we should stay the course? I opined against "aggressive experimentation" in the mold of FDR as it would likely not work in the short term and put us in even worse shape for the future - just like FDR's BS has put us behind the 8 ball. I am for things which allow individuals to control their destiny and future - not the gov't imposing itself on it's citizens like FDR's BS did.
And no, SS was not a good idea - it established the Federal gov't as the ultimate provider and we've let that mentality go too far. Then yes, you can get into the bastardization of the program by politicians but it still doesn't change the inherent problems with the program.

How about the inherent problems with the system that preceded and led to the Great Depression? Talk all you want about FDR's "failed policies", the fact is that since he was President, we've had a pretty good run of economic success after economic success, with only minor bumps in the road. Contrast that with the situation BEFORE he took office (when, presumably, individuals were able to "control their destiny"), and I'm not so sure FDR didn't have some good ideas.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Ocguy31
Anything that makes liberals upset is OK in my book.

:thumbsup: for Obama.

This liberal is all in favor of his picks. Unlike you people (and apparently your counterparts on the far left), I never bought the idea that Obama was some huge liberal. He's a reasonable centrist, which is exactly what we need right now.

We need a centrist now like we needed on ein 1933. I.e., not much.

Luckily, Obama has praised FDR's aggressive experimentation. We'll see if it's just words.

Centrist doesn't mean not doing anything, it just means that he's not going to aggressively experiment really far the left. I might be a liberal, but I don't think liberals are the ONLY people who are willing to try new ideas. When I say centrist, I don't mean halfway between the far left and GWB style bullshit...I mean someone willing to take the good ideas from both sides and come up with the best solution to a problem.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
SS, Agricultural Adjustment Administration, mortgage bailouts(yep, look it up), National Industrial Recovery Act, gold confiscation.... you need more? Sheesh...

So we should stay the course then? SS was a good idea its just that its bankrupt because politicians can't keep their hands out of it.

Did I say we should stay the course? I opined against "aggressive experimentation" in the mold of FDR as it would likely not work in the short term and put us in even worse shape for the future - just like FDR's BS has put us behind the 8 ball. I am for things which allow individuals to control their destiny and future - not the gov't imposing itself on it's citizens like FDR's BS did.
And no, SS was not a good idea - it established the Federal gov't as the ultimate provider and we've let that mentality go too far. Then yes, you can get into the bastardization of the program by politicians but it still doesn't change the inherent problems with the program.

How about the inherent problems with the system that preceded and led to the Great Depression? Talk all you want about FDR's "failed policies", the fact is that since he was President, we've had a pretty good run of economic success after economic success, with only minor bumps in the road. Contrast that with the situation BEFORE he took office (when, presumably, individuals were able to "control their destiny"), and I'm not so sure FDR didn't have some good ideas.

I didn't say there weren't problems and I also didn't say he didn't have a couple good ideas, but the new deal's failed policies have had a hand in why we are in the "mess" we are today. He expanded and entrenched the idea of the welfare state and entitlement thinking.