It’s amazing that Obama is even still in the race. The employment numbers are awful, many people believe he raised taxes, the economy is in terrible shape, Citizens United put billions from unknown and unknowable sources into the election (fully 90% going to Mittens et al) and yet .. . Obama is running neck in neck.

He should, by all accounts, be out of it by now, and still people believe in hope and change, want him to win, and know that he has made very few mistakes in his first four years. If we’ve learned anything at all, we’ve learned that the Rs are willing to put the country “on the table” when it comes to elections.

I hope no one expects much when Obama IS reelected. It seems that the most he will be able to do is slow the trend toward feudalism.

They can’t prosecute what they don’t understand. We had the same problem in Bush’s SEC. Lawyers that couldn’t read financial statements — didn’t know how to follow up on tips about Madoff’s Ponzi scheme (prolly never heard of Ponzi).

Should the prosecutors at least discuss the case with people who know more than they do about insider trading? Of course. Will lawyers ever admit there’s something they don’t know? I’ve never seen it happen.

Any chance of recall?

Will we be keeping track of the letters and the subsequent changes in regulations versus the amount of money he receives to get “re-elected” or will all the $$$ be under the table?

It’s a nice frame. You’ve got to give him that. “We’re trying to create jobs here,” (so we have to give industry a few “virgins” to sacrifice to make sure their enterprises go well). (And besides, it fits in well with the Republican Health Care Plan For Poor Americans.)

Since the Supreme Court decided that George Bush was their choice for President.

We can’t overturn 8 years of what — how to characterize in one word what he did to this country. I’m unable to sum it up, but just know I believe he’s the worst president in our history.

And, no his meddling cannot be overturned immediately, in light of the facts on the ground, to wit:

40% of the electorate actually showed up, 60% were too busy.

21% were republicans and 19% were democrats

Sarah Palin has struck a nerve in a small but noisy portion of the electorate and their demands are ridiculous at best, but STILL must be taken into consideration because WE haven’t been able to laugh her off the stage. WE haven’t been able to intimidate her with our brains and logic — she’s waaaay too stupid. In fact, if anything, we have encouraged her, strengthened her simply by paying attention. Republicans believe she must be important and frightening to liberals because we talk about her all the time.

Because while polls show that most Americans have a Progressive streak on many if not most issues, none of them, not even the most rabid, are willing to step up, step out, and show the Congress of the United States that they are not doing the will of the people.

So just call the next two years a total waste because the democrat in charge has his priorities all wrong?

We don’t have a leader — there is no Feingold, there is no Grayson — we don’t even have any cheerleaders. And so we fold our hands for the next two years or begin working on 2012 because there’s nothing to be done. Oh, and we can gripe on a message board about how terrible it is not to have any democrats in the house or the senate or the court or the white house (they’re Rove plants).

In his defense, the president has followed his principles when dealing with all that you have mentioned. He has said all along that decisions that were once made in the white house over some bourbon, will now be made in Congress. He proposes, they act on it, and he signs.

Every thing else does not have the legitimacy to stand for long. Any signing statement can be overturned by the next president.

Maybe he’ll change now. Maybe now he realizes that his vision for the way Washington is supposed to work, the way it worked before Bush just isn’t going to happen. Maybe he WILL use signing statements to fix the ills — he’ll become “OUR HERO” the new, new emperor in charge.

I rather doubt it. He can ill afford to lose on major and minor issues than when the house was democratic. Signs on weakness at this point will cause kidiots like DeMint and his ilk to believe that they have won everything. And frankly, the American people aren’t paying enough attention to know the difference.

Historically, Progressives don’t win their issues by thumb wrestling. In the past, they were assisted by a lively press who were NOT making enough money to worry about the next tax increase. In the past, they had new immigrants will little to lose, a lot to gain, and an idealism that swept the ghettos and turned people out. And if the idealism didn’t do it, the factory fires did.

We’re not going to win anything by alienating the only people who could potentially help us win a few. Waiting two years should NOT be an option. That’s more arm chair quarterbacking.

I’m a johnny-come-lately to the Obama camp, primarily because he never promised universal care, and I believed Hillary — having been through the wars and survived — knew how to make that happen.

Nevertheless, I was happy when a democrat won the election. And I guess, reading over this thread and the accompanying posts — that I am a Johnny-come-lately, yet again.

Do you want the president to go to the mat — I acknowledge this is a crucial question — over the imprisonment of KSM knowing that he knows and we know that he will lose? Would he do better trying to change the premise, which is to say, how did Congress get involved in answering the question of whether or not KSM will or will not be put on trial, whether military or otherwise?

Do you want him to re-institute the use of thousands upon thousands of signing statements? Should he use the same strategies as the hated republicans? They worked. Has the goal become more important than the process?

Do we, here, at least admit that we are now in the weeds and that if we cannot even get a few thousand people to the mall in support of Medicare for All, that it would be virtually impossible for the “all-knowing” people to rise up in support of either 1) the rule of law; or, 2) specifically, to determine the fate of KSM?

I just don’t get all this dumping on Obama. I understand how disappointed everyone must be — particularly in light of the all of the hope and hoped-for change. But doesn’t reality enter into the picture at any point in these dashed dreams? Don’t we look back at what the President was facing and is facing, and ask ourselves what is possible? Do we ever compromise for the sake of winning something?

We’ve just lost a crucial election. The president’s hands will be tied for the next two years. The people have spoken, including the 60% who couldn’t be bothered to show up.

And NOW is the time to make extra demands on a man who has lost the support of the House and half of the Senate? Is it really the time to ask him to lose on every other issue facing the US? He shouldn’t have made fun of the progressives — that was a mistake. Can anyone forgive him and help him win what is actually possible?

they are (not their) adults — I tried edit, but to no avail.

In some ways it’s understandable. I don’t think democrats have been very successful in getting out the message about why the gay and lesbian community should have the same rights as everyone else. We’ve tried laughing at them, we’ve tried talking to them like their adults, and we’ve tried screaming at them.

I heard Paul Begala on NPR the other day discussing the talking points memos he receives every day from the White House and which are used so successfully by the republicans. He claimed he has spent his entire adult career working on the same kind of strategy for democrats. But when asked if he actually reads the daily memos he said, “No. I throw them away.” He envies the republican party discipline, but he’s “too independent” to follow the dictates of the White House. Well cheer cheer for him. But how exactly does that contribute to his “life’s work”?

Voting out the judges should have been predictable. These voters feel like they have been left out of the dialogue that swirls around them, and we haven’t developed the skills of framing to include them and still make salient points.

We tried equating gays and lesbians to the black community and found we had insulted African-Americans (especially the religious types). We’ve tried asking if it’s fair for one group of Americans to have the right to vote for the civil rights of other Americans (California) — to no avail.

Perhaps what’s needed is a round of applause for every American who stands up for the civil and constitutional rights of other Americans. A continued and unstinting show of support in the blogosphere for ALL the elected officials who stand up for Americans. Perhaps we should nominate these Americans for special awards, honor them at dinners, send letters to the editors pointing out their courage and grace. Keep them in the headlines so that those who are confused get the idea that the way every good American treats these warriors is to give them a lot of credit for being so courageous. Even if that kind of treatment doesn’t “come to the attention of the MSM” at least they will be honored, and perhaps on a local level some people will get the idea that standing up for fellow Americans is the honest country-loving thing to do.

In other words, instead of allowing them to be treated like returning Vietnam Vets (assuming any of those stories are actually true), we turn the entire thing around and treat each of them like the Warriors they are.

Ah, the rule of law is hard, isn’t it?

=========
It’s beginning to look as if it’s damn near impossible.

When a republican president claims that all military (foreign policy) decisions are made by the military and a democratic president is fearful of being seen as weak, enter THE PENTAGON, with a play book for every eventuality.

I meant to add that the hags and baggers are a side show of clowns (don’t get me wrong, clowns at a rodeo are very important). But they’re still not the main event.

They represent a republican re-framing of the “issues” and the more energy we spend on them, the less energy and time there is to look at the big picture — the one where we’re going down the tubes head first.

Siun’s post upstairs is what scares me. It appears that we’ve started a black ops war in Yemen (presumably at the behest of Saudi Arabia) and are now in the position of trying to imagine why the “Copier Bombs” are being sent over here (other than the usual “they hate us for our freedoms”).

The public is SHOCKED! Looks like the Pentagon — not so much.

Sure — but aren’t you equally fearful of the democratic leadership that could have voted for the tax bill BEFORE they recessed and likely had it in the bag, but didn’t? (I could have inserted any number of issues here including HCR with a REAL public option, a larger stimulus at the beginning when Obama was riding the wave of popularity and hope, bucking the McChrystal hype and sending fewer troops to Afghanistan, a HAMP program that worked, etc.)

Were they waiting for a rep takeover (lame duck session) when it cannot possibly happen?

Dems have only proved that we are what we fear.

Nice dream but so unlikely. Reps would never go for it; Dems don’t want to “appear” to be soft on crime, wars, torture, rendition, wiretapping, taxes, public option healthcare, justice, etc., etc., etc.

“Fear itself” has won the day — the baggers on one side and the dem leadership on the other.