After firing up the professional left against the Dems, Kucinich quietly backtracks

[NJMaverick]

Quote:Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is denying any plans to seek the impeachment of President Obama over the U.S. involvement in Libya.

Kucinich recently raised the question of whether Obama could be impeached for leading the U.S. into a conflict — to enforce a United Nations-backed no-fly zone — without going to Congress first.

"I asked the question as to whether that was an impeachable offense; that’s different than actually calling for an impeachment or inducing a resolution, which I am not intending to do," Kucinich told Fox Business Network Thursday. "I am speaking to the limits of executive power.”

Dennis, I'm sure the GOP is quite happy with what you are doing and certainly hopes you will keep it up (hence the invite to Fox News)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-r...ach-obama-

[azmouse]

The more I hear about this smarmy little weasel the less I can stand him.

[kahuna]

I expected him to back track. This was a very bad move on his part and will probably cost him his reelection. When professional lefty Cenk disagrees with you, and the outcry on "progressive" websites are against you, you know you have stepped in it.

ETA: Using it to raise campaign funds was definately a tacky move on his part.

[NJMaverick]

(03-25-2011 09:14 AM)kahuna Wrote:  I expected him to back track. This was a very bad move on his part and will probably cost him his reelection. When professional lefty Cenk disagrees with you, and the outcry on "progressive" websites are against you, you know you have stepped in it.

ETA: Using it to raise campaign funds was definately a tacky move on his part.

I hope it does cost him the election. He has been a below average congressman despite having the advantage of being high profile. What real world things has he accomplished?

[Arkana]

(03-25-2011 09:35 AM)NJMaverick Wrote:  

(03-25-2011 09:14 AM)kahuna Wrote:  I expected him to back track. This was a very bad move on his part and will probably cost him his reelection. When professional lefty Cenk disagrees with you, and the outcry on "progressive" websites are against you, you know you have stepped in it.

ETA: Using it to raise campaign funds was definately a tacky move on his part.

I hope it does cost him the election. He has been a below average congressman despite having the advantage of being high profile. What real world things has he accomplished?

It's made him the darling of thousands of do-nothing left-wing keyboard strategists who like to whine about whatever is bothering them in a particular hour, such as Barack Obama not instituting single-payer via executive order, or Barack Obama not physically barring the doors to Gitmo, or Barack Obama not being able to strongarm 60 senators and almost 260 Congressmen into voting for a public option, or Barack Obama not stretching forth his hand and using his wizardly negro powers to addle Mitch McConnell's mind and prevent him from using the filibuster.

You know, the usual.

Dennis Kucinich needs to be primaried.

[RoyGBiv]

(03-25-2011 09:35 AM)NJMaverick Wrote:  

(03-25-2011 09:14 AM)kahuna Wrote:  I expected him to back track. This was a very bad move on his part and will probably cost him his reelection. When professional lefty Cenk disagrees with you, and the outcry on "progressive" websites are against you, you know you have stepped in it.

ETA: Using it to raise campaign funds was definately a tacky move on his part.

I hope it does cost him the election. He has been a below average congressman despite having the advantage of being high profile. What real world things has he accomplished?

I won't go that far. If he has a primary opponent, that's one thing. If he doesn't, or if he does and defeats that opponent, I certainly hope he is reelected. Dennis may be a bit of a loose cannon, but on his worst day he's not as bad as your average Republican.

And he wouldn't even face an "average" Republican. He'll likely face a teabagger. I don't want any more teabaggers in Congress. I'll even go so far as to say I'll take half the Democratic coalition being blue dogs over any more teabaggers.

[Andy823]

(03-25-2011 08:53 AM)NJMaverick Wrote:  

Quote:Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) is denying any plans to seek the impeachment of President Obama over the U.S. involvement in Libya.

Kucinich recently raised the question of whether Obama could be impeached for leading the U.S. into a conflict — to enforce a United Nations-backed no-fly zone — without going to Congress first.

"I asked the question as to whether that was an impeachable offense; that’s different than actually calling for an impeachment or inducing a resolution, which I am not intending to do," Kucinich told Fox Business Network Thursday. "I am speaking to the limits of executive power.”

Dennis, I'm sure the GOP is quite happy with what you are doing and certainly hopes you will keep it up (hence the invite to Fox News)

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-r...ach-obama-

Yes, Fox loves those who say stupid things like Kucinich did, and I am sure the left wing radicals that hate Obama liked it also, but what he did was simply "stupid" and he should be ashamed that he even brought up the idea of impeachment! He played right into the rights hands on this one!

[Still a Democrat]

"I asked the question as to whether that was an impeachable offense; that’s different than actually calling for an impeachment or inducing a resolution, which I am not intending to do," Kucinich told Fox Business Network Thursday. "I am speaking to the limits of executive power.”

Talk about your weasel words. Why DID you ask, Dennis, and what is YOUR stand?

You were obviously strring up some campaign cash from the professional left at our party's expense.

[brownboyrocks]

Wow... it's amazing how many people are so dogmatic when it comes to defending President Obama.

I think it was unwise for Cong. Kucinich to raise the impeachment question, but it is a valid question to ask of ANY president. Barack Obama is not the grand-poobah of democratic politics. The attack to the one truly "liberal" congressman for standing his ground when it comes to being Anti-War, is the problem with the Democratic party & it's so-called liberal progressive supporters. Everyone wants to call Kucinich a traitor or stupid ... etc. but no one wants to level the well-deserved criticism at the President for being lukewarm on nearly every policy that got him elected.

So yeah.. blame the people who stick to their guns for the problems the President is facing, or that Democrats as whole are facing. That's going to solve a whole mess of problems... or it won't.

Call me a radical, revolutionary, "professional left" or whatever you want, but I refuse to blindly follow the lead of someone who's not really doing that much leading. I knew before I voted for President Obama that he wasn't going to change a damn thing because Washington, D.C., and our political system are so much more than one executive office. Until POTUS takes on the entire fucked up system of government in this country you will get people like me and Dennis Kucinich who will not passively abide by the will of the majority just.

Isnt' that what this country is about? Questioning your leaders... even the ones you support and vote for?

- Brownboyrocks

[kahuna]

(03-25-2011 10:04 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Wow... it's amazing how many people are so dogmatic when it comes to defending President Obama.

I think it was unwise for Cong. Kucinich to raise the impeachment question, but it is a valid question to ask of ANY president. Barack Obama is not the grand-poobah of democratic politics. The attack to the one truly "liberal" congressman for standing his ground when it comes to being Anti-War, is the problem with the Democratic party & it's so-called liberal progressive supporters. Everyone wants to call Kucinich a traitor or stupid ... etc. but no one wants to level the well-deserved criticism at the President for being lukewarm on nearly every policy that got him elected.

So yeah.. blame the people who stick to their guns for the problems the President is facing, or that Democrats as whole are facing. That's going to solve a whole mess of problems... or it won't.

Call me a radical, revolutionary, "professional left" or whatever you want, but I refuse to blindly follow the lead of someone who's not really doing that much leading. I knew before I voted for President Obama that he wasn't going to change a damn thing because Washington, D.C., and our political system are so much more than one executive office. Until POTUS takes on the entire fucked up system of government in this country you will get people like me and Dennis Kucinich who will not passively abide by the will of the majority just.

Isnt' that what this country is about? Questioning your leaders... even the ones you support and vote for?

- Brownboyrocks

He can do whatever he wants. That's his right. But it will surely backfire on him. Mark my words. So if his "courageous" stance costs us yet another congressional seat, will you still lthink it's so grand?

[NJMaverick]

(03-25-2011 10:04 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Wow... it's amazing how many people are so dogmatic when it comes to defending President Obama.

I think it was unwise for Cong. Kucinich to raise the impeachment question, but it is a valid question to ask of ANY president. Barack Obama is not the grand-poobah of democratic politics. The attack to the one truly "liberal" congressman for standing his ground when it comes to being Anti-War, is the problem with the Democratic party & it's so-called liberal progressive supporters. Everyone wants to call Kucinich a traitor or stupid ... etc. but no one wants to level the well-deserved criticism at the President for being lukewarm on nearly every policy that got him elected.

So yeah.. blame the people who stick to their guns for the problems the President is facing, or that Democrats as whole are facing. That's going to solve a whole mess of problems... or it won't.

Call me a radical, revolutionary, "professional left" or whatever you want, but I refuse to blindly follow the lead of someone who's not really doing that much leading. I knew before I voted for President Obama that he wasn't going to change a damn thing because Washington, D.C., and our political system are so much more than one executive office. Until POTUS takes on the entire fucked up system of government in this country you will get people like me and Dennis Kucinich who will not passively abide by the will of the majority just.

Isnt' that what this country is about? Questioning your leaders... even the ones you support and vote for?

- Brownboyrocks

It seems the foundation of your defense is that DK is the "true liberal" in your eyes and as a result he is given a free pass. If you haven't noticed the wealthy elite and their GOP and tea party lackies are at war with the American people. The only ones that are standing between the powerful anti-American forces and what they want, is the Democratic party.
I have a real problem with liberals who undermine and hurt the Democratic party (thus helping the wealthy elite by helping the GOP and Tea party) by spouting off knee jerk and ill conceived public comments. DK was wrong about this being an impeachable offense, he was wrong to state it publicly and he was wrong to quietly walk it back.

[There Is No Spoon]

(03-25-2011 10:04 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Wow... it's amazing how many people are so dogmatic when it comes to defending President Obama.

I think it was unwise for Cong. Kucinich to raise the impeachment question,

Agreed.

The rest of your post is grandstanding "I'm a better liberal than you 'cause I don't compromise" hogwash.

[Andy823]

(03-25-2011 10:04 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Isnt' that what this country is about? Questioning your leaders... even the ones you support and vote for?

- Brownboyrocks

Yes anyone can question their leaders, no problem there, but when they says something as stupid as "IMPEACHMENT", well that's going a tad to far unless there are some really serious things that the leader has done, kind of like Bush did! Obama hasn't gone that far so why bring up the "impeachment" thing at all?

[Cha]

(03-25-2011 01:16 PM)Andy823 Wrote:  

(03-25-2011 10:04 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Isnt' that what this country is about? Questioning your leaders... even the ones you support and vote for?

- Brownboyrocks

Yes anyone can question their leaders, no problem there, but when they says something as stupid as "IMPEACHMENT", well that's going a tad to far unless there are some really serious things that the leader has done, kind of like Bush did! Obama hasn't gone that far so why bring up the "impeachment" thing at all?

Because he's fundraising for an election and it's all about getting noticed even if he opens mouth and something stupid comes out.

[Treestar]

And as it turns out there was a Senate resolution in favor of a no-fly zone March 1.

DK has jumped the proverbial shark.

[jaxx]

Kucinich is behaving like a child. Maybe he'll think before he shoots his mouth off the next time, but I doubt it. He exists on controversy, mostly his own. What a shame he used the President to try to further his own gains....I don't suppose that will work out well for him.

When I voted for Barack Obama I knew change would be hard, look at the people he has to fight.....the old "with friends like those" thing. But change we have gotten, good change. This President has done more in 2 years than others in 8. Good things, for the people. Some are never satisfied, some put down each gain as it's not good enough. But the people who paid attention to what the President said aren't griping. We didn't elect him to turn into someone else, to constantly compare him with this one and that one.

Personally I don't give a crap about the disappointed routine. If people choose to live in the I demand he do this or that state of denial it's their problem, not mine.

[Willinois]

No, Kucinich isn't backtracking at all. This is exactly what he said to begin with, as I pointed out in another thread. He said right from the start that he had no intention to seek impeachment.

This board is full of people who are savvy enough to recognize when the media spins and sensationalizes everything said by or about Obama. Everyone should be able to recognize when the same thing is done to Kucinich.

[brownboyrocks]

I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

[Willinois]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not.

Yes, people here are capable of recognizing that Democrats aren't always knights in shining armor. That includes Kucinich, who also deserves criticism at times.

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity.

False statement. He has spoken about it repeatedly.

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs?

Yes, he has done those things. That's why most of his stimulus tax cuts for businesses are dependent on them carrying out activities that are specifically job-creating. Haven't you read about that at whatever blogs you normally frequent? What bothers me about the Hamsher/Cenk crowd is that they spread false statements such as yours just as much as the right-wing talk radio hosts do. That's not my idea of what the progressive netroots should be like.

Walking a picket line is important if you're more concerned about theatrical displays. I'm not convinced that parading for the camera is the most important thing for him to do right now. I think the pundits who obsess over it are looking for a sensational cheap shot to entertain people with.

[NJMaverick]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

You know what you are arguing is akin to a police officer tearing off his bullet proof vest and setting it on fire. When his partner asks why he did it the response would be, "This vest is part of the problem, it's only bullet resistant. I am destroying it because I could still be shot and die even though I am wearing my vest. If it can't be perfect, I don't want anything to do with it".

The idea that Democrats need to be perfect or they are unless is a dangerous idea. It's one the wealthy elite hope you have though, because it makes it easier to attack working Americans. Ideology is a great thing to guide goals but it's worse than useless as a guide for tactics. I certainly don't want to be one of those self satisfied liberals that brags about how ideologically pure they are, while not having produced any real world results that achieve our desired goals.

Protests and whining about how much the wealthy elite and their GOP and Tea Party stooges are hurting people is not my style. I want to get things done. That means using the tools we have available, which is the Democratic party. That's like if you boat springs a leak and you toss the hand pump overboard because you would rather have an electric pump to pump the water out.

[Sugarloaf]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

Some lofty ideals there. Hey, here's a thought... If you think you can do a better job, why don't you run for office? Change it from the inside out and give them that "real leadership" of which you speak.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

What is delusional is to believe that allowing the more liberal party to be pummeled again and again by conservatives is going to result in more liberals getting into office. What message is sent when Republicans win? It certainly isn't "we need to be more liberal to win elections".

Even republicans learned this lesson with ODonnell. If someone were to say " Christine O Donnell lost because she was too liberal" you'd laugh in their face. Likewise the idea that people chose conservatives because Dems weren't liberal enough is ludicrous.

Yes, the Dems have a problem with messaging, but the power of more centrist dems comes from the party looking at conservative wins and making the logical conclusion.

[Baltoman991]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

LMAO!!!!

You, in a prior post, put Kucinich on a "pedestal" and defended him then you come back in another post and claim it's the rest of us who put Obama and the rest of the Dems on pedestals?

Oh, and if you took the time to research instead of sitting here telling us that we, not the professional whining left is the problem, you'd know that A:Obama hasn't been quiet about whats happening to the working man and woman and B: Obama has met with labor unions around the country.

Yes, it was the professional left and the whiners who didn't get their fucking ponies who cost us the elections in 2010. They decided to stay home, they decided to allow Republicans to regain some control.

I won't take the blame because I did my part.

[Born_A_Truman]

(03-25-2011 07:37 PM)Baltoman991 Wrote:  

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

LMAO!!!!

You, in a prior post, put Kucinich on a "pedestal" and defended him then you come back in another post and claim it's the rest of us who put Obama and the rest of the Dems on pedestals?

Oh, and if you took the time to research instead of sitting here telling us that we, not the professional whining left is the problem, you'd know that A:Obama hasn't been quiet about whats happening to the working man and woman and B: Obama has met with labor unions around the country.

Yes, it was the professional left and the whiners who didn't get their fucking ponies who cost us the elections in 2010. They decided to stay home, they decided to allow Republicans to regain some control.

I won't take the blame because I did my part.

[Cha]

(03-25-2011 07:37 PM)Baltoman991 Wrote:  LMAO!!!!
You, in a prior post, put Kucinich on a "pedestal" and defended him then you come back in another post and claim it's the rest of us who put Obama and the rest of the Dems on pedestals?

Oh, and if you took the time to research instead of sitting here telling us that we, not the professional whining left is the problem, you'd know that A:Obama hasn't been quiet about whats happening to the working man and woman and B: Obama has met with labor unions around the country.

Yes, it was the professional left and the whiners who didn't get their fucking ponies who cost us the elections in 2010. They decided to stay home, they decided to allow Republicans to regain some control.

I won't take the blame because I did my part.

THANK YOU, Baltoman!

[Arkana]

(03-25-2011 11:14 AM)brownboyrocks Wrote:  I have a real problem with people who don't recognize that the Democrats are part of the problem too. The Democratic Party has undermined & hurt itself by letting the GOP & Conservatives rule the debates for everything from the economy, healthcare to national security.

It's terribly delusional to believe that Democrats are this knight in shining armour kind of party that are going to save the American people & working class from total destruction. They're not. If the Democratic Party wanted to be that kind of party of they would not allow people like Joe Lieberman, Ben Nelson, or Evan Bayh (prior to this session), to control their message & policy positions.

All the while, the President remains quiet while the attacks to working people are being mounted with ever-more severity. Has POTUS gone to meet with labor leaders about job growth or the stagnant wages of middle & lower class people? Has POTUS rejected the false ideology that businesses use the money they save from not paying taxes to "create" jobs? Has POTUS actually done the "walking the picket line" that he said he would do?

I haven't seen it, and I'm not going to be quiet about it just because neo-liberalism is gaining a stronger foothold in our country. That's been an on-going effort since the 50s. So, you put the Democratic Party & POTUS on a pedestal & defend their every move, but I will not sit idly by while they follow the bankrupt path paved by the likes of Milton Friedman, William F. Buckley, or other neo-liberal free-marketers.

The Democratic Party needs real leadership, and I don't see that happening from anyone at the top tiers of the party. So you blame POTUS's critics & "the Professional Left" all you want for the ass-kicking this past November, and possibly the one coming in 2012. That's not going to solve the problem we face as country or a party. It just seals our fate.

Part of being a Democrat and a liberal is the ability to see more shades of color than black and white. Jesus, it's like the FDL wing of the party lost the ability to think critically when the President took the oath of office.

You squawk about "leadership" like the rest of the angry left, but I have not seen one concrete example of what Obama could do differently out of the mouths of anyone who thinks like you. Obama should "use the bully pulpit". What does that even mean? Obama should "lead better". What does that even mean? The President hasn't been quiet about the attacks on labor--you've apparently just chosen not to listen. The President has said repeatedly that he signed the tax cut deal to get millions of people another year of UI benefits and that he thinks the tax cuts for the rich are wasteful and useless--again, you have chosen not to listen. And the President of the United States cannot up and abandon his job to go walk among protestors that are protesting a state issue--so trying to hold him to something he said in 2007 while the world is going to hell in a handbasket is nothing short of ludicrous.

And guess what? The President's critics ARE largely responsible for the shellacking we received in November. In Wisconsin, for example, Scott Walker won the governorship by 100,000 votes. His opponent, Tom Barrett, received 800,000 fewer votes than Barack Obama did in 2008. You can look these stats up if you don't believe me. Ed Schultz told people NOT to vote in the midterms. How is that constructive? How is NOT VOTING FOR THE MORE LIBERAL CANDIDATE IN ANY GIVEN RACE going to encourage candidates to act more liberal?

You tell me how that's NOT the fault of a bunch of butthurt, angry "progressives".

[jaxx]

As a Democrat, Kucinich made a big mistake by using the Impeach word anywhere near the President's name. He has no grounds, ignored the UN Security Council, and instead went to the edge with his commentary. He could have said anything, complained, ranted, and never used the word. He doesn't think, he spouts off.

Now he is indeed walking it back because he was wrong. This kind of ignorance inflames the rightwing, they eat it up. It plays to their one term screech. And we're left to wonder what the hell was he thinking.

[Ikonoklast]

"Instead of taking of this issue with the President through Congress, I'll just shoot off my mouth to the first person to stick a microphone in front of my gob."


Thanks, Dennis, I guess you STILL don't understand just exactly how politics works. You never give your political foes ammunition to shoot you with.



Oh, and he must have read the poll results to see that voters in his district overwhelmingly back President Obama, who are probably scratching their heads over the 'impeachment' comment.


I can see any potential Republican opponent for that seat..."See, even Dennis is out of step with what the voters in this district want!"

Egotistical jerk.

[Cha]

Yeah, do keep that big fundraiser mouth going, Dennis.. and, oh don't forget you're encouraging someone to primary the president it just won't be you because you're too busy FundRaising.

[Born_A_Truman]

“List of Dennis Kucinich accomplish­ments in Congress over past 14 years:














.”

[KonaKane]

This all points to a greater problem my party has had for a long time: whenever the forces of political assassination gather against us, we are only to happy to help them.

[OptimistesMaddie]

I am beginning to dislike him more and more. People like him are the ones that are discouraging Democratic supporters. When something happens then they run and hide.

[DFLforever]

DK is walking it back because it didn't succeed as a fund-raising tool, which is the reason he brought the subject up to begin with. He lost some leftish support with his HCR vote and was trying to get it back the only way he seems to know - with an outlandish gesture.

I'm an occasional contributor to him myself so got a copy of his fundraising impeachment missive. I let him know I wouldn't be donating again. I also suggested he might want to switch to a party where they'd be more open to the subject of impeaching a Democratic president!

Over at another site we all are familiar with, one commentator mentioned how people begged Kucinich to bring impeachment charges against Bush and how he refused to do so year after year until the run up to the 2008 election!!

I know Kucinich is being targeted hard by the GOP for 2012. I doubt he's completely adverse to picking up a little appreciation from t-party types in his district. But he may now have a Democratic challenger as well.

[Cha]

(03-25-2011 05:37 PM)DFLforever Wrote:  DK is walking it back because it didn't succeed as a fund-raising tool, which is the reason he brought the subject up to begin with. He lost some leftish support with his HCR vote and was trying to get it back the only way he seems to know - with an outlandish gesture.

I'm an occasional contributor to him myself so got a copy of his fundraising impeachment missive. I let him know I wouldn't be donating again. I also suggested he might want to switch to a party where they'd be more open to the subject of impeaching a Democratic president!

Over at another site we all are familiar with, one commentator mentioned how people begged Kucinich to bring impeachment charges against Bush and how he refused to do so year after year until the run up to the 2008 election!!

I know Kucinich is being targeted hard by the GOP for 2012. I doubt he's completely adverse to picking up a little appreciation from t-party types in his district. But he may now have a Democratic challenger as well.

Thanks for emailing him back with the appropriate response to such outlandish framing. Perhaps Dennis wishes he hadn't brought up the I word in this particular instance?

[Julie]

If that guy doesn't epitomize yappy-little-dog I don't know who does.

Julie

[nofurylike]

Rep Kucinich is reaping what he sowed, unfortunately for him. i once supported him, and then i watched the "power corrupts" egomania weakness set in in him. by then, he would go so far to retain any power he'd gained that he actually allied himself with Ron Paul, and now, Rand Paul. that says it all. a sad demonstration of the blinders lust for power can put on a person straddling the juncture of principle and power.

*

Wow... it's amazing how many people try to invalidate us as being simple-mindedly dogmatic when we defend President Obama.

I have a real problem with people who presume we have not thoroughly examined issues before drawing conclusions. of course, in presuming that, they are doing exactly what they project onto us.

kudos on rebutting those simplifications of us, Ds4P!

[There Is No Spoon]

I've noticed another "trick" that ass-hole commentators like Cenk and Dylan Ratigan do - they do a long lead in describing how the President isn't talking about their "pet" issue of the day - you know, the one they want to BASH him about not talking about on the day they've decided he should be addressing it (immediately!!!!!11!!). Then as they're ranting, in order to anger their audience, they will show video of President Obama talking about some other issue on that day. This "emphasizes" their point that he's not responsive to THEIR desires - which they're saying (more like shoving down your throat in a manipulative way) SHOULD be YOUR desires too. It's very manipulative and they really ought to be called on this crap.

[Arkana]

(03-26-2011 09:09 AM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I've noticed another "trick" that ass-hole commentators like Cenk and Dylan Ratigan do - they do a long lead in describing how the President isn't talking about their "pet" issue of the day - you know, the one they want to BASH him about not talking about on the day they've decided he should be addressing it (immediately!!!!!11!!). Then as they're ranting, in order to anger their audience, they will show video of President Obama talking about some other issue on that day. This "emphasizes" their point that he's not responsive to THEIR desires - which they're saying (more like shoving down your throat in a manipulative way) SHOULD be YOUR desires too. It's very manipulative and they really ought to be called on this crap.

It's always the former Republicans, too, who are quickest to turn on Obama. Cenk, Schultz, Arianna Huffington...

Also, Ed Schultz looks way too much like Rush Limbaugh for my stomach not to turn when I watch him.

[There Is No Spoon]

(03-26-2011 12:38 PM)Arkana Wrote:  

(03-26-2011 09:09 AM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I've noticed another "trick" that ass-hole commentators like Cenk and Dylan Ratigan do - they do a long lead in describing how the President isn't talking about their "pet" issue of the day - you know, the one they want to BASH him about not talking about on the day they've decided he should be addressing it (immediately!!!!!11!!). Then as they're ranting, in order to anger their audience, they will show video of President Obama talking about some other issue on that day. This "emphasizes" their point that he's not responsive to THEIR desires - which they're saying (more like shoving down your throat in a manipulative way) SHOULD be YOUR desires too. It's very manipulative and they really ought to be called on this crap.

It's always the former Republicans, too, who are quickest to turn on Obama. Cenk, Schultz, Arianna Huffington...

Also, Ed Schultz looks way too much like Rush Limbaugh for my stomach not to turn when I watch him.

I got no problem with Ed - been listening to him for years on AAR long before we had an alternative on TV. He's not at all like Cenk or Ratigan - I think Rachel has gone off on Dems more often than Ed.

[Arkana]

(03-26-2011 12:46 PM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  

(03-26-2011 12:38 PM)Arkana Wrote:  

(03-26-2011 09:09 AM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I've noticed another "trick" that ass-hole commentators like Cenk and Dylan Ratigan do - they do a long lead in describing how the President isn't talking about their "pet" issue of the day - you know, the one they want to BASH him about not talking about on the day they've decided he should be addressing it (immediately!!!!!11!!). Then as they're ranting, in order to anger their audience, they will show video of President Obama talking about some other issue on that day. This "emphasizes" their point that he's not responsive to THEIR desires - which they're saying (more like shoving down your throat in a manipulative way) SHOULD be YOUR desires too. It's very manipulative and they really ought to be called on this crap.

It's always the former Republicans, too, who are quickest to turn on Obama. Cenk, Schultz, Arianna Huffington...

Also, Ed Schultz looks way too much like Rush Limbaugh for my stomach not to turn when I watch him.

I got no problem with Ed - been listening to him for years on AAR long before we had an alternative on TV. He's not at all like Cenk or Ratigan - I think Rachel has gone off on Dems more often than Ed.

Rachel didn't tell people not to vote in November 2010.

And it's so much easier to watch her. When she attacks Democrats, most of the time it's because they deserve it.

[There Is No Spoon]

(03-26-2011 12:50 PM)Arkana Wrote:  Rachel didn't tell people not to vote in November 2010.

And it's so much easier to watch her. When she attacks Democrats, most of the time it's because they deserve it.

Different strokes I guess. Rachel is better than Ed, but I can handle his bluster as well - he's the only one on there who actually understands the right-wing mind, so he often knows how to get to them.

[Cha]

(03-26-2011 09:09 AM)There Is No Spoon Wrote:  I've noticed another "trick" that ass-hole commentators like Cenk and Dylan Ratigan do - they do a long lead in describing how the President isn't talking about their "pet" issue of the day - you know, the one they want to BASH him about not talking about on the day they've decided he should be addressing it (immediately!!!!!11!!). Then as they're ranting, in order to anger their audience, they will show video of President Obama talking about some other issue on that day. This "emphasizes" their point that he's not responsive to THEIR desires - which they're saying (more like shoving down your throat in a manipulative way) SHOULD be YOUR desires too. It's very manipulative and they really ought to be called on this crap.

What a tragedy..the President is too busy running the country the way he sees it and not talking about what these gasbags have to whine about on any given day.

I'm guessing they make sure of it.

[johnaries]

Kuch is the perfect example of making the "perfect the enemy of the good". By "sticking to his principles" he has actually done as much damage to Progress as the Right. Thank god/goddess that he didn't become President. We would have been perpetually stuck in a war of words and ideas and never gotten anything accomplished.