The Obama 'product' after promises = Moral vaporware

This hits the nail on the head,

With a sledge hammer.  Change we can believe in is change that will never happen.  I have always wondered why a person would spend millions to get a job that pays less than 10% of the investment.  It is all the side pay that makes it desirable.

And We the American People get screwed by them every time.

If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 20:40:58 PM CST

this diary is stupid....

and it proves that far too many consumers of bloggie media are lemmings just looking for a satisfying response to rally around.  When they find it, they pile on like children taking cues from grownups about how to behave (and when.)

find me over at bluejersey.com

---

by: jay lassiter @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 02:51:12 AM CST

[ Parent ]

It's a lot like

buying junk bonds, they're not worth the paper they're printed on. Just like Obama's promises, worthless.

---

by: amberb_57 @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:02:46 PM CST

Amen

I couldn't have said it better.

"When religion and politics ride in the same cart, the whirlwind follows." - Frank Herbert, DUNE

---

by: Voenixrising @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:05:30 PM CST

The comments like

"Governing is different from campaigning" make me want to reach down someone's throat and rip out their tonsils.  Bush got every damned thing he wanted with a smaller majority.  Every.  Damned.  Thing.

If you don't want to govern, then don't run for the office.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:13:19 PM CST

Republicans under the Bush administration voted as a block

Getting a congress full of Democrats to all vote the same way is like herding cats. Add to that the inexplicable lack of backbone on the part of the Democratic congress and you have a recipe for the disaster we are watching unfold in slow motion.

An American voter with a memory is like a fish with a bicycle

---

by: David C. @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 00:31:33 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Wrong grouping

You are trying to group them by party affiliation and comparing that to their voting record.  At best it will look like the Democrats are split w/ very determined moderates overpowering relatively weak liberals based purely on politics and social philosophies.  How very liberal an analysis.

Now try grouping their voting records by religious denomination / affiliation instead and the correlation cleanly slides into place.

We're fearing and preparing for the wrong battle, folks...

---

by: sarasnavel @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 01:22:16 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Except they're not "moderates"

The obstructionists aren't "moderate" Democrats.  They're conservatives.  The moderates are falling in line with the progressives.  Let's be clear--the problem is the conservatives who fled the Republican Party because they were showing signs of weakness and now they intend to hold the progressives and moderates hostage to their caprice.

Democrats want a Big Tent.  Republicans have always claimed a Big Tent.  But then the moderates in the Republican Party like Snowe and Collins kowtow to the radical conservatives because the conservatives will cut them out of any access to power.  That's what the Democratic leadership needs to do:  meet behind closed doors and identify clearly that any Democrat (or independent caucusing with Democrats) who will not uphold the Party platform, then they will not be given choice committee assignments and especially chairmanships.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 07:50:15 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Magical Thinking

I wonder, in your list, given what we have just watched regarding health care, how you think any of these things could have been delivered sooner.

I don't think there's any possible way to question Obama's commitment to close Guantanamo Bay by the end of his first year. Yet it doesn't seem to be happening. Whose fault is that? Wasn't it as many Democrats as Republicans who are now, a year after the elections, all of a sudden disagreeing with this fundamental plank in his campaign program?

There is too much magical thinking going on here. Sure, it's fair to disagree with how things have turned out, but it's completely unfair to claim that since the world wasn't turned on its head by Obama's election it's some kind of betrayal. Surprise! Government doesn't work that way.

There's incomplete information here based on an incomplete presidency. Every evil in the world doesn't go away in one year--and you know what? Thank God, because then it would get BAD again right away when the Republicans or whoever take back the white house as they will eventually. Just today in the NYT I was reading about how the administration has completely defunded the murderous "abstinence only" sex education of the Bush years.

You have no evidence that Obama was lying in his support of gay rights. But there is plenty of evidence that his strategy is different than yours. You have no evidence that he has abandoned us; only that the demands of real-world governance and stategy have meant slower progress than we all would like.

A second important point is that you, presuming you voted for Obama, didn't pay attention to what you were voting for. I strongly disagree with Obama's Afghanistan policy; but if you think it's different than what he promised during the elections you weren't paying attention. I knew that he said many many times he thought Afghanistan was a "good" war but I strongly supported his election. This is called strategy.

Obama didn't promise a state-owned single payer national healthcare, which I what I support. Yet for all its faults the half-assed reform that is probably about to go through is better than nothing, and if you disagree with that you should ask yourself why every last one of the 40 republican senators are trying so hard to stop it.

Obama didn't promise to support marriage equality. (Hillary, you will remember, didn't even say she was for full repeal of DOMA). But it was still correct to vote for him, and there is progress on our civil rights under this administration. Not perhaps at the pace you want, but it ain't over yet, despite your desire to completely give up and throw the baby and its bath to the teabaggers.

Check out Politifact.com's promise meter.

http://politifact.com/truth-o-...

Sure, Obama has broken promises. All politicians do. But it isn't all bad and I think it has to be asked why you and so many others here keep suggesting that the sky has fallen when it just hasn't.

--ish

---

by: ish @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:14:13 PM CST

Do you have to work really hard at missing obvious points,

or does it come naturally to you?

Americans suffer from an ignorance that is not only colossal, but sacred.  --James Baldwin

---

by: QScribe @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:44:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Doesn't writing inane say-nothing responses

come naturally to you or do you have to work really hard at it?

WTF are you talking about, Qscribe.

--ish

---

by: ish @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:59:12 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Obama was clear from the outset:

He opposes DADT--if people are willing to serve, they should be allowed to serve regardless of sexual orientation without harassment.

He opposes DOMA--he advocated full repeal.  

When people say that getting these passed is "hard" in that whiny voice, I'm reminded, like Lewis Black, of a toddler making poopy.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 07:53:51 AM CST

[ Parent ]

New nicknames for Obama:)

Gee, I don't remember George W. Bush's first 11 months of presidency such profound scrutiny to deliver to the goods. I think I'm going to start calling Obama the "Microwave president."

No no no. I've got something even better. The "Box Office Weekend" president. LMAO. Yea, that's perfect! The first weekend of a showing---it better deliver. Or the studio is tanked.

Terrible expectations of how to run a country---but considering what he has to work with for a population---it's the tragic reality.

Wonder why he just hasn't upped and resigned already? He's been done.  

---

by: renwl @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:19:48 PM CST

It's only been 11 months!

Previously it was, "It's only been 6 months!"

And before that, "It's only been 4 months!"

There will be no controversial bills coming through the House in the next year per Pelosi, unless they come through the Senate first, and we know how likely that will happen.

And then we'll be gearing up for Obama's likely-failed re-election campaign because they refused to get anything done, so nothing controversial over the next 3 years.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 07:57:18 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Soon it will be

It's only been a year...two years, or we're not in the second term yet

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 13:28:22 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Maybe not Bush's

but if we were comparing Obama to Bill Clinton, that comparison might actually hold up.

For any Democratic President, the standard may always be FDR mixed with a little LBJ.

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 11:09:06 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Because he was an idiot

And nobody expected much of him at all.

Check out my brand new Huffington Post blog http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

---

by: Lev Raphael @ Fri Jun 11, 2010 at 14:37:42 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Another thing...

I LOVE it how people can trot out George W's 8 years to Obama's less than one. With a straight face! I love this place! LOL!  

---

by: renwl @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:29:26 PM CST

What exactly do you mean

by "this place"?  If you mean that to refer to anything other than "the United States of America," you're missing out on an awful lot.  If you seriously think that the regulars here are the only ones critical of Obama, you must not have looked at any other source of news and information in the last six months--HuffPo, the New York Times and scores of others.  Buy a clue.

Americans suffer from an ignorance that is not only colossal, but sacred.  --James Baldwin

---

by: QScribe @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:41:58 PM CST

[ Parent ]

What exactly do you mean????

If you seriously think that the regulars here are the only ones critical of Obama...

So that enlists comparing Obama's 11-mos to Bush eight years? You're cracking me up. This is better than prime time. LOL. Please---more of your logic. You're killin' me! LOL.  

---

by: renwl @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 23:31:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Wow.

A person who can't grasp even the most obvious facts laughing at people who can.  There is a clinical term for such behavior, but the discreet commenter refrains from using it.  But I think we must be patient and wait for you to get a grip.  After all, it's only been eleven months, and it will obviously take you a lot longer.

Americans suffer from an ignorance that is not only colossal, but sacred.  --James Baldwin

---

by: QScribe @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 10:44:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

h8er bully

You wanna actually reply to renwl's point or just be a bully? I'd like to see the clinical terms for your behavior, Qscribe.  

--ish

---

by: ish @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 11:14:47 AM CST

[ Parent ]

OK, fine, Quiz Kid.

I'll respond to his nonsense about "one year vs. eight years":  A perfectly valid comparison would be to Bush's FIRST year, during which--with a smaller majority in congress--he got virtually every one of this legislative initiatives passed.  Obama has gotten NONE of his.  None.  Zero.  Zip.  Zilch.  That of the result of ZERO leadership on the promises me made in his campaign.

That satisfy you?  It takes a hell of a lot of nerve for someone who routinely refers to other commenters as "fucktards" and the like, and who actually tries to order people off blogs that aren't his own, to try characterizing someone else as a bully.  Just sit there like a good boy and count your nickels and dimes, or something, okay?

Americans suffer from an ignorance that is not only colossal, but sacred.  --James Baldwin

---

by: QScribe @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 14:54:42 PM CST

[ Parent ]

okay so I don't like you either

Now to the issues. First, you're just wrong.
I refer you again to the Politifact promise meter. There's a lot of information there. It's really not none, zero, zip, ziltch.

Second, why do you blame the shortfall on Obama? That's a real question. Why do you see this as a failure of the democrats as opposed to a failure of the republicans? That the dems were willing to actually be bipartisan while the republicans are not? That the conservative dems seem to have veto power that the liberal ones don't? How are these things Obama's fault?

What do you think leadership would look like that is different? How do you know what's going on behind the scenes?


--ish

---

by: ish @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 15:05:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Conveniently myopic focus in assigning responsibility

I continue to be perplexed and irritated by the narrow vision of those who place all the "blame" for their unrealized expectations on the head of a single individual, President Obama.
To begin, I suspect their expectations where shaped by dreams devoid of any accurate sense of political reality.  An understanding of the make-up of the House and Senate should tell any adult that the "total change" desired was not going to happen all at once in a "wave of the wand" format.  
Why would people like Blue Dog Democrats suddenly change their thinking, behaviors and votes just because Barack Obama got elected?  
Why would defeated, humiliated Republicans who were arrogant bull-headed ideologues suddenly submit themselves to negotiating a truce with the conquering Obama?
A simple look at the make-up of the Congress reveals that not only is there not a Progressive majority but also that the status-quo, business-bought, special interest-fed members both Republican and Democrat, are a roughly equal force. Moderates and centrists that form the swing vote are not given to going out on risky limbs.
So, anyone who claims to be shocked that change wasn't sweeping and complete, clearly wasn't forming expectations based on reality. Complaints that begin "Obama campaigned on a promise" involve interpretations suited to personal desires and ignore the "we" and the "work together" that were also a regular part of every campaign speech.
Perhaps the biggest misconception of the disappointed devotees of change is that words and expectations constitute meaningful action.  I saw a severe shortage of real action from most progressives during the first 11 months of the Obama administration.  Where were the phone banks, the letter writing and emailing messages, the group lobbying visits . . . aimed at the Congress . . . the people who vote to enact change?  They did not exist!
This is a participatory democracy that requires individual action to influence the action of elected representatives.  Even lobbyists show up and speak up.  Why should the people think they need to do anything less.  No action by the people leads to no results in the Congress.  THAT is exactly what happened with health.
If the people want better results, the people are going to have to do a better job of caring out their part of the bargain.
It's easy, convenient and comfortable to blame Obama.  It's harder to accept and fulfill personal responsibility to act for change. However, the latter is the only option if you expect results!

---

by: msfwdc @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 21:54:40 PM CST

Nothing convenient, just reality.

  Name one issue President Obama ran on and has acted and used the Bully-Pulpit to get legislation through congress?  One issue he has taken the lead on?

 He hasn't, he has been hands off except to tell us why we have 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan.

 Healthcare is a right he says, but he stayed completely silent at the beginning and middle of debate.

 War Criminals go free, go figure.

 DADT, great people still being discharged.  At the same time Felons are being granted waivers to serve.  How about all those vets who rely on the VA?  Lied to as well.

 I watched as Bush ran his tax cuts through congress.  It was an everyday affair. Bush was a leader, he led this country down the SHITTER.  Obama is a week kneed bought and paid for politician who was supposed to be different.  

This is a participatory democracy that requires individual action to influence the action of elected representatives.  Even lobbyists show up and speak up.  Why should the people think they need to do anything less.  No action by the people leads to no results in the Congress.  THAT is exactly what happened with health.

 What a crock of SHIT.  We spoke when we elected him by huge margin.  He took the lead to try to make nice-nice with the religious right while ignoring the people who elected him.  In the 2010 and 2012 elections, I will be writing in HARVEY MILK everyplace on the Ballot I can unless there is a worth while candidate to vote for.

  My predication is turnout for these clownw will be so low because the base (ME) has had enough of his lack of learship in our elected crongress critters  I am not going to waiste my time phone calling, canvasing areas of town, donating money muchless vote.  I will never again vote for the lesser of two politicians,  Harvey Milk is what they will read on my ballit


If I make sense? it was quite by accident.

---

by: HappyCat @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 00:09:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]

If you are going to write in

write in a local LGBT

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 18:57:26 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Seriously?

Obviously, we all went into the election with our own take on what Obama promised, but I feel he has made great strides towards fulfilling the ideals of the campaign.  First - getting the stimulus bill passed to avoid a second depression, saving millions of jobs.  Then, saving the American auto industry - again, preserving millions of jobs.  Securing our first Latina judge - a strong progressive on the court.  And we're not even warming up.  Winding down Iraq, winding up Guantanamo, bringing the prisoners to the US for trial and imprisonment.  Ramping up the military effort against the Taliban - yes, he promised that and it is part of why I voted for him.    Doing his best in Copenhagen, recognizing that he can only promise so much given our political landscape.

Here's something Obama himself said perfectly - yes, the place is a mess.  Why not grab an effing BROOM!  We have many obstacles to overcome on the path to the society we want to create, and President Obama is NOT ONE OF THEM.  Abolishing the filibuster.  Defeating Joe Lieberman.  Replacing the conservadems with some real progressives.  Building more political will for further healthcare reform.  There is work to be done, and all this sniping about how Obama didn't do this and Obama didn't do that is, frankly, kind of a waste of time.  We still   have a legislative system (even if it sucks), and we have a lot of work to do to organize ourselves against corporate control of our democracy.  So, let's remember who are our REAL adversaries and stop trashing each other or Obama for the work that remains to be done.  

---

by: Scott in DC @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:19:04 PM CST

Sing it Barry!

---

by: David Ehrenstein @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:26:41 PM CST

Maybe the Democrats could run soembody else next time out

cause it don't matter if you're black or white -- right?

---

by: David Ehrenstein @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:35:29 PM CST

Take one example

Closing Guantanamo.  Popular idea, he campaigned on it, me and lots of other people have written to him to support it.  But one senator after another started whining that the super-criminals would be a threat to their state (absurd).  Hopefully we'll get them here in Illinois where we are quite capable of keeping them locked up and sort out the ones who should be handed some cash, a plane ticket and an apology.

Maybe he could just wave his magic wand on that and many other issues.  And it would work right up to the point where it backfires.  Obama is untying a very tangled bundle of knots; you can just tug real hard on one of them and end up tightening all the others.

In the end, Guantanamo will be closed.  I wish on day 1, but it will play out.  Took time for people to recognize how stupid the whole "super-criminal" thing is, among other obstacles.

The tendency is to weigh one issue as MUCH more important than all the others and then get pissed when it isn't addressed FIRST and just as we wanted it to be.  Really, though, we're in a big crowd.  For me, it's ending wars and addressing climate change.  And if you're thinking; "No, wait, this other issue is more important than those!" then you're beginning to understand the knot.

Let's see where we are in three more years.  Meanwhile I will keep voting Democratic and under NO circumstances vote any Republican or let any of my vote to fail opposing Republicans.  If we had, say, 70 votes it wouldn't matter what 3 or 4 blue dogs did.

---

by: george.w @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:36:07 PM CST

Thank you

for being a voice of reason and actually doing something for an issue you care about, rather than sitting back taking potshots.  This whole diary reeks of sensationalism and laziness.  Don't like the speed of change?  Row faster, friend, and get your friends and neighbors rowing, too.    I'm sick of fighting fellow liberals - I'd rather be taking out some DINOs and any other conservatives within my reach.

---

by: Scott in DC @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:48:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I call bullshit

Don't you dare say that I haven't been talking with my representatives and Senators.  Don't you dare say that I haven't made my concerns known to Party leadership here at the house district, county, state, and national level.

We're getting to the point that GLBT Democrats are no different from the Log Cabin Republicans.  Neither party is going to treat us like full citizens.

Crap, I'm trying hard to remain civil to your abject lack of civility.

The voices of reason aren't the conservatives.  They're not the apologista corps for the conservatives.  Conservatives are just perfectly able-bodied men and women who, for whatever reason, have never learned how to take a step forward.  The apologists are just reaching over to the conservatives and saying, "That's okay.  Backward works just as well."

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 08:07:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Um...

Sorry, dawg, but I don't think my giving props to George for is activism can be construed in any way to imply that you - who I am meeting for the first time - are not doing the same.  My point here is that we should be focusing on organizing for the change we seek, not moaning about Obama as though we were a bunch of helpless geeks.  If you're busy calling and writing letters, then that's fantastic.

The last paragraph of your reply -- sorry, I just don't understand at all what the heck you are talking about.  Did I ever say conservatives are the voice of reason?  Color me confused.  

---

by: Scott in DC @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 10:24:02 AM CST

[ Parent ]

When people say that the "moderates" are shaping the Senate bill, they're wrong

It's not the moderates.  It's the conservatives.  

It's time to build up some moral fire from the liberal side and kick conservative butt.

Mark Udall isn't "moderate".  He's conservative.  And yes, I'm pissed as all hell that someone who was a solid liberal voice in the House has become just another conservative Democratic Senator.  The same goes for the rest of them.  Lieberman is not a "moderate" caucusing with the Democrats.  He's a conservative.  Same for Mary Landrieu, Blanche Lincoln, and the rest of the "moderate" Democrats.

# Duty, duty -- honor is, is --
Honor, Creideiki -- alertly
# Shared, is -- Honor #

---

by: MileHighDawg @ Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 22:55:33 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Leadership, Obama Style, and the Looming Losses in 2010: Pretty Speeches, Compromised Values, and the Quest for the Lowest Common Denominator

Obama and the Dems have failed on so many levels that they themselves are setting themselves up for failure in 2010 and most likely beyond.  Vaporware is a great term for what they have failed to do.

There is a great post up at the Huffington Post by Drew Westen, Ph.D., He is Professor of Psychology and Psychiatry at Emory University, founder of Westen Strategies, and author of The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation. This article fully supports the above post by TechBear that this administration is largely one of Vaporware.

This post is probably the most succinct objective assessment of the Obama administration now in its 12th month. It is worth a read.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/...

msfwdc, I would argue mostly the opposite that it is rather 'convenient' to blame the folks who are not in seats of political power on the inaction of this administration regarding the promises he made while on the campaign trail. I was comfortable giving Obama a pass on all he failed to to do for one year....time is up.  

There have been many individual and organized activists who have been speaking out on Obama's inaction and if you have not been listening outside of the beltway then of course you are not aware of what is really happening in the real political landscape.  

I urge you to open your eyes to what this DNC and administration are doing to set themselves up for a rather disasterous 2010 and 2012 outcome if they don't get their act together and start listening to the everyday folks who put them in the seats of power in the first place.

vanhattan

---

by: vanhattan @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 22:39:21 PM CST

The point of front-paging this

Is that TechBear is coming from a specific point of view, but he asks the question "How is this not vaporware", not what the timeline should be.

He's not inaccurate in applying the definition "the release date for these products has consistently been set back, features have been eliminated"

We have had "release dates" set back on DADT and ENDA, for instance.

The meme that "he's only been in office ___ months" is getting old when we all know that the first year is when you have to push things through, and the President has not deigned to step on the bully pulpit to say let's get this through.

You could easily apply Vaporware to Congress as well, but only the President made specific promises that one presumed he would act upon quickly (unless he is under the fantasy that he's guaranteed a second term). Pelosi is already rolling back support for doing anything controversial because of the 2010 elections.

Bush had no problem shoving his agenda through ASAP. Planning on governing for two terms to deliver equality legislation when it's safe is NOT a strategy that I would roll the dice on, but apparently Rahm and Co, will roll them, and what happens to our issues is irrelevant.

So back to the question -- is TechBear's extension of Vaporware valid or not?

---

by: Pam Spaulding @ Mon Dec 21, 2009 at 23:10:40 PM CST

The analogy is valid

ENDA = Ovation, the original vaporware.

DADT repeal = Duke Nukem Forever

Health Care Reform = Transmeta.  Or the Itanium.  Wait, you say; those were real, eventually released products!  Uh-huh.  Ones that had enough inefficiencies as to render them noncompetitive in the long run after incurring huge development budgets.  Sound familiar?

I think the question of Vaporware extension validity is interesting especially when intent is taken into consideration:

Vaporware is often really, truly, honestly intended by developers to be released "really soon".  But they don't know the business side of things or project management and the product never becomes reality.

However, vaporware as used by marketing and business types is a whole 'nother matter: One often used purpose of vaporware is entry deterrence, where a large well funded company announces products far ahead of any rational timeline in order to manipulate a market away from a competitor.

So, which is Obama?  The hapless but incompetent developer or the cynical manipulative businessman?

---

by: sarasnavel @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 01:58:28 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Some was scheduling - if he'd tossed DADT, DOMA and Healthcare into

the ring at the same time, we'd already have a single payer system in place and funded while they were screaming so loud about the homosexual agenda.  

At this point, if DADT were to be changed (when did that word get slipped in to replace repealed?) this coming year, I'll be more than surprised.

---

by: Scott_NC @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 04:14:22 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Well, as the song says

"And the men who hold high places
Must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality
Closer to the heart"

That's the actual vaporware.  

My America includes LGBT families.

"The state has no business in the bedroom of the nation."- Pierre Trudeau

---

by: Mena @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 00:19:48 AM CST

Advocate....

Advocate, advocate, agitate!

What has disappeared into the aether is a fierce advocacy for our rights as citizens.

Shrubya was a fierce advocate for homophobia, and managed to accomplish (if what he did can be called an "accomplishment") much on that front, all the while doing tremendous damage to our country on so many other levels.

I realize Pres. Obama has a huge amount of debris to clear away.  The actual stumping for his programs is very, very effort intensive, with lots of telephone calls, visits, and so forth.

Finding time to say "Homophobia is wrong, and un-American" without a shred of equivocation is not effort intensive.

Politically inexpedient, perhaps.  More often than not,  acting out the right thing to do is difficult.  That is part of the struggle of being fully developed as a person;  a far more difficult task, ultimately, than being fully powerful.

Hate stops a beating heart.

---

by: KarenS @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 01:02:55 AM CST

Shrub had Karl Rove

"Turd Blossom" managed to whip up anti-marriage amendment ballot questions in dozens of states in 2004 to turn out gay-hating christians, who, unsurprisingly, also voted for Chimpy in 2004. How many of those wouldn't have voted due to the Iraq War and the ongoing downward slide but for the chance to punish two men kissing on the TeeVee? It's a proven tactic - give conservatives a chance to hate gays, and you pass your agenda and get your candidate in office. Works every time.

Now if our side could only find some basic lizard-brain issue to play on to GOTV for actual progressives instead of Rahm and Harry's Conservadem caucus, we'd be in business.

As things stand, it was decided and publicly declared years ago that the Dems would "govern from the center" from now on, essentially doing exactly what they've been doing - a whole lot of nothing. This is true in both the Executive and Legislative branches, from the top on down.

The Republicans fucked this country sideways until it curled in a ball and whimpered. We expect that. We do NOT expect the Dems to do the same, particularly within 12 months of campaigning on "Hope" and "Change."

God save ornery old queens! - kevinchi

---

by: Keori @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 11:53:34 AM CST

[ Parent ]

We have the issue, if we played it up correctly

American Churches controlling the agenda of foreign governments, with round ups of LGBT's

Coming soon to a state near you
Accompanied by round ups and harrssment of non-evangelicals, occasional murder, etc...

We could and ought to make these evangelicals the issue, present the picture of what they could do HERE

I tell you Chica that no greater abomination exists than women denying their spirit of sisterhood and instead becoming the oppressor. -Rebeca, Universidad Complutense de Madrid

---

by: MauraHennessey @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 19:02:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

The first year of an Administration sets the tone

Dubya gave every indication that his Administration would slam home his policies. And many of them he did.

The Obama Administration shows little or no willingness to fight for anything, much less gay equality...he set down very few or no benchmarks for his Administration on health care and, as a result, we will get health insurance reform, at best, not health care reform.

and that goes to this point right here:

But the release date for these products has consistently been set back, features have been eliminated and the primary user base -- we, the American people -- are ignored by a marketing department that insists on tailoring the products to maximize revenue rather than provide a quality item.

Now...get Rahm Emmanuel out of there and things may change...

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 08:49:16 AM CST

Truly, the first 100 days

The first 100 days for a president is a benchmark set by FDR:

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/ex...

Arguments supporting Obama saying, "It's only been ___ months!", like Pam said is old and has been that for a while. In his first 100 days, Dubya set us on the road to ruin. In the first three months he upped faith-based initiatives, instituted the global gag rule on funding reproductive rights around the world, that "No Child Left Behind" crap, trillion dollar tax cuts benefiting the wealthy... are we not still dealing with the fallout of these actions? 100 days. Wow.

So yes, Obama could have gotten a lot done in his first 100 days with a Democratic majority, which was there. And as many others have said, no matter who is in the WH, they know how to put the screws to wayward members of their own party to pass legislation they truly stand behind.

"Oh, I thought you meant a specific plan. With maps and stuff." -Buffy

---

by: Aspasia @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 13:47:13 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yes...

and Obama (unlike Bush) had a mandate for change (hell, I still have problems believing that George W. Bush was legally and duly elected as the President of the United States.)

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 14:17:03 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Yuppers

(hell, I still have problems believing that George W. Bush was legally and duly elected as the President of the United States.)

Gods, yes! Although hearing "hanging Chad" for several weeks did amuse me to no end.

"Oh, I thought you meant a specific plan. With maps and stuff." -Buffy

---

by: Aspasia @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 15:10:20 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I've always thought that "Hanging Chad" would make a great porn star name

Seeing as how it led the whole of America to become screwed.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

---

by: TechBear @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 15:24:08 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Or a movie

"Hanging Chad" with the sequels "Swinging Chad" then "Pregnant Chad" and ending with the highly successful "Multiple Hanging Chads".

It can be a box set!  

"Oh, I thought you meant a specific plan. With maps and stuff." -Buffy

---

by: Aspasia @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 22:27:28 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It seems my post was too short

My point is not that there are, as yet, no deliverables: the simple lack of a product is not what makes vaporware.

Vaporware is when you hype features (health care for every American) to pre-sell your product, and then do not implement those features in the final release.

Vaporware is when you create much fanfare over new and improved versions (the occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan) and then release the same version under a different name.

Vaporware is when you publicly commit yourself to a product launch date (the closure of Gitmo) and then use empty excuses to keep pushing that date back.

Vaporware is when you issue press releases to industry media about pending fixes to major, longstanding bugs (DADT, DOMA) only to end up either ignoring the bugs or even touting them as features.

Do you begin to see how this works?

I know and understand that it takes time to produce deliverables. But when those deliverables are pushed back for no reason, when no effort is made to produce deliverables, when deliverables are released that are the same old product -- or worse, have more bugs than the products they are meant to replace -- I do not see how anyone can consider that anything other than vaporware.

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President, or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong, is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public." - Theodore Roosevelt

---

by: TechBear @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 08:59:09 AM CST

The problem with your stretched analogy..

...is really that you're just endlessly repeating the same memes, quite a number of which are just not true.

You really think the opposition of apparently most of congress including Obama's allies to the closing of Gitmo is "an empty excuse"?

Why do you keep bringing up Afghanistan when what he's doing now IS one of his campaign promises?

Why do you keep bring up Iraq when clearly things ARE winding down (which is what he promised)?

The healthcare reform bill, as flawed as it is, brings the number of uninsured down from almost 20% to something like 6%. Have you not been paying attention to how ugly this fight has been? You think it would have been easier if Obama had said what, "pretty please"?

C'mon.


--ish

---

by: ish @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 09:47:41 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Educational time:

In the grand scheme of the three governmental branches, the President/Executive branch is hardly even near as powerful as the other two. While they do have clout with suggesting what legislation goes before the two houses that comprise Congress, they, by no means, set the agenda. Such authority rests with the legislators, your representatives and your state's senators.

Now, allow me to preface this by saying I don't care for Obama. I generally do not care for most governmental entities, as I feel that with every bit of good they do, they put out five times as much bad. But, Obama, from the offset, was making very extensive promises that I could recognize easily as "puffery." (Which, in legal terms, equates words presented in attempt to secure a sale which cannot be held later as a guarantee; in technological terms, it's apparently the creation of vaporware.) So, by no means am I defending Obama with this post, merely pointing out the following fact: The actions that are lacking are almost wholly within the legislative branch.

The President himself (or herself, hopefully sooner rather than later) has very little authority with passing laws. The primary actions the President can take which would have immediate effect are executive orders and executive agreements, neither of which hold the same weight as laws passed in the legislature. When it comes to legislature that reaches his desk, he has the choice of signing or vetoing it, and, even in the latter, such vetoes can be overturned by another vote in Congress.

Now, you'll note that I said 'almost wholly within the legislative branch'. There is no denying that when the President puts pressure on Congress, they put extreme consideration and expedite the President's wishes to the front burners. There is no denying that the President could say things in support of legislation that would make his original puffery more than that. There is much the President could do to stop or start activities, such as withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan, ceasing torture, and so forth.

However, as far as other hot button issues and even with the above-mentioned issues, the legislature could easily do all those things without the President's approval. If the legislature wanted a withdrawal, or disavowal of torture, they could easily cut the military's budget. They, after all, have the power of the purse, and set the budget and size for all armed forces; nothing says "Get our boys home" more than an "or else we'll drop your budget to one cent and one soldier" addendum. If they wanted an open government, they would make it such themselves; and, so we're clear, the President can do nothing to make the legislative body be more open besides suggest. That's something they'd have to compel on themselves.

In short (as I make these points almost every time a 'h8 Obama' post comes up), if you've got a problem, your best bet isn't heaping it on a President. They are, by majority, fairly ineffectual when compared to the legislative branch of our government. A point raised in an earlier post was that people spend ridiculous amounts of money for a job that pays less due to the exposure to lobbyists and their kickbacks; lobbyists know well enough that the legislature is the way to go, which is why they focus entirely on working with Congressional committees. In terms of kickbacks, the Presidency isn't without merit, though; you do get the same pay you received in the White House for the rest of your life, as well as Secret Service protection for the same duration. (Not to mention, it tends to make your autobiography sell better than if you were just a governor. That's right. I went there, Palin.)

Pay more attention to your local elections, and work to get the legislators you want into office. They use puffery as well, mind you, but a look into their voting history will generally tip you off to the sort of stuff you can expect from them. In addition, legislators are more readily accessible to the public, and are more responsive to their constituents (only slightly less so with senators, but only because their terms are longer and they feel more insulated due to that).

Saying that the President should be in there, pitching on your behalf because he got your vote or because he said something before his inauguration which led you to believe he was a 'fierce advocate' is a gross oversight on your part, and a basic disavowal of your first amendment right. The only person who you can count on to speak up on your behalf is you; when you leave it to an elected official whose terms are limited, whose constituency is the entire nation, and whose votes were earned through puffery, you're only robbing yourself and your ideals.

You know, I bet if the Constitution came with illustrations, we wouldn't have even half the trouble we do today.

---

by: madigari @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 10:13:32 AM CST

He doesn't want.

Look. To all those defending Obama: No one is complaining that Obama tried but failed to deliver.

People are complaining because Obama didn't try.

But here is the part that a few people still don't get: The reason he didn't try is the simplest one. He doesn't want.

He doesn't want single payer, and he never did. He doesn't want reform of the Wall Street Mafia, and he never did. He doesn't want the Patriot Act to be rescinded. He doesn't want a reduction in military spending. He doesn't want de-privatization of the prison industry. He doesn't particularly care one way or another about the civil rights of gay people. And on and on and on.

You cannot actually want and yet try so little. You cannot actually want and then, with deliberation, do the very opposite.

People need to get with the evidence, and then they need to vote accordingly.

---

by: Jim @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 10:50:31 AM CST

Even a few members of the Congressional Black Caucus

might agree with this sentiment, TechBear.

---

by: kevinchi @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 11:23:33 AM CST

Definitely

Especially Maxine Waters and John Conyers. Conyers was a dedicated supporter of Obama and even he has lost patience with the performance.

"Oh, I thought you meant a specific plan. With maps and stuff." -Buffy

---

by: Aspasia @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 13:50:32 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Actually Barry's the SECOND Black President

---

by: David Ehrenstein @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 12:18:18 PM CST

I wasn't expecting him to be another Lincoln ...

... but I didn't think we'd be seeing identical Bush Dept of Justice pleadings in cases as different as rendition, wiretaps, DOMA, et al. I never thought his DOJ would file an amicus brief in support of John Yoo. And so forth.

This was bait and switch. Oh, he's still charming and does all the right things on camera, but it's gestures. That's all.

CINDERELLA: If this is the kind of prince you've become, what kind of king are you going to be?
PRINCE CHARMING: I was raised to be charming -- not sincere.
-- Sondheim, "Into the Woods"

---

by: coram nobis @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 14:14:48 PM CST

veiwed this minefield and tippy toed out

I was born at night....but not LAST NIGHT

"race, taste. and History finally overcome....and you ain't there"
by Tony Kushner

---

by: peteyPornpig @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 15:16:43 PM CST

Its about leadership

I thought that George W Bush was the worst President in my lifetime, maybe ever. He won the election by 1 vote in the Supreme Court and reelection by a not insignificant margin but hardly a mandate. For most of his term, he had slim majority support in Congress and for parts of it the majority was held by the oposition party. Except for the 9/11 spike, he never was held in high regard by the public and in the last few years his poll numbers really tanked.

Yet for 8 years I knew exactly what he stood for and I knew he was going to work real hard to acchieve his goals every single day. His favorite expression was "I expect...". Not "I want". Not "I hope". Not "I'm going to try and convince". Just the imperative, the command. It is amaising to me that in spite of not having a strong hand, he stayed true to his own beliefs through all 8 years.

In 11 months, I can't really say I know what Obama stands for. I know what he says. I know what people tell he stands for. But I have never seen him take a stand. He is always ready to "compromise". If we were in the exact same legislative position today but Obama was out in front of the issues, I'd have no complaint. But he's not out in front. He's detatched, fearful to get his fingerprints on something. You can talk about it being only 11 months but it isn't a matter of time. It's a lack of demonstrated leadership that is driving progressives over the edge.

Back in the fall of 2007, the phrase people used for the devisive ENDA was "The perfect is the enemy of the good". In the health care reform debate I hear that same phrase again. I first heard it in a slightly different form almost 20 years ago: "The perfect is the enemy of the good enough". If you are a principled person, somewhere along the line you have to say this is just not good enough. That's leadership. That is something Pres. Obama has yet to say. Will he ever?

---

by: Laura Hart @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 18:29:20 PM CST

No.

Because what you think is good and what he thinks is good are two different things.

---

by: Jim @ Tue Dec 22, 2009 at 23:25:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Which is a very good reason...

for him, or anyone else, to not have power over our individual lives.

Hate stops a beating heart.

---

by: KarenS @ Wed Dec 23, 2009 at 18:44:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]