Skip to main content

View Diary: President Obama's Original Sin (68 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Interesting that the diarist call the President a (8+ / 0-)

    "corporatist" (a personal insult and mockery directed at Barack Obama) and yet is worried that others will make personal insults and mock him.

    Contrary to the diarist, I would say that a President who has given a society access to healthcare, which has eluded said society for close to a century and where heretofore many in that society would get sick and die, is a man of the people.

    Oh how noble are these lofty individuals who scoff at Barack as not being a man of the people justified in doing so, since of course their ability to wax eloquently for perhaps a hundred years has not yielded that which the "not a man of the people" has accomplished for millions.

    Still, it is also important to note that this 44th President as achieved all that he has despite being blocked and sabotaged by a terrorist segment of Congress.  That even as he has been called a "corporatist", he is also despised by corporate America, who have spent tens of millions of dollars to oppose him.

    Despite obstructionism by Republicans, the individuals who are really aligned with corporate America, the President passed a Wall Street reform legislation with the aid of individuals who are, I guess, also considered “corporatist”.  What are the names of such “corporatist”?

    Patrick Leahy, Al Franken, Tom Harkin, Sherrod Brown, Sheldon Whitehouse and Bernie Sanders, what a bunch of “corporatist”!

    These individuals voted for the legislation because they understood that politics is not doing the impossible, but doing the possible. It is doing the best that you can under difficult circumstances and improve on your efforts later.

    If individuals such as these had adopted the stance of not voting for any legislation unless it were perfect we would not have passed the Affordable Care Act or even Social Security.

    We would have gotten nothing accomplished, just the chance to boast that we joined with those that were against the interest of the people to block legislation that wasn't perfect. We would have had NOTHING.

    Am I wrong? Let’s see…. Let’s take a look at the Republicans who voted against the Wall Street bill.

    Chambliss (R-GA)
    Coburn (R-OK)
    Cochran (R-MS)
    Corker (R-TN)
    Cornyn (R-TX)
    Crapo (R-ID)
    Inhofe (R-OK)
    Isakson (R-GA)
    Johanns (R-NE)
    Kyl (R-AZ)
    Graham (R-SC)
    Grassley (R-IA)
    McCain (R-AZ)
    McConnell
    DeMint (R-SC)
    Sessions (R-AL)

    These are staunch Conservatives, who habitually vote against the interest of Democrats and the nation, so nothing remarkable here. But what is remarkable? There was a Democrat, whom many so called "true Progressives" consider the epitome of Progressivism, who voted along with Republicans against the Wall Street legislation, and who was that Democrat?

    Feingold (D-WI)

    What has Ross Feingold achieved, in terms of stopping the injurious practices on Wall Street since voting against the Wall Street bill? A bill that, although not perfect,  put at least some regulations in place?

    NOTHING…..

    He helped the Republicans vote against the legislation and has nothing to show for it except the boast, perhaps, that he along with Republicans voted against the legislation.

    This more than anything else illustrate  the mindset of the all or nothing, Obama is a “corporatist” crowd.  They talk and talk and talk, and have even waited a century before giving tens of millions of people the ability to gain access to healthcare, until the so-called "corporatist" "not a man of the people" Obama showed up.

    Big Talkers.

     

    •  asdf (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Ray Pensador, emal, churchylafemme

      "Contrary to the diarist, I would say that a President who has given a society access to healthcare, which has eluded said society for close to a century and where heretofore many in that society would get sick and die, is a man of the people."

      Sorry, but the ACA does not give access to healthcare, but access to health insurance.  They are not the same.  There are still going to be millions that cannot afford the costs of treatments and/or medications.

    •  ACA is a CORPORATE "solution" (4+ / 0-)

      with mandatory tithes to corporate profits.

      Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

      by The Dead Man on Sun Oct 06, 2013 at 07:23:52 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Keep saying that. Tell that to people who have (3+ / 0-)

        lived for years without care. You folk who keep trying to diminish the ACA with the big scary suggestion that it is a "corporatist" plan, will never understand that to the average person all that is important is that he or she can get care. Just like those on the Right who keep trying to diminish it your arguments are more just noise.

        If people had to depend on your "perfect" model to get healthcare they would have had to wait another 100 years. I believe that the plan can and will be improved but I don't subscribe to the view of most of you folk here who wanted the plan killed because it didn't live up to your wish list.

        Talk talk talk.... And frequently no action.

        •  We should all praise god for the table scraps (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          churchylafemme, Ray Pensador

          our betters leave us.

          Obama: self-described Republican; backed up by right-wing policies

          by The Dead Man on Sun Oct 06, 2013 at 10:50:43 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  So saying the ACA is corporatist (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ray Pensador

          automatically means a person wanted the bill killed? How do you know "most of us folk who wanted the plan killed because it didn't live up to our wish list?"

          Or are you just ascribing the most extreme position of that debate to anyone who says anything that isn't 100% complimentary?

          Yes, I do believe that's exactly what you're doing.

          And talk, talk, talk, but frequently no action means that no one tried? People were screaming for a public option. A lot of us thought that's what Obama wanted. Until he didn't, because there "wasn't enough votes." Because nobody had it in them enough to twist Lieberman's arm, or whatever the excuse was for giving up on it without a fight.

          It doesn't change the fact that the insurance industry has a lot of nice, new customers.

          Being a giveaway to that industry is okay, because a lot more people can get insurance. Fine.

          It's still a giveaway, and it's far from perfect. People can point that out if they want, because it's a fact. A few bloggers saying something unflattering isn't gonna undo the law, nor is it going to prevent people from taking advantage of it, so you can rest easy.

          But as long as you're here to take umbrage on his behalf whenever someone says something mean about his achievements, we can be confident in the knowledge that we're one step farther away from realistically evaluating anything he does.




          Somebody has to do something, and it's just incredibly pathetic that it has to be us. ~ J. Garcia

          by DeadHead on Sun Oct 06, 2013 at 11:04:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site