You are currently browsing the daily archive for March 18, 2010.
This is a direct quote of what Obama told Fox
Now, we can fix this in a way that is sensible, that is centrist. I have rejected a whole bunch of provisions that the left wanted that are — you know, they were very adamant about because I thought it would be too disruptive to the system.
Hmm – I guess he never campaigned for “Change” either. We already know about the Pubic Option
Having ditched the soft and mushy left, Obama presents himself as Goldilocks. Too bad the “too big” crowd is screaming hysterically and the “too little” is bending over asking for more.
To make this even more pathetic, the Fox audience wasn’t impressed
Did he think a strong performance would possibly influence some undecided moderate Democrats, many of whom have plenty of constituents who watch Fox regularly? That seems an out-sized ambition, even for a President who maintains unlimited confidence in his ability to speak and persuade. Whatever the case, I think it was a mistake by the President to go on Fox last night and I do not think he helped himself or his cause with the interview.
Bobots were shocked by the “rudeness” of the interviewer
and the White House leaks accusations of Faux for lying yet again
A White House official: “Many of the falsehoods and myths about health reform gained traction with Glenn Beck and others on FOX, so the President is returning to the scene of the crime to make the final sale.
(or was it a sell-out?”)
I guess this is all part of courting the anti-choice crowd. You know, the one Moveon, B0bots are not allowed to attack.
To the shills’ claims that he ran as a centrist
He ran as a man who claimed he could change the way
politics was done. He ran on ‘we are going to change this country, and change the world’. He ran on ‘WE are the ones we have been waiting for’. He ran not just opposed to mandates, but utterly mocking them as larcenous and unneeded.
Show a link, please, to him on the trail saying “I am a centrist and will govern as a centrist.”
Change. He ran on change. Change you can believe in.
Not sure what campaign you were listening to. McCain’s maybe? That tax in the ‘reform’ was his idea, one that Obama claimed to oppose. Until he won.
54. Centrist, my arse!
Corporatist is more likely. I guess Medicare and Social Security are ideals from the extreme left. Now days, anything that doesn’t support big business-but actually helps the people is extreme left. Those wild, wacky lefties-I tell you, what would this country be like without them? The majority of the populace wanted a strong PO–I guess Obama must be placating all those wacky lefties–NOT!!!!Not true. He pushed “the center” even further right (which is what he wanted to do.) nt
In fact some get daring enough to confess
48. And that’s why I voted Uncommitted in my Minnesota caucus in 2008
I couldn’t stand either Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton, because it was so obvious that they were the two candidates agreed upon by the corporate media.
In early 2007, the corporate media were already acting as if they were the only Dem contenders.
That told me that I could never support either one with any enthusiasm.
I did vote for Obama with great reluctance. But seeing what we got, I wish I had voted third party.
Of course, she missed some important differences in what the corporate media was doing, but got more than most idiots there.
Sorry, F*ing retards, the writing as on the wall. Reagan, Blackwater, stealing the primaries… Now live with it. It’s on you..
It’s symbolical and comes from GOP quarters – but it’s no small matter: 37 States prepare laws against the HCR mandates
BOISE, Idaho – Idaho took the lead in a growing, nationwide fight against health care overhaul Wednesday when its governor became the first to sign a measure requiring the state attorney general to sue the federal government if residents are forced to buy health insurance.
Similar legislation is pending in 37 other states.
Yes, Federal Law supercedes State Law but that’s quite te reaction! (Opposition of this kind to NCLB took years to build up)
The other remarkable development here is B0bot reaction
LiberalFighter (1000+ posts)
1. Every person hat opts out should have their premiums increased 100%
Note, the name an the fact that they don’t refer to states but to persons. This is not about parties or defending Obama, but direct shilling for insurance.
Not unlike I saw in this other exchange
NJmaverick (1000+ posts) Wed Mar-17-10 12:00 PM
Response to Original message
5. It was only cruel if you were more concerned about destroying insurance companies
instead of helping people
PROUD REGISTERED DEMOCRAT
jgraz (1000+ posts)
Response to Reply #5
11. Destroying insurance companies IS helping people
What other parasites do you weep for? Ticks? Tapeworms? Viruses?
So, when you pay your mandated premiums to insurers, just know what some of the proceeds is gong for: shilling on B0botland. Of course, this would be the cheap part of PR. And, to complete the cartoon in my illustration, someone has to pay for the campaign for it too.
Washington Express seems to think the Texas style history revisionist textbooks are heading for the rest of us too: parents beware!
Washington Times feels for poor overwhelmed CBO and reveals the Illinois GOP candidate tactic: a repeat of Sctott Brown’s “not Obama seat, people’s seat” I got news for him: not Obama’s seat since it went for auction.
and Obama Times appears more guarden in its gloating over Kuchinich than WaPo (you can see Axelrod’s style is different than Rahm’s)