OBAMA Has Put Himself on Island (against the Dems too!!)

Some presidents begin their tenure with great popularity and then gradually lose the allegiance of one group after another. That’s what is happening to President Barack Obama, Politico reports.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/33a1dfc6de4d.jpg[/atsimg]

Congressional Democrats are now upset with him for causing massive losses in last week’s elections. Democratic state party leaders are peeved at the White House’s incompetent political operation. Democratic lobbyists are repulsed by his snobbishness toward their profession. Cabinet members have been rendered irrelevant.

Source: www.newsmax.com...

The Politico Story: (more indepth)

President Obama isolated ahead of 2012

Source: www.politico.com...

So, the old trick worked. Let the new dog in and run around.... and when he thinks he is King, go after him. I think the Republicans let Obama in there-knowing he would mess the Democratic Party off it's foundation. I don't think they beleived he could single-handedly take down the whole Dem. Party in 2 years but it just goes to show everyone of his great powers..... lol

2012, a done deal. Hillary will sit it out, Obama will demand to run again-and lose, to Palin. But, that is to be expected. The bigger story will be how the New House Leading party (Repub/Tea Party) will submit tons of GOOD legsislation up to the Senate. Those bills will clearly show the country the remaining Dems Senators which side they sit on.

Do they continue their march to Socialism/Progressive or swing wide right to save themselves and the Dem Party? Before you answer that, I believe 31 Dem Senators will be up for election in 2012 as opposed to 10 Republicans. Those 31 already saw what running against Obama can do (W.V. Gov-now Sen elect) and the appartent mood of the country towards Obama and the Dems. Which way to go, which way to go? lol

Thing are looking pretty dismal for Obama in D.C. and across the country. Maybe he should considering real-estate in India... while he is there that is.

You are going to see some HARD BALL from the Republicans come Jan. and honestly, IT's About TIME!

The issue is not that the Democrats swing to the right rather I think that is the problem. There is no march towards Socialism, if there were all the bankers would be fleeing the country. We just have a situation where we have two parties, well actually one, that believe in Statism. Sure the Republican wing of the party is a little more fiscally conservative and a lot more culturally conservative but what difference is there really?

A banker had a hit-and-run in Eagle, CO and it was on the news, was he locked in jail? No he was simply let go with fines because he was a banker. The elite have the control through both parties, the Democratic Party just 100 years ago would have been the party both you and I would have belonged to. They strictly defended the people at all costs even if it meant horrible failure in elections.

Mr. Carlisle said in 1878 that this was a struggle between the idle holders of idle capital and the struggling masses who produce the wealth and pay the taxes of the country; and my friends, it is simply a question that we shall decide upon which side shall the Democratic Party fight. Upon the side of the idle holders of idle capital, or upon the side of the struggling masses? That is the question that the party must answer first; and then it must be answered by each individual hereafter. The sympathies of the Democratic Party, as described by the platform, are on the side of the struggling masses, who have ever been the foundation of the Democratic Party.

There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that if you just legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, that their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous their prosperity will find its way up and through every class that rests upon it.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

That was part of a speech known as the ‘Cross of Gold’ speech which is considered by Political Historians to be the greatest political speech in history. William Jennings Bryan was a strong proponent of Populism which was the basis for the Democratic Party throughout the 19th Century with such great presidents as Thomas Jefferson and Andrew Jackson crusading against banks and the elite in favor of the people.

Eventually the Progressives took over control of the party leading to the death of the original Democratic Party in 1912 with the election of Woodrow Wilson, whom was openly hostile to the Populists such as Bryan. These Populists were forever pushed into the corners of the party and now they have been completely removed. The Republican Party has always been in the pocket of the big business interests since its conception. I would not have trusted Republicans 100 years ago and I don’t trust them now.

The Progressives have always been hostile to the people. Before the 1970’s the Progressives were in the Republican Party but now the Progressives of each party have taken control of both parties thus removing any Populists and anyone else who dares to stand up to big moneyed interests. Why is this relevant to the thread? Because I believe Obama is exactly the Democratic Party now and they don’t like what they see.

Could this be a time for Democratic renewal? As long as Nancy Pelosi is the leader then I don’t see it as possible. Have the Democrats not learned yet? They held the House virtually consecutive for 40 years (1954-1994) yet when they elect these Progressive presidents they lose every time. Their party is smashed and the Republicans take the mantle of Populism. It’s like placing your hand on the burner, they just keep doing it knowing exactly what is going to happen.

If they learn to get out of the pocket of big business and the bankers and fight for the ‘little guy’ again the Republicans wouldn’t have a snowballs chance in hell. But first they would actually have to bight that hand that feeds them and I don’t think that is possible, Democrats are very weak and timid politicians. Turning on big business, I doubt they could ever imagine doing that.

Originally posted by MisoirSure the Republican wing of the party is a little more fiscally conservative and a lot more culturally conservative but what difference is there really?

History would show you fiscally you are backwards...they talk alot and produce the opposite.

culturally they are off the charts different...near theocratic idealists...damn american taliban.

but I would say the choice of left or right is totally 2 dimensional in a age where we are complex enough to have far more opinions and options than that...seems we are being politically lazy

Congressional Democrats are now upset with him for causing massive losses in last week’s elections. Democratic state party leaders are peeved at the White House’s incompetent political operation. Democratic lobbyists are repulsed by his snobbishness toward their profession. Cabinet members have been rendered irrelevant.

It sounds to me that the 'problem' is that Obama is a good president. Combating special interests in Washington? No need for appointed, unelected advisors? He must really be taking things into his own hands, and the executive branch of the US government has become incredibly strong.

- Democrats can't blame Obama for their big losses. THEY themselves are the ones that voted for obamacare, etc. It's their own fault. They could have voted how the country wanted them to ... no Obamacare. Then they'd still have jobs and the american people would have what they wanted. It's not Obama's fault. He didn't hold a gun to their heads and say 'vote this way'.

- Palin won't be the GOP choice for 2012. Won't happen.

- Don't count on Hillary to sit it out. Hillary says she isn't interested ... but I don't believe it.

- 2012 Obama could be reelected if the republicans don't come up with a good candidate. Palin, Newt, Romney, Huckabee, or Haley Barbour just don't have 'it'. Jindal has 'it' but has said he won't run in 2012. I think he's the only chance the Republicans have at this point - and he said he's not going for it.

Originally posted by anon72
Obama will demand to run again-and lose, to Palin. But, that is to be expected.

lol...remind me not to be part of your dreamworld...would choke on all the books being burned..

man, talk about fantasy.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap


I'm not following ya'. He promised no lobbiests would find a job in his White House and yet it's overflowing with lobbiests and special interests. He has appointed tons of czars. So I'm not sure what you are saying.

reply to post by truthseeker10


Nope! I will never miss you.


Wait I do miss him! his daughters are gorgeous beyond belief.

Originally posted by FlyersFan
- Democrats can't blame Obama for their big losses. THEY themselves are the ones that voted for obamacare, etc. It's their own fault.

8% of people leaving the polls said they gave a rats arse about obamacare, immigration, or any other of the talking points...what they said is that they are highly frustrated at the economy and the slow job growth rate...thats it..the end.

you can, after the fact, start saying that they voted in R because everyone wants prayer in school, or whatever fringe thinking you can imagine...and you know that to be absolutely untrue.

8%...keep that in mind...and if the R's decide to push the 8% care down the throats of 100%, their victory will be exceptionally short lived.

the people that didn't like healthcare are divided...some wanted no reform, some thought it was nothing but a compromise towards universal...and most hated the process to pass the legislation..this is what the results were, not some hyped up idealistic version of the truth...simply the facts. have fun spinning that one.

But many Democrats privately say they are skeptical that Obama is self-aware enough to make the sort of dramatic changes they feel are needed — in his relations with other Democrats or in his very approach to the job.

From the first page of the article.

I think many will see the point-IF they read it.

Some Democrates are begiining to wonder if Obama is even compentent to perform as the POTUS. If Obama IS SELF-AWARE ENOUGH!!!!! Think about what that is saying. Either he is nuts, lost it or is just so politically sided to the Left that he doesn't care.

He offers no apologies for what happen at the mid-terms. He admits he got a schallacking but.... big deal.

Which means only one thing. Obama is doing all of this destruction of the American way of life as we know it ON PURPOSE. If you don't agree with that you'll surely have to agree he sure in hell is doing much to fix anything.

All he has done for the last two months is fly around and campaining for his homies. The whole time saying the election wasn't about him....or his policies.... Guess what... Mall Bovine Feces Obama.

You know, the one Big Thing that no one is talking about (most no one) is the number of state Legislatorships that the Republicans now control (come Jan). A total of One Hundred & Ninty Six 196. The Dems-60 (I think). The Repubs have a chance to Jerrymander the Republican furture for decades-politically. There are still 8 seats in the air. More than 170 House elections won.

Then, you toss in the now apparent attempts of the West Virginia Republican Party to try and get the newly elected Dem Gov-Senator elect-to switch to the Republican Party. Figuring since he sounded so much like Ronald Regan and how fast he ran from Obama policitics that if he goes to Wash D.C and does not do as he says (including Obamacare reform). He's toast.

It is going to be a very interesting two years.

I now feel the chances of Obama not seeking another term (or be allowed to be) is now:

65%-35%.

dp

Originally posted by FlyersFan

- 2012 Obama could be reelected if the republicans don't come up with a good candidate. Palin, Newt, Romney, Huckabee, or Haley Barbour just don't have 'it'. Jindal has 'it' but has said he won't run in 2012. I think he's the only chance the Republicans have at this point - and he said he's not going for it.

Jindal? ... He didn't do well on the GOP rebuttal to the State of The Union, He railed against the state level stimulas package, but got his picture taken in front of a few of those big fake checks from the gov., and I think being from Louisianna...he has to have some skeletons in his closet the way that gov works down there.

Just my opinion of course...he looks vulnerable...and I hate to say it, but with the GOP having stepped to the right I am not sure if they are prepared to roll the dice with an "Indian-American" after all the "born in Kenya" stuff etc. There is a component of the far right that is in fact racist...not the whole far right...but they might lose enough votes putting an "Indian-American" on the ballot in the current climate to make it a risky venture.

I think it will be Huckabee...a moderate that has pivoted to the right in the current climate and able to dance between his Moderate past and the core right present and potentially bring the whole GOP to the voting booth.

We might see Sarah Palin as VP again...The establishment GOP will be trying to figure out a way to buy her off and prevent her from running and pulling the TP votes her way.

reply to post by anon72


So you are saying that he...

Isn't liked by DC insiders, the Democratic congress and Lobbyists?

OK...

Maybe he is exactly what he has been claiming to be? Not a fan of DC politics and lobbyists?

Pres. Obama has always been a moderate. That is why niether the far right or far left has been happy with him.

He has never liked the lobbyists...that is why the Chamber of Commerce and Big Business have pumped over a half billion dollars into stopping him.

"Far Left/Socialist Agenda" is a buzz-word...a button to be pressed in your head...not a reality. I think the history books will get it right about Pres. Obama, but until then people will scramble to try and paint him as extreme for political purposes.

Originally posted by anon72

But many Democrats privately say they are skeptical that Obama is self-aware enough to make the sort of dramatic changes they feel are needed — in his relations with other Democrats or in his very approach to the job.

From the first page of the article.

I think many will see the point-IF they read it.

Some Democrates are begiining to wonder if Obama is even compentent to perform as the POTUS. If Obama IS SELF-AWARE ENOUGH!!!!! Think about what that is saying. Either he is nuts, lost it or is just so politically sided to the Left that he doesn't care.

Self aware means political. And yes he is much less politically driven than any President I have seen. If he was concerned with politics, he never would have gone for HCR as it was the third rail of politics. He could have let it sit for another 4 or 8 years and left it to be the next guys problem. Presidents have been doing that for decades with Healthcare Reform. So why did he do it? Because it needed to get done. I don't want my President so "Self-aware" that they view legislation in light of...can this be spun to make me look bad?...I'd rather have a President willing to take a "shalacking" knowing they are doing the right thing.

reply to post by anon72


Observe, everyone, as the "Obama is not mentally fit for office and will be removed under the 25th Amendment" meme is spread by this poster. What was once a dirty political scheme in Washington has already become a popular prediction, and soon it will become a rumour, and the rumour will become news, and the news will become truth in the minds of millions of mindless teevee drones.

reply to post by SmedleyBurlap


Im not sure if you are referring to me but..... I am just pointing out what his own party members/associates are reported to be doing.

Not good when it is on the other foot, I presume.

Most likely those in control at the Dems HQ attempted to discuss their concerns with Obama-as it related to the ass-kicking from last Tuesday. Obama didn't get the message they sent, doesn't care what they sent-or is just a political babe in the woods.

Regardless, he is contining to bring down the DEM's House of Cards.