President Obama's re-election campaign unveiled a new video this morning, which has a similar look and feel to the recent "The Road We've Traveled" documentary, but features a different message and messenger.
Note, for example, that aside from some brief narration at the beginning, the only voice in this video is Elizabeth Warren's, the Democratic U.S. Senate candidate in Massachusetts. That's interesting in and of itself -- the campaign clearly sees Warren as a key progressive voice, with enormous credibility on these issues, particularly with the Democratic Party's base.
And the fact that shining a spotlight on Warren during his very competitive race probably doesn't hurt the party's larger goals, either.
But also note the message of the video itself. Whereas the recently-released documentary was largely focused on reminding the public about the severity of the crash Obama inherited from his Republican predecessor, and the improvements seen over the last few years, the message of this video is looking forward. As Warren says in the clip:
"This next election is about the direction our country takes. It's about whether or not we are going to be a people who say, 'I got mine; the rest of you are on your own,' or whether we're going to be a people who say, 'We can invest in our future.'
"And we can build a real future for ourselves and for our kids, so that when the next kid comes up with a good idea, they got a shot to make it big, and so does the kid after that and the kid after that.
"This election is going to affect everyone. We really have come to real choice and what our future looks like is going to be very different depending on who's governing."
In effect, this is a bookend message to last week's documentary video. It's not about reminding voters about the steps taken to rescue the country from economic ruin; it's about urging voters not to go backwards.
In a way, they're two sides to the same coin, but it's worth watching to see how the Obama campaign pushes both messages at the same time.
Leave a Comment:
Excellent. Excellent. Sobriety. Genuine issue. Nice to see a President not playing the triumphalism card; he, like our country, is in travail. No ranting and slavering raving; just a quiet, sane voice. This is a great piece of work.
Yes this makes us sane common sense lovers happy, but it's driving the fringe absolutley nuts. They are reaching into their bag of crazy and withdrawing conspiracy theories that have been defeated time and time again; and plans to sink this Country in an attempt to win, what they can't win. Why does the movie "Roadhouse" come to mind? The Mr. Wesley character is the extreme greedy right (GOP), bullying hard working folks around and making his own rules and to hell with the masses. Guess which calm character is President Obama? Fiction imitating life or vice versa?
Elizabeth Warren gets it...do you?
This may make some Mrs. Clinton fans angry, but I think Elizabeth has a better chance at reaching independents better. Mrs. Warren fires me up and keeps me calm at the same time...That's what I need. I love her!!
I have to add.....Mrs. Warren will be able to attack the GOP's absurd policies without being called the "dark cloud" hanging over our nation, or answering to "why do you hate White People?". Remove the GOP's race card and hate speach and watch them pull out their hair. Warren / Clinton 2016. LET'S GO BIG!!!
I would certainly like to vote for Elizabeth Warren in a Presidential race come 2016.
As an MA resident, let's focus on supporting her unseating Scott Brown, then we can worry about 2016. ;)
nooooo, I want her Noooooow! :D
(yes, howl that like a wolf. It's fun!) (add a little Verucca Salt to your tone!)
Warren/Booker 2016. I'll quit my job to help.
She's a heroine for the ages, starting in MA 2012, through US 2016 and beyond. Count me in too as help.
If the 1% succeed in completing their economic stranglehold on the majority of Americans, what would be left. If plunder is the goal, what is left to pursue? If power is the goal, fear of losing that power would overshadow any pleasure gained. In all of mankind's history, no totalitarian rule has survived the combined needs of the ruled. A game is only fun if it is competitive.
For these people, the "game" is only fun if they win. Competition isn't what they're interested in.
they didn't wave a magic wand, but Obama waved his pen and signed the NDAA and other bills that have taken away the liberties of this country .... you want to re-elect that?
You have a better alternative, @Andrew? I certainly don't see one. Mittens, Santorum, Paul, Gingrich? GMAFB.
No Andrew, I've voted in every election since 1968 and there is only one of those Presidential elections that I did not vote for a Democrat while holding my nose, and that was the first one, but the reality of political life in the USA is that there are only two political parties that matter at the national level and you gotta choose between the lessor of two evils. This time I'll hold my nose again because I know what the alternative is, I've seen how the intellectual left in its purity crusades keeps handing the Federal government over to Republicans, how many tens of thousands of human beings are dead unnecessarily because the intellectual left couldn't bring itself to vote for Al Gore. So you go ahead vote Green, Libertarian, Progressive, etc., and when Mitt takes office in January, pat yourself on the back for contributing to the next war.
do you want another GW there to take away what freedoms he missed the first go around?
Obviously you haven't seen "Harold and Kumar go to Guantanamo". The bill doesn't give more power than the feds already have. Personally, I'm against anyone, citizen or not, not getting a trial, but if a citizen decides to switch sides and become an enemy combatant without filling out the paperwork first, they should still be treated as an enemy combatant.
This is different than a protest because you are aligning yourself with an enemy of the state in intent and action. Doing so is grounds for losing your citizenship anyway, so it ends up being a matter of semantics.
Every progressive website I visit now has a silly commenter like you -- Obama is a corporatist; Obama is capitulator in chief; Obama is a bankster... blah blah blah. Obama fenced that NDAA law around with pretty high walls (the signing statement; the policy directives he issued) AND Feinstein is introducing a bill to correct its excesses.
The other thing they often say (must have the same playbook) is that he's just a 'moderate" Republican. I ask: WHEN HAS THERE EVER BEEN A MODERATE REPUBLICAN IN THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT???? Hoover? Eisenhower (of the attack small business fame; McCarthyism, etc.)? Nixon???? Reagan??? Bush I??? Bush II???? Maybe Gerald Ford, but then he pardoned Nixon, didn't he?
But then, hey, if this is all you lovers of the GOP who are wolves in "progressive clothing" got, then go ahead, give it a try.
Please don't feed the trolls.
The USA PATRIOT ACT was -- and CONTINUES TO BE -- about ten thousand times WORSE than NDAA in terms of taking away average Americans' civil rights, yet the Republicans have said NOTHING. Nada. Zip. No complaints at all. It was signed into law by Bush, and he's been cheered on for it ever since.
Yet these same people point to NDAA as if it's the end of the world.
When are people going to stop focusing on individual issues and start dealing with things honestly and openly. It's not a perfect world! People think that avoiding the hard questions makes things better. It doesn't.
If you're going to complain about NDAA, then you damn well better start raising cain over USA PATRIOT ACT because it's WORSE! If you won't because it's a BUSH bill and NDAA is an Obama bill, then you're clearly more interested in bashing this president than addressing bad legislation.
What liberties wre taken away?! NONE. The right would not dobt to change the constitution to impose their bigotry, but when it comes to commun causes, reducing inequality, and the future of oportunity in this country then it is the wrong thing to do.
I'm sick of the utter selfishness of the GOP, and will vote all of them OUT!
President Obama has accomplished way more that is positive than is negative. And, yes, we are going to RE-ELECT him.
Andrew, don't be afraid. As Americans we are all in this together. New roads need to be explored. New people, we need to meet. New ideas need to be discussed. New ways to preserve the beauty of our Nation need to be put in place. Sometimes looking backwards is useful, if only to learn from our mistakes. I for one would love it if our entire country would go back to farming and taking care of Gods' gift. I'd love to live on a farm and vacation on a beach or a mountain. We could be known as the country that feeds the world. I am really curious about other peoples' beliefs, I feel we have been kept in the dark about such matters. Noone should have the right to shield us or invoke unwarranted fears in order to get their way. You may be wrong, I may be wrong. Let's figure it out together. Replace the drum for the handshake. I don't want to force my beliefs on anybody. I will pray for you, will you pray for me?
2016 belongs to Hillary. Elizabeth in any position she wants. Elizabeth in 2024.
2016 ticket should be Hillary/Warren or Warren/Whomever.
Hillary says she is not going to run for office again
Warren and Cory Booker for VP.
The Democratic candidacy doesn't "belong" to anyone.
The fundamental decision by voters in every election SHOULD be based on asking the candidate[s] "what will you do, what is your vision for the future?".
The oft repeated meme that people should answer the question "are you better today than you were [two, three] four years ago?" neglects to continue backwards and ask "well, then where were you before that and what were YOU doing to improve your own life?"
Time moves forward. This is not a negotiable point of view.
And oh yes, while on this subject allow me to point out something of historical fact with current resonance and implications. The children and grandchildren from the Reagan years (the genesis of current conservative economic governance principles AKA "trickle down") are the ones caught up in today's economic woes. The elderly have a social safety net AKA Medicare and Social Security -- it is younger people who are hit harder today.
So, my friends in the right wing hand wringing chorus singing "for our children and grandchildren" No, and hell no -- we do not want to make the mistake of following your economic principles again. We are living the results today.
Good day all
I am Canadian, very concerned with US politics because "how goes the USA, so eventually goes Canada".
Obama is not perfect ... NO leader has ever been perfect .. but he seems to understand what is important. More to the point - he gets what the country needs and believes in the USA.
I'm closely following the Republican fight - and it scares me. The candidates only seem interested in taking away liberties - from unions, women (especially women), from the poor, from everyone. They don't ever seem to talk about real plans to help the country, the economy and citizens who need real help.
Obama may not be perfect but he is the best answer for the country in this time of economic downturn and turmoil.
The current republican field scares the stuffing out of any rational, thinking human.
And embarrasses us utterly. This is not how a world super power should behave. I think the world has a lot to fear from a republican as President, not just the US.
I soo agree. *shudders*
President Obama is an amazing President for our times. I never expected perfect from him or anyone.
This is an excellent message that feels absolutely sincere.
As Warren says in the clip:
What concerns me is that there is no focused vision or plan for what "our future" can look like.
President Obama stated: “What’s at stake is whether this will be a country where working people can earn enough to raise a family, build a modest savings, own a home, and secure their retirement.” As long as working people are limited by earning income solely through their labor worker wages, they will be left behind by the continued gravitation of economic bounty toward the top 1 percent of the people that the system is rigged to benefit. Working people and the middle class will continue to stagnate, resulting in a stagnated consumer economy. More troubling is that this continued stagnation will further dim the economic hopes of America’s youth, no matter what their education level. The result will have profound long-term consequences for the nation’s economic health and further limit equal earning opportunity and spread income inequality. As the need for labor decreases and the power and leverage of productive capital increases, the gap between labor workers and capital owners will increase, which will result in upheaval that will be very frightening and very chaotic.
At present, there is a brewing power struggle going on in the United States between individual human beings (citizens) and the plutocratic powers who manipulate our government and the would-be plutocratic powers (top corporate executive managers and financial barons). What the 99 percent movement is really all about is returning America to economic democracy. If we do not achieve economic democracy, then plutocracy will lead to fascism—the ownership of productive capital by the rich and by their institutions.
What we really need in this 2012 presidential election year is a national discussion on the topic of the importance of productive capital ownership and how we can expand the base of private capital ownership simultaneously with the creation of new capital formation, with the aim of building long-term financial security for all Americans through accumulating a viable capital estate.
See "Democratic Capitalism And Binary Economics: Solutions For A Troubled Nation And Economy" at tp://foreconomicjustice.com/11/economic-justice/
I'm sorry but i'm not thinking about 2016, I rely on social security and medicare for my survival every day. I may not be here in 2016 so let's figure how we can get thru 2012 to 2016. Fools that we are we think things will get better without us having to do anything but sit back and wait. Things will only get better when we don't sit back and wait ,because there are factors at work 24/7 that are taking your freedoms away from you. The whole system is a mess, we are bombarded will information constantly thru Radio, television , all sorts of newspaper articles and of course the internet. We listen to politicians promise this and that and not meaning a thing they say. Marriages have become a financial arrangement rather than a vow to God of an ever after thing. We as a people and I mean all people need to start a new way of thinking about themselves and also all the people around them. If we have to start worrying about " hoodies " then we're in trouble as a nation and a people . By the way will my disneyland hoodie get me shot???? God be with you today and say hello to someone you would never say that too. Give a donation to a homeless person who may need you to tell him someone cares??????????????
What this country needs in 2016 after we re-elect President Obama in 2012 is for Elizabeth Warren to be our president. If the country would of listen to Elizabeth Warren in 1999 when she said to President Clinton to not sign into law the laws allowing banks to get into the speculation markets that the Republicans crafted and can you believe President Clinton signed into law our country would not have experienced a bad recession as we did. Elizabeth Warren had the foresight to know what is right for America and as our President in 2016 she will lead our country to path that we should all follow. Join the movement to make Elizabeth Warren the next Senator from Massachusetts in 2012 and our president in 2016! Read my web page at www.mybetteramericaplan.com to see why Elizabeth Warren would be great for America! As a government official she'll explain the economic situation in clarity to us all as she does in the video.
I agree!!
Rebel,
I completely agree that Graham-Leach was a horrible law, but even if Clinton had not signed it into law it would still be the law today. Republicans controlled the House and the Senate until 2006. If they had waited a little longer, Bush would have gladly signed it in his first 15 minutes in office. Same effects only a little later.
Republicans pushed the bill through to allow Citicorp to leagally do what it was doing anyway, combining banking with investing. That was what got us into the Great Depression. I remember hearing from all the Repundits that we were much more able to prevent another drepression because businesses knew better. Obviously the Repundits were wrong.
"of the people, by the people and for the people", the 'American dream' as stated by President Lincoln. This is a true vision for a bountiful future for America. The GOP seem to desire 'of the rich, by the rich and for the rich'. Which vision materializes is in the hands of the voter.
I first voted Democrat for McGovern. Nixon won. I got a job working for the city reading water meters. In those days you just banged on the door walked in and yelled "meter man" and went to the basement. Inevitably, I was able to view various TV's all day. All day it was the Watergate hearings and the showing of republican deceit and dirty tricks. I thought for sure, that party would be done for a generation. Nope. Next Reagan. Do you remember the wealthy getting the tax breaks that continue today under the guise of "Trickle Down"? The whole Iran/ Contra debacle. They still expect the stupid in the American public to believe that a lowly Marine Lt.Col. ran the whole show. Can you really imagine all those 2 and 3 star generals taking orders from him. Wouldn't happen. Through spin and lies the republicans pulled it off. Then we had the scams, lies and trickery of the Bush Jr theft in Florida. They had Katheryn Harris tilt the scales of justice for them and she was glad to do it. She figured there was a big job for her in it. What happened? At the second Bush/Cheney, republican convention Bush turned his back and didn't even acknowledge her. The republicans got what they wanted and threw her to the crapper like a dirty condom. Have you ever heard from her again. For all any of us really know she could be sleeping with the gators in a Florida swamp. In other words, the republicans did what they always do to the stooges they use. They then shun them. Then there was the Bush Jr number 2 run. At least two true war hero's were decimated by the dirty Rove lies and tricks. Bush/Rove destroyed McCain in S.Carolina by playing to the far right, white sheet wearing bunch. A couple days before the primary they came up with the story of McCain having an "illegitimate" BLACK BABY. They failed to mention that it was a child, like several others, that the McCain's had compassionately adobted. Then there was the Bush/Rove destruction of Max Cleland. You remember him. He was the proud, honorable, combat vet that had come home missing legs, arms and God only knows what else. The dirty republican/Rove machine somehow, through their lies, equated him as a terrorist because he had the unmitigated gall to question what real evidence the Iraq war was based on. As we know for sure now it was the lies and fraud that many suspected back them. How many dead and maimed because of those lies? If only Bush/Cheney/Rove would have told the truth about that one in the beginning. Then there was the devastation of the other Vietnam Vet Hero that was running for President. The National Guard, Vietnam dodger, deserter, Bush was able to benefit from the Swift boat 501 bunch and again Rove. The lies and distortions they told about John Kerry still leave a sickening taste of bile in my mouth. Cowards, draft dodgers and deserters lying to destroy a true hero. Shameful. Now we have a President that is trying to drag us out of the ditch that the republicans drove us into and what help does he get? He is blocked and filibustered by the republicans from the first day. Mitch McConnell the republican leader said on day one, " My job is to make sure this President is a one term President. Why? Is it merely because Obama is a Democrat? No, it's because the racist bigots in the republican party hate him because he is black. The lies and distortions began immediately. You have to admit, the republican house has managed to block, filibuster, and lie about every thing that this President has proposed. Surely you all have not missed the fact that the republicans could care less about what is good for the country. What the republicans really care about is their greed and their clutch for power. We have two choices this time around. Are we going to vote for the same bunch of liars and greedy bastards that drove us over the cliff and brought into this huge recession, or, are we going to vote for the man that has started getting us back out of danger and let him continue to do the right thing. If you agree with the fact that we can't allow the racist bigots, of the republican party, to destroy our country then you will agree that our President needs help achieving the goals of saving the Nation. He can only do that if the radical Tea Baggers are voted out in November so Real American Democrats can come in. Remember the racially motivated, Tea Baggers? They are the ones that came in crying "Out with government" and "Jobs, Jobs, Jobs". Is that what they have accomplished? No. It has been a constant attack on women and women's rights. The newly elected Tea Bagger republican governors have been in a constant attack on workers rights and women's rights. What have they done to advance jobs and pay for American's workers? Nothing. Every thing they propose is just a carry on from the republicans of past. It's all benefits to the most wealthy 1%, benefits and tax breaks to corporations that send "your" jobs overseas. It is also the republican pledge that they won't do any thing to see that the most wealth start paying a fair tax rate or address the huge subsidies that the American Tax Payers give big oil. Why? The republicans are in the pocket of the most wealthy and powerful. Folks, we can only change this attack on working America with an Obama vote in November. We can not allow the republicans to continue in their destruction of the middle class and poor. The republican goal, if they are allowed to continue, is to make the United States a slavery class, "third world nation", solely for the benefit of the wealthy and the huge corporations. Is that what you really want for your children and grandchildren? I think not.
It's all about the money. Greed kills, we just need to figure out how to stop it. Said the Muppet to the Wall Street King.
He is looking to governing past the election, and not just a few years down.
I agree with everyone who says we shouldn't get cocky. This isn't cockiness. This is putting one foot in front of the other in the here and now of getting the President re-elected. But as we put one foot in front of the other, we must keep an eye on where we are going. Tunnelling down on each footstep causes you to draw a crooked path. Misteps are avoided, and the straighter line is drawn when you stay focused on the destination of the line.
So actually, we must talk about 2016. Now. I mean no offence to Hillary. She has a good heart but she is a neoliberal like her husband. That third way that he charted only showed us that the common ground with the Reagan revolution was that path towards plutocracy. If nothing is done, 2016 will present a false choice between two champions of the plutocracy. 2016 is where this is going to be real real hard for progressives not just because the strongest Dem is a big believer in the Larry Summers/ Bob Rubin school of economics. It is because the pendulum will be against us, favoring whomever the GOP nominates.
And that is a huge problem.
Because Romney being defeated in 2012 means the Santorums of the party will be saying "We told you we cannot run moderates against the Dems". If the "Now it's my turn" pattern of the GOP holds, then if Santorum does not win the nomination, it will be someone from the far Right of the GOP. This both gives Dems a chance of winning, but if they lose, it threatens a winter of several years before any more progressive legislation can be passed. Hillary's case is strongest because she will be able to make the convincing case that she and not someone like Warren will be able to capture the lions share of intensely alienated independents and moderate republicans. It's nuts. The solution to Santorum is not to run a Bush-lite candidate against him. collaborating with the plutocratic strategy to keep the Overton Window moving their direction.
I am balls to the wall behind Warren. It doesn't matter how many times she says publicly she is not interested. Besides, someone has to open up a seat for Maddow's run for Senate (see above statement about not caring how many times she says she is not interested). Even if Warren didn't run I would go for some other true liberal. The only thing that would make me consider otherwise would be if Hillary published a book making a clean repudiation of her husband's economic and "triangulation" policies based on convincing theory based argument. I am not optimistic given her Senate record and her handling of the XL pipeline rubber stamping in the State department. But I'd read the book.
One thing is sure. She will publish a book. What is in it will tell us how challenging the situation will be in 2012.
Four years is not a lot of time to prepare ourselves.
typo last sentence... How challenging the situation will be in 2016.
I think the real challenge is getting the former Obama voters and Hillary voters to decide that they will continue to press the president to do what they want him, but make the logical choice. I strongly urge a vote for Obama and Democratic candidates that are defending Democratic platform. If someone is not 100% or 90% happy with Obama, even 25% happy with Obama, imagine the dissatisfaction to have a Romney and ever more "backward" looking Congress.
Obama has done a fine job, despite the constant barrage against him. There is a recovery happening.
We've seen what happened when Republicans run on jobs and when elected, focus only on dismantling more things to harm working people in order to promote corporate interests, institutions matter more to republicans, acting like victims and complete lack of governance, only to control women and push for authoritarian policies that replace democracy and equality. Liberal ideas are despised, such as equality.
We could get one or two. maybe more Corporate Supreme Court Justices, more controlling of people, moral legislating would continue. Our jobs would continue to be less available, with less benefits, less wages, to squeeze the middle more and there would be no sacrifice for those that are quite comfortable. Maybe more wars in other places.
Elizabeth Warren is a big part of the progressive movement and I am convinced she will be the FIRST FEMALE PRESIDENT!! Keep your eyes on her...she is the real deal!!
There is a certain suicidal trend in right-wing politics. While dismantling much of the American dream they continue to arm the people they are screwing. Where is the logic in creating a generation of people who are hungry, devalued and frustrated, and allowing them to have automatic weapons. It surely sounds like a well thought out strategy. Snark.
Warren/Boxer 2016
I just want to say how refreshing it is to read so many insightful, intelligent comments posted here today.
Read more >> Options >>
I will agree with Warren,
The last 3-5 years have been a disaster for this country; let's just hope enough people can see what Obama has done to us and our economy! The Democrats are banking on:
so I better vote for Obama so he will continue to give me what I'm due, or:
we are going to go bankrupt trying to support all the non workers in here! Don't you think?
Well said captain, though I don't know anything about Warren it is my understanding that she basically spent her life in the world of academia and/or politics. This typically means they are very intelligent but lacking any common sense is how the real world works. I just hoping Obama brings Pelosi back out, every time she is on the news hundreds of new Republican voters are created.
There is no such thing as common sense. There is only logic and then arguments that you put forward that have no real basis, but that you want to defend as being true simply because you believe it to be true (i.e. "common" sense). The last 3-5 years accumulated because of decreased taxation and too many decreases in the regulatory system. Putting a Republican in power now or giving the Congress completely over to the Republican Party will only worsen this crises and more than likely send us into a second Great Recession. If we cease to support all the "non-workers" as you put it Capt. then our nation will go bankrupt from the loss of revenue. I do not know where you get this idea that if no social assistance programs exist then people will suddenly and magically begin finding work that they didn't before. And I bet you'd only have "common sense" to back up your justification as opposed to actual evidence.
For the record your "common sense" also dictates, I would assume, that thousands of people become Republicans when Pelosi is in charge. You are aware that Pelosi as an individual has a higher approval rating than Cantor and Boehner, yes? But then again why use facts and logic when we've got "common sense."
Seriously people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIkciQjUKkE
Seriously, how many Liberals do you know that can actually run a business that has to be concerned with their bottom line. Why do you think they congregate towards government or education? Answer, they don't have to concern themselves with such silly things like not having enough money to stay in business.
It's funny how liberals can be the elitists who control all of the media and yet they simultaneously are all government workers who don't know how to balance a checkbook. Sighs.
iamalevi2
Wow, a bit generalizing and labeling isn't it? Are you just getting your jollies to criticize Liberals? That's what I read it as a person that just wants to take a swing and boost the ego.
I am pretty liberal and was in business for awhile, trying to keep the product stocked was our biggest issue. We had faith that things would work out and didn't need to ask for government/taxpayer subsidies or tax breaks. Then I worked 41 years in the private sector, callused hands, worked in rain, cold and 113 degree heat and overtime.
I never complained about my taxes, either.
Lots of liberals work in the private sector. In fact since the majority of people in the US work in the private sector it's safe to wager that most liberals work in the private sector. But the insinuation he (she?) is attempting to make is that the government has to cut people off social assistance programs because that is the only way to balance the budget. Putting aside the fact that it's not the only way, what he/she doesn't realize is that governments don't work like businesses. In the private sector if you have a bottom line to maintain you can fire people or stop spending money on X in order to reduce costs. These are luxuries that the private sector has. The public sector, however, does not have such luxuries. The poor, the hungry, the sick, the elderly, the disabled: none of these people stop existing just because they are an inconvenience to the federal dime. And if you stop providing assistance to them federally then either A. you explode the state deficits as the states are forced to pick up the slack (this is why every state in the union at the moment is running a deficit- because of federal programs that were either cut or purposely put onto the backs of the states....sort've like offloading all of your corporate debt onto a smaller company...the debt didn't go away, you just shifted to whom the responsibility lied) or you have problem B. you have to then burden the costs of the far more exasperated problems that would have been avoided or more easily contained and managed (and therefore been cheaper) had you kept spending the same. People do not seem to understand that fundamentally the government's primary role is to take care of those who fall through the cracks. The interesting thing, I think at least, is that so many on the right are looking to excuse the fact that the private sector isn't stepping in to fill more cracks. Just as so many want to excuse the tax cuts.
As I said earlier, I'll be in my angry dome ;-)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIkciQjUKkE
The last 3-5 years have been a disaster for this country; let's just hope enough people can see what Obama has done to us and our economy!
By "us and our economy" Capt America USMC is referring to the British North American colonies which are occupied by an illegitimate secular humanist regime imposed by force of arms on the aristocratic class by the unwashed serfs. Obama has strengthened that illegitimate regime by restoring the national economy and empowering the peasant class. Obama is only postponing the day when the capitalist ownership class can "take the country back" from the rebel mob and their despicable Constitution and legal rights and sundry inconveniences to the privileges of wealth.
We are going to go bankrupt trying to support all the non-workers in here!
This is of course the goal, to bankrupt the nation by handing public funds to investment-class non-workers. The sooner the fascists can provoke civil unrest with national bankruptcy the sooner they can seize power in a coup.
Seriously, how many Liberals do you know that can actually run a business that has to be concerned with their bottom line.
Seriously, how much trash can a right-winger post with no evidence whatsoever. It's unlikely that iamalevi2 even knows what "evidence" is and can only repeat slogans.
Obama has done so much damage to the economy, why can't you guys see it? This recession (depression) has been grossly extended by Obama, and yet you guys continue to defend him!
Covan, conservatives want less government which would mean more individual freedom. What do you have against freedom? Oh yeah, if your free, you might fail!
Warren is right about one thing, we have come to a choice! Obama stands for more government and government control, bankrupting budgets, and higher unemployment and gas prices. Do you really want that? Just askin’
Capt America USMC:
For the same reason we can't see invisible pink unicorns, because the object of the argument does not exist. The Economy has improved. You may assert that the economy would have been better with McCain in charge (and Caribou Barbie as VP) but since reality has a sample size of one, you are merely venting air from you overheated imagination.
Yawn. Boring. What conservatives mean when they speak of freedom is not the ability to act as individuals, but rather the destruction of our ability to act as a whole country. To a conservative freedom is synonymous with , and individual liberty refers to the atomization of society.
Like it or not the world has become a very big very messy playground and the disparity between the most powerful and the least had never been greater. If we are to proceed in an orderly fashion then we need rules to protect the least from the greatest and hose rules need an enforce that is not beholden to the plutocrats or their theocratic stooges.
Captain America, if you want small government, get the hell out of my uterus.
If you want small government, let's cut the military budget.
4 more years!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
its probably too early and she may not even be interested but i would actually like to see Ms Warren on a presidential ticket 2016... i like her fight
http://digg.com/newsbar/topnews/we_the_people_of_the_united_states
Elizabeth Warren reminds me of when Senator Obama spoke at the convention, dedicated to creating a better system, full of knowledge, ability to reason and connect. It isn't just a script, it is meaningful to her. I want to see her as Senator of Mass for awhile, then maybe President.
It was through the labors of these people who now need help that robber barons made their fortunes. As they were freed from regulation they found ways to manipulate the markets and buy some political support and tv time. With increasing industry due in part to the fall of totalitarian communism new cheap labor became increasingly available allowing them to sell out American workers. Capt' America sounds more like Capt' Bain.
Liberals want to tax you into oblivion so they (because they all work for the government) can use your money to fix all the problems. Of course the liberals are nothing more than parasites and wouldnt be able to survive without stealing your money, they need these "problems" to justify there 'existence' so they can rob you blind.
I don't listen to right wing talkers, but I'll wager right now (low stakes, please) that the talking point is currently, the liberals all work in government and want to rob you. I just answered another RW that I am liberal and always worked in private sector and a time self employed business partner. Curious that the RW never seem to discuss (ha) subsidies to businesses like oil, etc.
Interesting that you said you worked for a "time" as self employee. I guess you're making my point. Of course not all Liberals work for government, colleges, or MSNBC, but they certainly are a majority there.
Post proof or retract.
You don't actually have any numbers. You also don't have any proof of causality. Even if you could prove a majority of gov't workers are liberal, you couldn't prove that it's anything more than coincidence. You couldn't prove they choose gov't work for the insidious reasons you're implying.
First, when do facts matter to liberals before they start making claims, especially about what the Tea Party stands for. Second I see you ignore my comments about college professors and MSNBC, so we must agree on that one. Third the "common" government worker is probably not Liberal however those in position of power probably are. That is my opinion, and when you look for examples you can see how few conservative Democratic senators there are, maybe then you can kind of get my drift. Since your standard is "proof", I hope to see any future comments you make backed up with charts and articles for support. I wouldn't want to think of you as some kind of hypocrite!
Jim Fisher created a NewsVine user account just for that one post. Sure he did.
@ForceStrong, remember facts, aka reality, have a well-known liberal bias. So neither Jim Fisher nor heisalevi2 can go anywhere near them.
Ah yes so when we're attempting to take a stance we openly admit that a. we have no information or proof of our claims and then b. cover this up by offering up still more ad hominems. Because when you can't win an argument on the basis of merit you must....attack your opponent because that's what all good patriots do!
For the last time logical fallacies =/= stronger argument
Iamalevi2, I am a Human Being first and foremost. I couldn't really follow all that you were saying. There were too many labels being thrown around. We really don't know what the Tea Party stands for anymore. They are stagnating the entire governing process. They put Elected Officials into office on a different platform then they actually said they would. So all signs point to deceiving the Americans. My opinion was formed when they started calling African Americans in Public offices the N.... word. They based their beliefs on Fear. They were afraid they were going to lose all their money. I have Tea Partiers in my family. They are the ones that are the most well off and don't really bother with the family. They are selfish. They think that the ever growing impoverished in this country have chosen this path as if it were a life style. I am lower middle class. I help my neighbors . I look out for our elderly neighbors especially. A lot of them have fought in our wars. I say hello to just about everyone I see. I don't want their money. They should be more generous, God frowns upon selfishness. Jesus helped to feed the hungry. They are just protecting thier wallets and disguising it as being moral.
You don't understand the Tea Party at all It any political group you'll always have a few nut cases. It appears you must get your info from Media Matters or some other Liberal source. Please provide facts to backup the claims you made, or was that just "your opinion"?
Heh Iamlevi, of course, doesn't provide facts for his assertion, but since he was asked to do so he now believes that he will save face by requesting that of everyone else. This is also especially funny when considering the context w/ which Shum wrote. Because why read what someone said when you can derail?
Derailing =/= cogent debate
Apparently you missed the part where I said that "this is my opinion". That means it's open to challenge. You can disagree if you want, but if your going to ask for facts to "prove" my opinion, please provide some of your own first. If the standard to post here is always provide proof, well then I dare say there wouldn't be much to read here. If I provided links to a right wing news source, would you accept them? Probably not anymore than I would from a Left leaning site. However the basic fact is that the Tea Party stands for fiscal responsibly, that's why they get trashed from the Left The Left can't challenge them on this, therefore they ridicule them. It's an old political trick that if you discredit the man/woman, you discredit their message.
Apparently you missed the part where I said that "this is my opinion".
Not at all. Nor did we miss the part "Please provide facts to back up the claims you made, or was that just 'your opinion'?"
It's an old political trick that you call your made-up hooey "opinion" while requiring others to back up their facts.
Mouzer beat me too it- "Iamlevi, of course, doesn't provide facts for his assertion, but since he was asked to do so he now believes that he will save face by requesting that of everyone else." That's it, exactly.
Both claim A and claim B, in context, were not statements of opinion. They were both assertions of fact. You were asked to provide evidence. You did not, but instead attempted to straw man the argument and scape goat to everyone else needing to provide evidence for your initial failure. You attack liberals for being the ones who don't know accountability and responsibility, yet here you are asked to take accountability and exercise responsibility and you refuse to.
So you are engaging in this old political trick then? You couldn't disprove the fact that everyone challenged you to provide evidence of your claims about liberals so you then resorted to name-calling. This would mean you're openly admitting that you are playing this game. Which is interesting because you're not a liberal. Which means this is either crazy mad cognitive dissonance on your part OR crazy mad projection.
Well we have 2 claims here which are both assertions of fact. A. you claim that the Tea Party stands for fiscal responsibility and B. that the left ridicules the Tea Party because they can't challenge the Tea Party on this fact. So my first question is what does it mean to "challenge" the Tea Party and on what facts are we challenging the Tea Party. If we're referring to elected officials who call themselves members of the Tea Party then I can provide a plethora of evidence that unabashedly shows that these members do not stand for fiscal responsibility. They certainly say as much, but all of their 'fiscally responsible' actions end up equating to more debt or more spending.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/01/27/us-taxes-nassau-teaparty-idUSTRE70Q5NY20110127
http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2011/10/30/conseratives-brought-nation-to-default-ask-for-govt-handouts.html
http://hotlineoncall.nationaljournal.com/archives/2010/12/tea-party-caucu.php
http://irregulartimes.com/index.php/archives/2011/03/02/fiscal-restraint-vast-majority-of-tea-party-in-congress-votes-against-50-billion-spending-cut/
http://www.greatfallstribune.com/article/20111028/NEWS01/110280323/Cyndi-Baker-sought-job-Great-Falls-school-district?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2011/08/14/295491/bachmann-debt-ceiling-refuses/
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/08/10/292811/before-calling-the-epa-a-%E2%80%9Cjob-killer%E2%80%9D-michele-bachmann-asked-for-money-from-the-agency-to-stimulate-%E2%80%9Clong-term-benefits%E2%80%9D-to-the-local-economy/
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2011/03/07/171970/koch-cancer-cuts/
http://www.examiner.com/economic-policy-in-national/hypocrisy-congress-increasing-defense-spending-while-talking-debt-reduction
Now does an elected official who calls himself a member of the Tea Party actually mean he's a member of the Tea Party? No. But this sort've becomes like an Irish Catholic arguing w/ an Orthodox Greek Catholic about whose practices are more in line w/ the teachings of Jesus. But, I digress. When a liberal and/or a Democratic person attacks these politicians it is done so on the basis of their actions.
When I- as an example- see someone who claimed to be part of the Tea Party take in TARP money that he was previously railing against I call this hypocrisy and get very annoyed. This, to me, invalidates his position as being concerned about TARP and annoys me further because, to me, it seems that he is lying. Now perhaps that isn't a fair accusation, but in such a hypothetical situation this would be my reaction.
Are all Tea Partiers hypocrites? No, of course not. I for one do not believe this and I am sure I am not the only liberal or Democrat out there who thinks as much. However when your elected officials behave this way it does leave one to ask a lot of questions about the sincerity of the movement. This is especially so when someone like me clicks on a Tea Party blog and I don't immediately see that blog calling out that elected official on the hypocrisy. At least in that case I could see it as consistency. What you have, instead, is a situation in which any time a Tea Partier is seen as acting badly the Tea Party movement immediately jumps to arms and starts attacking....Democrats! Because, as I said before, it's better to save face by putting the blame on other people than it is to admit your own hypocrisy. And from this position we establish where much of the cynicism comes from w/ regards to liberals/Democrats and the Tea Party movement.
Racism, as an example, was very prevalent at the Tea Party rallies. When confronted about this racism did the Tea Party immediately take ownership, apologize, and then work to correct the problem? No. The Tea Party instead dealt w/ this by blaming....Democrats! Because, as I have said so many times before, it's better to save face by putting the blame on other people than it is to admit your own hypocrisy. And this, my friend, is where most of the cynicism comes from.
You (or rather I should say those to whom you say you identify) call liberals and Democrats lazy, incompetent, unpatriotic, whiners, hippies, sinners, irresponsible, immoral, etc. But then when the very people you claim to be a part of are caught engaging in behavior that one might call lazy, incompetent, unpatriotic, whiny, hippy, sinful, irresponsible, immoral, etc. do you admit to it, own up to it, and attempt to change for the better? No....you instead blame Democrats.
The Tea Party came on the scene only after President Obama was elected. This was also the first time I ever heard about balancing the Budget and our National Debt being an issue of great importance, If it was so important why, wasn't this discussed before, like when Bush was President. To me this was the topic of choice that they picked to try to sound like a resounding voice. The topic could have been anything. They tried to blame the economy and the loss of jobs on President Obama . That didn't work . So, they stuck with taxes, budget, and the deficit. These topics never seemed to surface when Bush was President. Here, this poor guy takes on the job of cleaning up this entire mess practically by himself. He's got us out of the ditch, he took care of Bin Laden and other terrorist. What has the Tea Party done for this nation? What's their track record? If it weren't for President Obama these people might have something substantial to complain about. But, the President is doing just fine without their help. The other proof is the actual talking to Tea Partyers and they explained to me that they would not give one penny to someone who was in need. They also felt that all Democrats and Liberals had their hands out for money. They also told me that President Obama was a muslim and he was the anti-christ. These were Tea Partyers. They joked and laughed that us stupid people voted for him. That's how I formed my opinion.
.