If you have "no place to go," come here!

Obama backing down on raising Medicare eligibility from 65 to 67 is a sign of weakness

D shills ("1st Vice-Chair, Ventura County Democratic Party; Executive Board Member, CA Democratic Party.") are stupid and/or evil:

Obama Administration critics and defenders need to realize* that this shouldn't be about supporting or attacking the President. It should be about engendering a twitch response in our politicians that we'll support them for doing the right thing--even saying they'll do the right thing--and not support them when they don't.


It's not about saying the right thing. They lie all the time, and the Ds are even sneakier and more devious than the Rs.

Take Obama -- please! Having done the wrong things for two years, he's now saying a few of the right things, now that he's powerless to deliver. You'd have to be stupid to fall for that, and even stupider, or worse, to get others to fall for it.

When Obama says the right thing, I'd argue that we need to increase the pain 'til he does the right thing. And then we need to increase the pain more until he does everything right. It's all they understand.**

For example, we should be lowering Medicare eligibility. To, say, birth. Why not save the money and the lives?

NOTE * Don't you love it when the "adults" explain to the "children" what their "needs" are? That's my all-time fave trope! Not.

NOTE ** Reading Ghandi's bio again. Ghandi, in many ways, was not a nice man at all. That doesn't mean he went about killing people. Eh?

No votes yet


CMike's picture
Submitted by CMike on

O'Donnell was praising President Obama for ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell. He led into his interview thusly:

[2:15] O'Donnell: ...I must tell you in my experience with the legislative time table, as politics and governing go, that's fast [i.e. the repeal was brought about fast].

Dan Savage: It is fast. And it didn't happen in a vacuum, however. There was a lot of screaming and yelling. Unlike a lot of other Democratic constituencies, in the first couple years of the Obama administration, the LGTB community made it known, was very loud and held the president's feet to the fire, that we expected action on DADT, action on DOMA, action on ENDA -- which we didn't see -- or there would be consequences.

And the Democrats delivered on DADT after the midterm elections when the percentage of the gay vote going to the Republicans jumped and the amount of money coming from gay donors to Democrats and Democratic organizations dropped because Gay and Bi-Trans voters were very dissatisfied with the foot dragging they saw coming out of the White House. And they [Democrats] read the writing on the wall after 2010 and they delivered on this...

nasrudin's picture
Submitted by nasrudin on

"If you want to pull the party--the major party that is closest to the way you're thinking--to what you're thinking, YOU MUST, YOU MUST show them that you're capable of not voting for them. If you don't show them you're capable of not voting for them, they don' listen to you. I promise you that. I worked within the Democratic Party. I didn't listen, or have to listen, to anything on the left while I was working in the Democratic Party, because the left had nowhere to go."

I disagree with the "nowhere to go" bit (voting since '68, only voted for a D for prez once), but he gets the rest right.

Voodoo Chile's picture
Submitted by Voodoo Chile on

Can't believe that's the same Lawrence O'Donnell that was hulking out on Glenn Greenwald over the idea of running primaries against particularly shitty Democrats.

While I like what O'Donnell says on occassion, he is entirely inconsistent and I do not put a lot of stock in such erstwhile allies. Bill Mahar is another person who falls in this camp with me.

nasrudin's picture
Submitted by nasrudin on

The money shot in that quote, for him, is the "nowhere to go" bit. He may actually believe it -- having told that lie so many times -- or he may just be shilling (as usual).