Progressive Independence

Michael Kwiatkowski

Michael Kwiatkowski
Location
Ohio, United States of America
Birthday
May 18
Bio
I'm a Green Party member in Ohio, and active on several blogs that include my own. This year I am helping to spread the word about Green and other Third Party candidates for public office.

Michael Kwiatkowski's Links

Salon.com
SEPTEMBER 15, 2011 2:36PM

Obamabots On the Attack

Rate: 2 Flag

On the Open Salon version of my previous entry, some right-winger who supports Obama kept trying to lay the blame for next year’s results on the left for failing to properly support the candidate who has done far more to pass the Republicans’ agenda than any GOP office-holder could have.

I am about certain Obama will be a one term president–and that one of the Republican clowns will win in 2012.

Most of the blame for that will fall with the unrealistic expectations and shortsightedness of people devoted to a progressive agenda.

Naturally, when pressed for what exactly is so unrealistic about expecting Obama to do the job he was elected to do, Mr. Right-Winger couldn’t answer, instead falling back on the tried and true tactic of replying with personal attacks, hoping to deflect attention away from the glaring lack of evidence to support his accusations. This is not surprising. Obamabots, lacking any substantive policy changes with which to defend their political messiah, frequently resort to attacking the messenger when it is pointed out that he has not lived up to his campaign promises.

The fact is that voter depression stems in large part from the failure — or refusal — of political parties to act in the public interest. Throw in vote-rigging (GOP) and ballot-rigging (Democrats), and it’s no wonder American voter turnout is among the lowest in the Western World. But always remember that the largest component in deciding the outcome of any election, no matter how corrupted, is what politicians do or don’t do in shaping the outcome from a policy standpoint.

In 2000, 2002, and 2004, the elections were successfully stolen primarily because the Democrats put up poor candidates, engaged in shoddy campaign strategies that left what should have been easy races competitive, but above all, continually acquiesced to Republicans on policy-making. From letting Medicare be partially privatized to supporting George W. Bush’s war against Iraq, to their confirming his fascist judicial nominees, Democrats demonstrated that they were not to be counted on to defend the public interest.

Voter anger at Republicans nevertheless built up, and in the 2006 and 2008 elections, handed Democrats the reigns of power. That the very next election cycle, 2010, saw massive voter backlash against Democrats had nothing to do with voter stupidity or unrealistic expectations — we know more about what’s going on than many pundits give us credit for — and everything to do with Democrats’ endless continuance and expansion of right-wing policies. It didn’t help that Obama and his party literally added insult to injury by taking rhetorical shots at legitimate complaints and threatening voters if they failed to turn out to maintain majorities in Congress.

One would think that Democrats and their sycophants capable of learning from their mistakes, which happen to be bad decisions to institutionalize right-wing policies, and those decisions were rationalized by nothing more than political hubris. When politicians break promises and then add fuel to the fire by attacking voters, we naturally don’t take kindly to it. We can and will punish those who use and abuse us. Given no alternatives but to vote for the same bad policies or not vote at all, many of us chose not to vote. What’s the point when nothing changes?

But try telling that to Obamabots and they will lash out with every bit as much invective as any follower of Bush and Cheney. That they refuse to acknowledge the folly of their ways, much less learn from it, says far more about them than it does about the American left.

Your tags:

TIP:

Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Recipient's email address:
Personal message (optional):

Your email address:

Comments

Type your comment below:
[r] Mike, here, here. You are dealing with OS's "ostrich society". I just posted this on my own comment and Wilkerson's one about Cheney. I lifted it from correntewire who lifted it from Democratic Underground. BTW, I also am a Green.

"Refreshing honesty from a comment Randall Kohn cited at correntewire from Claudia Jones at Democratic Underground:

http://www.correntewire.com/comment_of_the_day_4

"67. Democrats prefer to lose

"Democratic party politicians are in an unenviable position. They must convince people that they are fighting for the everyday working class people while they are actually working for the wealthy few. This is a delicate balancing act. When they gain power, as in 2006 and 2008, they have an enormous problem because people have an expectation that they will actually do something to benefit the working class people. Convoluted and improbable excuses and rationales must be concocted lest people see through the ruse. Of course, part of the game is denying that any of this is going on. It was remarkable to see the relief - almost glee - among party politicians, flacks and liberal pundits after the 2010 drubbing. They paid lip service to being unhappy over the results, yes. But they were very happy to be back in their comfort zone and go back to pointing the finger at the Republicans and claiming impotence and to blaming the general public for the state of the country."

Democratic Party as well as Republican Party are the great protectors and enablers of the PREDATOR CLASS."
Michael, I am the guy who wrote the words you quoted in your beginning.

Anyone who considers me to be a "right winger" shouldn't be writing essays on anything more substantive than Lego blocks.
By the way, I was the only person in OS to even bother to respond to the earlier thread from which you got that quote.

The best you did in response to call me a liar and a boy.
Frank, when you post in defense of a right-wing extremist, and his extreme right-wing policies you are a right-winger. You can't have it both ways. No one is going to believe you are even remotely liberal when all you seem to do is attack the left using right-wing talking points and lies.
Michael,

Obviously you are new to debate—so I will continue to give you the benefit of the doubt.

You wrote: Frank, when you post in defense of a right-wing extremist, and his extreme right-wing policies you are a right-winger.


If you are referring to Barack Obama as an extreme right winger and his policies as extreme right wing policies—and expect everyone to agree with that bizarre assessment—then you are delusional, Michael.

Every right winger I know intends to vote to be rid of Barack Obama. They consider him to be destructive of all of the conservative agenda. Not a single person I know who intends to vote for Barack Obama considers him/her self to be a right winger.

The only people who consider Barack Obama an extreme right winger are people on the fringe left who have lost the ability to think clearly and to reason. People whose only political iimpact will probably be to significantly harm causes the supposedly support.

For you to call me a right winger is absurd…and for you to call Barack Obama a right winger is also absurd.

Grow up.

With people like you speaking for the Green Party...it is little wonder they are having so little impact on our political identity right now.
Frank, the only one who needs to grow up here is you. Adults don't need to resort to personal attack to make a case, nor do they go out of their way to lie to people. Bottom line: the only fault for Obama and the Demcorats losing elections lies with Obama and the Democrats. Deal with it.
Frank, the only one who needs to grow up here is you. Adults don't need to resort to personal attack to make a case, nor do they go out of their way to lie to people. Bottom line: the only fault for Obama and the Demcorats losing elections lies with Obama and the Democrats. Deal with it.

This from the guy who called me a liar and a boy in his other post!!!

Adults don’t need to resort to personal attacks to make a case!

You are a funny guy, Michael.

And as for lying, I defy you to show one lie I have told in any post to you.

I do agree with one thing you are saying here, though…that the loss will be the fault of Obama AND THE DEMOCRATS. I have been saying that all along.

But talk about losers: I am willing to bet the Democrats will get a hell of a lot more votes, losers that they are, than the Green Party.

The Green Party is to the Democratic Party what the Libertarian Party is to the Republican Party. Spoilers both…and neither will ever amount to anything more. Both spoilers have advocates who simply do not understand the mechanics of politics nor the machinery of elections.

Hey, both are good for laughs…and we all need lots of laughs. I even thank you for the ones you are providing…and I mean that sincerely, Michael.
I call them like I see them, Frank. Your behavior in this and the last thread was that of a petulant child throwing a temper tantrum and blaming everyone for perceived electoral losses but those who most deserve it. Like I said before, voters are not as stupid as you like to think. We see through B.S. We do not accept lame excuse-making. We do not cave in to threats. If you want your party to do well in elections, then make its politicians do their jobs. If you won't, and if they won't, voters are under no obligation to vote for you. It really is as simple as that.

Oh, so you want me to point out a lie you've told? Okay, here goes liar-boy.

Both spoilers have advocates who simply do not understand the mechanics of politics nor the machinery of elections.

Spoilers or not, they understand far more about "the mechanics of politics" and "the machinery of elections" than you apparently do. See my above paragraph. You do, of course, understand that politicians and the parties to which they belong are not entitled to votes; they must earn them. When you have a candidate who campaigns on a public health insurance option to get the presidency, then turns around and trades it away in return for corporate money and future support, that only guarantees that he is exposed for the liar he is and that voters will not trust him again. When you have a candidate from the party that created Social Security instead leading the charge to dismantle it, that turns elderly voters and voters who soon will be elderly off. When you have a politician who as a candidate for higher office decried abuses of executive power turn around and embrace those very same abuses once he is in office, people see that and respond accordingly.

All of these and other offenses Obama and Democrats guilty of. They go against everything they promised voters. No one likes being lied to, and they will not tolerate being insulted and threatened afterward. Grow up, will you? You come off like a two-year-old whose lie about not having broken the cookie jar has fallen on deaf ears and is about to be sent to his room without his supper.
Michael...getting lectured on adult behavior in a debating forum from you is like getting lectured on how to stay slim from Rush Limbaugh.

We're through.

As I mentioned before, with people like you representing the interests of the Green Party, it will continue to be nothing more than a spoiler.

By the way, read each post in both your threads...and you will easily see that YOU initiated childish behavior in each. You will also see that except for Libby, I am the only person in OS giving you any consideration at all.
Hey, if you don't like being talked to as though you're a child, stop acting like a child. You want to place blame for Democrats' failures and losses everywhere but where they belong: on the shoulders of Democrats. Deflecting responsibility for one's own actions, lying to people habitually, and trying to bully or browbeat them into submission instead of providing a convincing argument are not hallmarks of adulthood — they are the telltale signs of a schoolyard bully, one of the most childish creatures ever created.

I am glad to know "we're through", however. I expect now you will refrain from posting in my threads unless you have something constructive to say.
Perhaps the Greens cannot see as well. Too Green is too expensive and not green enough would surely kill us all. Finding common ground has been missing from the political world since 1901. There, we had a surplus, life was good and the world before our feet. Teddy jumped in as the Progressive with some pretty good ideas followed by Wilson with some pretty good ideas. Both of them saw the pile of money and thought 'Spend it', they did.

Neither of them, their supporters or today's Greens and Liberals have ever given a thought to getting back to where we have a pile of money and keeping it rolling in makes all things possible. Without it, well, you have exactly what it brings and breeds.

Happy?
Too Green is too expensive and not green enough would surely kill us all.

There is no middle ground to be found, if that is what you're looking for. For example, a 2010 article about the severe phosphorous shortage predicted within as few as fifty years.

http://westernfarmpress.com/management/experts-fear-critical-phosphorus-shortage

Fifty years may seem like an eternity to mere mortals, but it's well within the expected lifetimes of our children and grandchildren. The world's population is expected to reach nine billion by the middle of the century, placing even more pressure on dwindling resources. What's more "expensive": engaging in new farming methods that preserve and recycle resources now, or waiting until the last minute when doing so will be that much more costly — especially in terms of human life?

Finding common ground has been missing from the political world since 1901.

That is hardly the fault of environmentalists.

There, we had a surplus, life was good and the world before our feet. Teddy jumped in as the Progressive with some pretty good ideas followed by Wilson with some pretty good ideas. Both of them saw the pile of money and thought 'Spend it', they did.

And when you compare their actions to those of the predecessors, and their successors, it's easy to see the wisdom and foresight they had.

Neither of them, their supporters or today's Greens and Liberals have ever given a thought to getting back to where we have a pile of money and keeping it rolling in makes all things possible. Without it, well, you have exactly what it brings and breeds.

Maybe you haven't been reading the Green Party platform:

http://www.gp.org/committees/platform/2010/index.php

Broken down to its simplest terms, the platform proposes that we end the wars and occupations, reduce military spending, tax the wealthy to help pay for green public works projects and the rebuilding of our infrastructure, and more economic policies that generate jobs while preserving and restoring our natural resources.

Happy?

Are you?
I am the only person in OS giving you any consideration at all.

Consideration from apisa is akin to being vomited on by Santa Claus on Christmas morning.


-R-