It's stuff like this that doesn't sit well with my conception of liberalism.

MONDAY, AUGUST 22, 2011
Corrupt Obama Administration Pressuring New York Attorney General to Support Mortgage Whitewash
It is high time to describe the Obama Administration by its proper name: corrupt.

Admittedly, corruption among our elites generally and in Washington in particular has become so widespread and blatant as to fall into the “dog bites man” category. But the nauseating gap between the Administration’s propaganda and the many and varied ways it sells out average Americans on behalf of its favored backers, in this case the too big to fail banks, has become so noisome that it has become impossible to ignore the fetid smell.

The Administration has now taken to pressuring parties that are not part of the machinery reporting to the President to fall in and do his bidding. We’ve gotten so used to the US attorney general being conveniently missing in action that we have forgotten that regulators and the AG are supposed to be independent. As one correspondent noted by e-mail, “When officials allegiances are to El Supremo rather than the Constitution, you walk the path to fascism.”

Revealingly, one of the Administration’s allies said: “Wall Street is our Main Street.” And the worst is that this remark may not be a cynical Ministry of Truth pronouncement. Team Obama bears all the hallmarks of being so close to banks and big corporations that it has lost all contact with and understanding of mainstream America.

The latest example is its heavy-handed campaign to convert New York state attorney general Eric Schneiderman to a card carrying member of the “be nice to our lords and masters the banksters” club. Schneiderman was the first to take issue with the sham of the so-called 50 state attorney general mortgage settlement. As far as the Administration is concerned, its goal is to give banks a talking point and prove to them that Team Obama is protecting their backs in a way that the chump public hopefully won’t notice.

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2011/08/cor...-whitewash.html

That's just a blogger venting. Our government will continue to be heavily influenced by big business until we get campaign finance reform, which I remember Obama was workign on when he was elected, I'll check. Obama's still got my vote. The only way I'd ever vote for a republican would be if I was dead, and someone dragged my carcass to the voting booth, and got my cold, dead hands to poke the stylus.

Were you honestly expecting him to deliver everything that he promised?

The problem with politics in the US, at least how I see it, is systemic in nature. The system is so rotten that to think one man would be able to change that is ludicrous.

My only problem with this idea is that W. was able to fuck everything up all on his own.

I'd say this was decades in the making too. If you take down as many financial and business regulations as were taken down in the 80s, you not only consolidate every industry into a set of 3-6 heavyweights reducing liabilities on their balances (ie: jobs) but they also strengthen their positions with strong lobbies to encourage monopolistic tendencies that discourage future entrepreneurship and job creating tendencies.

I really had no expectation of Obama overhauling the system. If one did, that's pretty self-indicting of one's knowledge of how the political system works. I think he's a smart person, I'm pretty on board with where he is politically and I believe in him as a good decision maker, especially relative to most people in politics. That's pretty much all I expect from a president.

Face it, Montana-- you've always been a Republican.

It's pretty sad when an Obama apologist has been reduced to making comments such as that.

I'm not an apologist. I'm a supporter. Sure my president didn't get me everything he promised, but he got a lot of shit done. Frankly, I think he could get a lot more done with a SECOND TERM.

If America elects Rick Perry, I will personallyl take down our flag again.

Frankly, I think he could get a lot more done with a SECOND TERM.

What a douche.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44372992/ns/us_news-environment/

Obama said his decision was also meant to streamline future smog rulemaking.

"Work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013," he said. "Ultimately, I did not support asking state and local governments to begin implementing a new standard that will soon be reconsidered."

is this not a reasonable explanation, montana?

Silly of me to discuss this with you, but I still think you're nit-picking. DO you honestly think there is any other party candidate that would have a better evironmental agenda?

Obama passed healthcare reform, and he's ending the war,

while he's been trying to pull our economy out of George Bush's out-house.

He passed Bob Dole's health care plan and tossed out the PO and single payer for no reason

He hasn't ended any war, in fact he got involved with a new one

because they had no chance of passing?

i'm very disappointed at the very limited progress that has been made under obama. but hyperbole is not necessary to make your point

Uh...that's not close to being true

what in the world are you talking about? the mealy mouthed piece of legislation that we ended up with barely passed. how did a public option, let alone single payer have a shot

It barely passed because Obama insisted on "town hall" meetings and dragging out the entire process to the point where the GOP spin machine and insurance companies could hack it to pieces. Instead of passing health care right away when he had a huge mandate, he was busy letting it hang out to dry while bailing out the banks. It's pretty much common knowledge that he misused his early office time.

This article explains this quite well:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-k...prss=ezra-klein

And if a new president hostile to environmental regulation comes into office — Rick Perry, say — then the EPA may never get around to issuing new ozone rules

I'll take Perry's predictable insanity over Obama's heart-wrenching betrayal.

good plan, Dumdum.

Good diary today on the massive fallout from this insane Obama decision:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/02/1...se-?via=siderec

there's one thing i can almost guarantee: when obama makes a decision, he thinks he's doing the right thing for the country in the big picture/long-term. is he weak? too conciliatory? perhaps. but his heart's in the right place

You're turning on him just like they want you to.

I don't really get what this "but I knew where Bush stood!" argument is supposed to prove. "His base is turning on him!" O RLY?

Another Obama apologist brings out the watered down Hallmark Card tactic

Not changing likely illegal clean air violations so less people die is not having "your heart in the right place".

i'm just being rational. you simply can't do what you want whenever you want. obama recognizes that

another obama hater plays the 'take statement out of context' card

The place where the executive branch has the most power is over the the EPA, Department of Agriculture and Department of the Interior. An adminsitration *can* do what they want here. This bizarre decision by Obama was something he had complete power over. He just decided to screw his base, and the American people in general since we all breathe air. What this means is that either you don't understand how power flows from the executive branch, or you're totally irrational.

I voted for Obama. I even made calls. But he's turned out to be a Republican. There are many, many good democrats who feel the same way. See the links I posted.

Obama is losing his base. It's pathetic when one of the biggest democratic site has this as the top diary:

"Obama, just stop with the Republican talking points"

so what is obama's thought process here?

it obviously isn't "i'm gonna irrationally screw over my base." and that's my point. you're lashing out in righteous indignation whereas i reasonably suppose that there is more to the story. there has to be.

if it's not obama's stated reasoning with regard to the timing and implementation of new legislation, it's gotta be something else. political horse trading perhaps. whatever it is, however misguided, it's probably not borne of irrationality

you're conflating liberalism and the democratic party. the democratic party is more moderate than liberal. that's the sad truth. the reality is that we live in a right of center nation. given our two party system a strong leftist party is highly unlikely to sustain traction

He's probably losing "swing voters" AKA dumb dipshits who're swayed by the breeze.

He's probably losing "swing voters" AKA dumb dipshits who're swayed by the breeze.

As disappointed as I might be with Obama, I'm way more disappointed in these crazy folks that still think that any president can just get into office and change everything overnight, etc.

That's pure American voter naivete.