Posted on 02/04/2012 9:42:06 AM PST by Oldeconomybuyer
ALL ACROSS America, liberals have been engaged in a debate over the enthusiasm with which to support President Obamas reelection. One side argues that while Obama might not have been the second coming of FDR, he was dealt an impossible hand; Republicans obstructed everything Obama tried, which forced him to attempt to compromise. The other side faults Obama for often behaving like a Republican lite rather than fighting for the things for which liberals and Democrats have stood. Complaints notwithstanding, these folks will likely pull the lever for him come November, but they are less excited about doing so than they were four years ago, which may very well affect his prospects.
If this sounds vaguely familiar, it may be because there was a similar argument in 1980 over Jimmy Carter. Carter too was accused by liberal stalwarts of campaigning to promote a liberal agenda in 1976 only to abandon it while governing and of gutlessly buckling to the right, not only because he lacked political skill but also because he lacked political will. Many liberals felt betrayed then as they do today. But there is one major difference between 1980 and 2012. While Obama will coast to the nomination despite the liberal griping, Carter found himself challenged by the left of his own party in the candidacy of Senator Edward Kennedy.
Kennedy aggressively made a case against Carter that could easily be made against Obama as well: That he is insufficiently devoted to the traditional values of the Democratic Party to deserve liberal support. Which raises the question: Is there a legitimate reason for liberals not to vote for Obama?
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonglobe.com ...
Sounds like you may have better things to do than reply to posts on FR 8>)
Right on the first count, wrong on the second.
If we elected Sarah Palin and a fillibuster-proof majority in the Senate and House and did not see budget and program cuts, we would be equally pissed.
Liberals know Obama squandered their rare majority.
Which brings me to the second part of your post. Obamacare is a result of backroom deals precisely because Obama squandered the liberal majority by not leading his own people.
We have heard the talk that Obama does not meet with his own cabinet, does not meet with party leaders and never reaches out to anyone.
Part of Reagan's success is by his reaching out to Tip O'Neil and moving his agenda through a hostile Congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.