Obama Returns

[ Posted Wednesday, April 6th, 2022 – 15:43 UTC ]

President Barack Obama returned to the White House yesterday, for the first time in five years. He was there to support President Joe Biden in a signing ceremony, although it wasn't for a bill but merely for an executive order. This directive will provide a fix for some people who had fallen through the cracks of the Affordable Care Act, and will wind up helping many American families afford health insurance for their whole family. So it's easy to see why Obama was invited, to help usher in a technical fix for his greatest achievement as president.

But I have to say, while it was good to see Obama give a short speech and crack a few jokes with Biden, it did kind of draw attention to how much he's kept himself in the background ever since he left office. And if Biden and the rest of the Democrats are smart, they'd be all but begging Obama to take a much more active role in his party heading into the midterm election season.

Obama was (mostly) quiet during Donald Trump's tenure in the Oval Office. This was seen as entirely appropriate, as Obama was following the unwritten rule of former presidents not to publicly criticize other presidents who follow afterwards. In fact, the best thing George W. Bush ever did was to almost completely retire from the public stage after he left office. Obama was following not only in his footsteps, but he was keeping faith with the modern tradition set by ex-presidents of both parties.

However, now the situation has changed. There's a Democrat in the White House again. It is completely understandable that we haven't seen Obama until now, because neither he nor Biden would have wanted Obama to overshadow Biden's new presidency in any way. Which he would have been accused of doing, if he had shown up too early.

That time has now passed. Obama re-entering public life cannot be seen as some sort of attempt to siphon attention away from Biden anymore. Now, it's more like "all hands on deck" to fight off the Republican attempt to retake control of Congress in November. Democrats faced the usual historic headwinds in this endeavor, which is exacerbated by how the public feels about high inflation and the economy in general. Which is, coincidentally, where Obama could help out the most, because he is a master at explaining any situation and the political position of his party, in language everyone can relate to and easily understand. He is a valuable political resource that both Biden and the congressional Democrats should use at every opportunity they get.

Two excerpts from his speech yesterday show exactly why I say this. In the first, Obama very subtly draws the contrast between himself (and the Democrats who made Obamacare possible) and what the Republican Party has now become. The portrait Obama paints is a contrast between a party that wants and tries to help people and a party dedicated to one sole and selfish goal: getting and keeping as much political power as possible -- power for power's sake, not for the sake of the American people in any way, shape, or form.

But for all of us -- for Joe [Biden], for [then-Senate Majority Leader] Harry [Reid], for [Speaker of the House] Nancy Pelosi, for others -- the [Affordable Care Act] was an example of why you run for office in the first place, why all of you sign up for doing jobs that pay you less than you can make someplace else; why you're away from home sometimes and you miss some soccer practices or some dance recitals.

Because we don't -- we're not supposed to do this just to occupy a seat or to hang on to power. We're supposed to do this because it's making a difference in the lives of the people who sent us here.

And because of so many people, including a lot of people who are here today, made enormous sacrifices; because members of Congress took courageous votes, including some who knew that their vote would likely cost them their seat; because of the incredible leadership of Nancy and Harry, we got the A.C.A. across the finish line together.

And the night we passed the A.C.A. -- I've said it before -- it was a high point of my time here, because it reminded me and it reminded us of what is possible.

Nobody does soaring rhetoric quite as well as Obama, you have to admit. And Joe Biden could use a little of that (seasoned with a dash of Obamaesque charisma) to his great advantage right now. Because Biden has -- pretty obviously -- not been doing a stellar job at getting his own message out to the people. He has allowed the opposition to define both him and his achievements far too much and far too often. Obama could help defuse some of the arguments Republicans are already making in the midterm campaign, and he could do so convincingly and compellingly.

Which brings us to the second excerpt, where Obama explains not only what Biden is about to sign and what it will mean for over a million Americans, but why such tweaking is not only necessary but downright inevitable in any big new government program.

But the reason we're here today is because President Biden, Vice President [Kamala] Harris, everybody who has worked on this thing understood from the start that the A.C.A. wasn't perfect. To get the bill passed, we had to make compromises. We didn't get everything we wanted. That wasn't a reason not to do it. If you can get millions of people health coverage and better protection, it is -- to quote a famous American -- a pretty "big deal." That's what it is. A big deal.

But there were gaps to be filled. Even today, some patients still pay too much for their prescriptions. Some poor Americans are still falling through the cracks. In some cases, healthcare subsidies aren't where we want them to be, which means that some working families are still having trouble paying for their coverage.

Here's the thing: That's not unusual when we make major progress in this country. The original Social Security Act left out entire categories of people, like domestic workers and farm workers. That had to be changed. In the beginning, Medicare didn't provide all the benefits that it does today. That had to be changed.

Throughout history, what you see is that it's important to get something started, to plant a flag, to lay a foundation for further progress.

The analogy I've used about the A.C.A. before is that: In the same way that was true for early forms of Social Security and Medicare, it was a starter home. It secured the principle of universal healthcare, provided help immediately to families. But it required us to continually build on it and make it better.

And President Biden understands that. And that's what he's done since the day he took office. As part of the American Rescue Plan, he lowered the cost of healthcare even further for millions of people. He made signing up easier. He made outreach to those who didn't know they could get covered -- make sure that they knew; made that a priority.

And as a result of these actions, he helped a record 14.5 million Americans get covered during the most recent enrollment period.

That, ladies and gentlemen, is what happens when you have an administration that's committed to making a program work.

And today -- today, the Biden-Harris administration is going even further by moving to fix a glitch in the regulations that will lower premiums for nearly 1 million people who need it and allow 200,000 more uninsured Americans get access to coverage.

Obama even snuck in a nod to Biden's sloganeering in the midst of all that ("it requires us to continually build on it and make it better"). Obama hit upon not only the fact that Obamacare is now wildly popular -- so popular that Republicans don't even attempt to run on repealing it anymore -- but also that Biden has already improved upon it in significant ways.

More importantly, this explanation not only framed why Biden had to make such improvements, but it also helped set Democrats' expectations for the rest of Biden's agenda in a much more realistic place. Sometimes "a starter home" is all that is possible. But "securing the principle" and "laying a foundation for further progress" is important and well worth doing, because it is much better than the alternative of doing absolutely nothing.

Given the restraints that Senators Joe Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema have placed on Biden's agenda, Obama's explanation could go a long way towards defusing some of the frustration and impatience of the Democratic base with the large gap between Biden's campaign promises and what he's actually been able to achieve. Most especially when it comes to efforts to ameliorate climate change, which is the one area where Manchin and the rest of the Democrats seem to be at least partially in agreement. Getting Manchin to sign off on some sort of plan to take on climate change won't be the Green New Deal or even what Biden wanted to do in his Build Back Better plan, but it would be laying the foundation for future progress in a big and unprecedented way.

This is why Barack Obama really needs to get out in the public sphere a lot more than he has, of late. Because if anyone can both explain this stuff and make not only a solid case but a soaring rhetorical case for what is possible to achieve now, it is him.

Obama is newsworthy, in a way that no other Democrat (with the possible exception of the Clintons) now is. The media will follow and report on his movements and speeches. Immediately after the primary season is over (and even before, where there are no Democratic challengers to sitting officeholders), Obama should appear at as many rallies and campaign events for Democrats running in both Senate and House races. His seal of approval can be a real motivator for Democratic base voters. And that's precisely what is needed, right now -- some excitement and enthusiasm for people to cast their ballots this November.

In fact, I can boil this entire column down to three simple words:

More Obama. Please!

-- Chris Weigant


Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant


65 Comments on “Obama Returns”

  1. [1] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    i agree. whatever else he is, obama is a great speaker and salesman for democratic causes. democrats put themselves out on a limb for him, and it's high time he returned the favor.

  2. [2] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    A great salesman? That's not what I recall.

  3. [3] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    he sold quite well, he just didn't have the stomach for the congressional knife fights that it takes to deliver as advertised.

  4. [4] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    you mean, he didn't know what he was getting into?

  5. [5] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    maybe on some level he knew, but he overestimated his own power to persuade.

  6. [6] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    ... and underestimated the determination of his opposition to prevent him from accomplishing anything.

  7. [7] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    Obama was better than the alternative two elections running.

    But I was hugely disappointed by what he offered versus what he delivered. And I'll always believe that a significant chunk of those that disapproved of Obama were disaffected Liberals like myself.

  8. [8] 
    Michale wrote:


    sure, one can reach for one or two similarities between any successful politicians.

    Not factually accurate.. MLK's and JFK's oratory style has MANY similarities to Hitler's oratory style..

    however, the communications styles of trump and hitler are similar
    in MANY ways.

    Why don't you just come out and say it?

    What you are saying is that President Trump is as evil as Hitler because they have similar oratory styles..

    But, that is a logical fallacy because I have PROVEN that Hitler's oratory style is similar to great leaders of the past..

    MLK... FDR... JFK...

    and no, most of Donald's characteristics are very different from Hitler's. However, there is enough of a similarity in their communication styles that there IS

    room for concern.

    ONLY to someone who suffers from PTDS..

    ONLY to someone who is pre-disposed to hate President Trump and want to find any connection they possibly can..

    But, as I have PROVEN beyond any doubt, people who have great oratory skills are not ALL evil psychotic people..

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    As most 10 year olds could have told you before posting such an idiotic post…
    “Your Lordship” is not a pronoun. It doesn’t even have amateur status.

    Now you are discriminating based on my definition of what a pronoun is.

    What a hateful bigot you are, Russ!!! :D

    }}}A photo ID is the ONLY true and verifiable ID..{{{

    — Every owner of a fake ID

    A photo ID can be easily VERIFIED as a fake ID..

    A utility bill is much harder to VERIFY as a valid ID..

    Are you SURE yer a cop groupie?? :D

    Suggesting that we wouldn’t have as many people sick if we simply stopped testing for the virus.

    No one said ANYTHING about testing..

    I am talking about school closures which SCIENCE (*REAL* science, not that fake Democrat "science") has PROVEN is harmful to children..

    I am talking about masking school children which
    SCIENCE (*REAL* science, not that fake Democrat "science") has PROVEN is very harmful to school-age children..

    Now.. Do you want to address my actual argument??

    Or just make up some more shit that has nothing to do with what I said??


    Hokay.. :D

  10. [10] 
    Michale wrote:

    Yunno what was so hilarious about Odumbo's return to the White House??

    It PROVED how much of a Dunsel Joe Biden is!! :D

  11. [11] 
    Michale wrote:


    i agree. whatever else he is, obama is a great speaker

    Yea.. Odumbo is just like Hitler in that regard.. Great oratory...

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    he sold quite well, he just didn't have the stomach for the congressional knife fights that it takes to deliver as advertised.


    The mark of a good salesman is follow through.. If you sell something, you have to deliver..

    Odumbo talked a good game..

    But he could never deliver..

  13. [13] 
    Michale wrote:


    But I was hugely disappointed by what he offered versus what he delivered


    Like President Trump, Odumbo was an egotist.. A narcissist... Still is, apparently..

    He loved the glory and the limelight of the "Big Sell"...

    Unlike President Trump, however, Odumbo didn't want to get messy with the after-sell details.. Odumbo's follow-through was abysmal.. So, Odumbo never delivered..

    Odumbo fed on the adoration of the Big Sell.. But when it actually came time to deliver, Odumbo couldn't be bothered... He got what he wanted with the glory and the adulation.. Why should he bother with the follow through??

    It's like when he won the Nobel Peace Prize for not actually doing anything...

    Odumbo's thinking was, "Why should I actually do the work?? I already got all the worship and adulation. It's not as if I am going to get MORE adulation and glory with the actual delivery..."

    That's ya'all's Odumbo...

  14. [14] 
    Michale wrote:

    Biden is failing in Ukraine... Just as Biden failed in Afghanistan..

    Mocked as ‘Rubble’ by Biden, Russia’s Ruble Comes Roaring Back

    How many more failures are ya'all going to tolerate before you concede the facts??

    Democrats simply cannot govern.. They are incompetent leaders...

    The facts overwhelmingly show this to be an accurate assessment...

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Democrats' 6 Jan hysteria is a joke...

    Judge issues first outright acquittal of Jan. 6 riot defendant

    The defendant claimed that he thought police allowed him into an entrance near the Capitol Rotunda.

    The ruling is a blow to the Justice Department and seems likely to elevate similar defenses from hundreds of other members of the mob who have claimed that they didn’t know they weren’t permitted inside the Capitol and believed that police officers had approved their presence.

    The 6 Jan committee will, like the Democrat Russia Collusion Delusion, will die an ignoble death... :D

  16. [16] 
    Michale wrote:

    Texas Governor Abbott will start busing illegal immigrants into DC and dropping them off!! :D

    Abbott: Texas will charter buses of undocumented immigrants to DC

    Abbott has also directed the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM) to charter buses to send migrants to the Capitol in Washington, D.C. in response to the Biden administration reportedly busing migrants into Texas cities from the border.

    Ya gotta love it!! :D

    I also recommend busing illegals and dropping them off in front of Nancy Pelosi's house!! :D

  17. [17] 
    Michale wrote:


    If you still want to talk about how badly Biden's CDC has totally frak'ed America's children??

    Here are some more FACTS for you..

    The CDC finds a depression epidemic among teens — that it created

    The Irish poet W.B. Yeats wrote of sailing to an imagined Byzantium because his was “no country for old men.” The pandemic has proven that the United States is no country for the young.

    A new Centers for Disease Control study reveals how badly teens have suffered from COVID policies — that the CDC itself pushed.

    The CDC found that more than a third of US high-school students reported poor mental health during the pandemic. Nearly half — 44% — said they felt sad or hopeless. A horrifying near-20% said they had seriously considered suicide in the previous 12 months.

    The lifeline for those who made it through unscathed? Per the CDC data, it’s an obvious one: a feeling of “school connectedness.”

    Teens who felt connected to both adults and their school buddies were far less likely to experience those feelings of sadness or despair: 35% vs 53%.On suicidal thoughts, the numbers are even starker, with 14% who felt connected having such thoughts vs. 26% of those who didn’t. And when it comes to actual suicide attempts, 6% of those who felt connected made the attempt vs. 12% of those who didn’t.

    School shutdowns were not only unnecessary, they actually and actively HURT our children..


    School masking was not only ineffective, it actually and actively HURT our children..


    Your Democrats have actually and actively HURT America's children..

    This is DOCUMENTED FACT...


  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    It turns out that feeling connected to your friends and teachers is actually a matter of life and death. This is obvious to any parent of a teen and, indeed, to anyone who remembers being a teenager.

    Spring breakers drink vodka on the beach.
    COVID rules and excessive boozing is killing America’s youth
    And — more news of the obvious — school closures played a major role in destroying those feelings of connectedness, paving the way for the depression epidemic now overwhelming our kids.

    The CDC admitted this, if only glancingly, in its report on the findings. What it doesn’t admit is its own role in creating this epidemic.

    “The COVID-19 pandemic has created traumatic stressors that have the potential to further erode students’ mental well-being,” chirped the body’s acting principal deputy director, Dr. Debra Houry, about the new data.

    But those “stressors” were, in large part, created by the CDC.

    So, the agency who thinks it should study gun deaths and enforce gun control actually completely and utterly FAILS when it comes to implementing safety measures for something it actually has a purview for.. :^/

    Democrat incompetence.. Front and Center...

  19. [19] 
    Michale wrote:

    Jon Stewart blasts American dream as unattainable for Black people: 'Turns out to be a fallacy'

    The former 'Daily Show' host has been criticized in recent weeks for his 'super-woke' racial takes

    What *IS* it about Democrats that they are so racist???

    I mean, I know.. Democrats are the people who gave this country Jim Crow and the KKK.. I get that..

    But to be so blatantly racist in the here and now??

    It's mind-boggling..

    While it looks like Jackson Brown will be confirmed as the SCOTUS, I'll make a prediction..

    ANYONE who congratulates Jackson Brown on being the first black woman to be on the SCOTUS is a racist...

    To a NON-racist... To a person who is completely color-blind with regards to race...

    The ONLY possible response is to Jackson Brown being elevated to the SCOTUS would be, "Yea?? So???"

  20. [20] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    i provided two links with evidence to support my point. if you can't be bothered to read them, i guess that conversation is over.


  21. [21] 
    Michale wrote:

    You provided links to other opinions from other Trump haters to support your opinion based on Trump hate.. I really don't need to read other opinions from other Trump haters to support the opinion that ya'all hate Trump..

    I mean, let's fact it. There is absolutely NO REASON to compare President Trump to Hitler besides hate... Amiright??

    On the other hand, I have provided FACTS from scholars who are free of hate of JFK, MLK and FDR that point out the actual factual similarities between JFK, MLK, FDR and Hitler, from an oratory perspective..

    It's like saying, "Well, President Trump is a male and Hitler was a male, so that means President Trump = Hitler."

    If you WANT to find similarities between Trump and Hitler... sure.. you can find all you want..

    But when you look at the actual FACTS on the ground.. When you look at the ACTIONS of Putin, Trump and Hitler...

    Then a more factual case can be made that Putin is more like Hitler than Trump...

    But if you cannot concede your biases against President Trump are real and factual then yea... I guess the conversation is over...

  22. [22] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hunter Biden Laptop??

    Here’s a dozen times Joe Biden played a role in son Hunter’s business dealings

    NOT going away.. :D

  23. [23] 
    Michale wrote:

    “I hope you all can do what I did and pay for everything for this entire family for 30 years. It’s ­really hard. But don’t worry, ­unlike Pop [Joe Biden], I won’t make you give me half your salary.”
    -Hunter Biden to daughter Naomi

    Yea.. Joe Biden wasn't involved at all in Hunter Biden's crimes.. :^/

  24. [24] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    each of the linked articles provided factual examples of at least six ways trump's communication style was similar to hitler's, in a way that it was not similar to anyone else's. maneuver, panacea, fabrication, pride in a mythical past, pseudo-racial nationalism, clownish showmanship, breaking taboo, violent suppression of dissent, just to name a few.

    you know that unsupported, blanket ad-hominem claims about the authors of said articles don't pass muster with me. either refute the specifics or concede that they're true.


  25. [25] 
    Michale wrote:

    Since we're talking about Odumbo....

    Who was awarded the WORST LIE AWARD for 2013???

    None other than Barack Hussein Odumbo...

    But we've got a different Obama lie for Worst Lie, as a surprise. In fact, surprise was what led to this one. The surprise of the Edward Snowden leaks. In response to all the revelations about the enormous scope of the N.S.A.'s spying, Obama named a commission to study it (this commission has just issued its report, by the way). But the jaw-droppingly false way Obama presented it was what gave us some side-splitting laughter, as Obama wanted us all to believe that he truly "welcomed the debate" over spying.

    Puh-leeze, Mister President. You did not "welcome" this debate, in fact you would have preferred it never had taken place. Otherwise, you would have been free to instigate this debate, at any point in the past four or five years. Not doing so shows that in no way did you "welcome" this debate at all. Which is why we're giving it Worst Lie of 2013, in fact.

    Facts are SOOOO inconvenient, eh?? :D

  26. [26] 
    Michale wrote:

    you know that unsupported, blanket ad-hominem claims about the authors of said articles don't pass muster with me. either refute the specifics or

    One cannot refute OPINIONs.

    I have also provided links that "prove" that JFK's, MLK's and FDR's oratory styles were similar to Hitler's...

    Having as good an oratory style as Hitlers DOES NOT MAKE ONE LIKE HITLER...

    The fact that you seem to believe differently is simply one of those Agree To Disagree moments..

    Further, this entire debate got started because YOU feel that Putin's ACTIONS are not sufficiently heinous to warrant comparison to Hitler..

    It's a bona fide FACT that President Trump's ACTIONS have absolutely NO CONNECTION to Hitler.. But Putin's actions DO...

    As I said.. I get it.. In your opinion Trump = Hitler.. I get that.. Your welcome to that opinion..

    But such a belief simply proves the Godwin Theorem...

    And the fact that Godwin himself tried to weaken the Theorem by injecting Trump/America hate in no way diminishes the validity of the Theorem prior to Godwin injecting political bigotry into the Theorem..

    concede that they're true.

    I concede that those are truths.. YOUR truths.. The author's truths..

    But I deal in FACTS...

    And there is simply NO FACTUAL comparison between President Trump and Hitler..

    Beyond the superficial oratory style.. Style that is FACTUALLY proven to be similar to Odumbo's oratory style, JKF's, MLK's and FDR's amongst many other great men...

    Oratory is a tool.. Like religion... Or a gun.. Or an alligator..

    The tool can be used for good or evil.. In and of itself, it's not either..

  27. [27] 
    Michale wrote:

    The Scandal Obama Still Won’t Acknowledge

    He made Hillary’s dirty trick against Trump possible.

    Barack Obama has long bragged about his supposedly scandal-free presidency, a claim that conveniently ignores a host of ethical problems, from Hunter Biden profiting off access to Obama’s White House to the IRS harassing conservative activists. But the biggest scandal of Obama’s presidency is still coming into focus: his administration’s spying on a political opponent, Donald Trump, based on nothing more than a dirty trick deployed by Obama’s former secretary of state, Hillary Clinton.

    The collusion in the 2016 election was not between Trump and Russia but between Hillary and the United States government under Obama.

    On the speaking circuit these days, Obama lectures Americans on dangers to democracy. But he presided over the most significant one in recent memory: an utterly bogus investigation that hobbled Trump’s campaign and presidency. Obama’s CIA director, John Brennan, had informed him by at least July of 2016 that Hillary was pushing a Trump-Russia collusion claim. Obama could have instructed his agencies to steer clear of this nonsense. But he didn’t.

    John Durham, the Justice Department special counsel who is examining this debacle, has shown in his filings the ease with which Hillary got friends in the Obama administration to investigate Trump. Christopher Steele, her chief opposition researcher, was peddling the Trump-Russia hoax across the Obama administration in the months before the election.


    Scandal Free???

    Shirley, you jest... :^/

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    OK OK OK.. Let's talk about Odumbo...

    Barack Obama’s humiliation of feeble ol’ Joe Biden

    Someone in the White House must really hate Joe Biden.

    Who had the stupid idea to invite his charismatic predecessor back to upstage the president and humiliate him before the world?

    If the idea was to borrow the Barack Obama magic, it backfired. The president just looked feeble and ­unpopular against his limelight-hogging former boss.

    If the idea was to prove how utterly feeble and lost Joe Biden is???



  29. [29] 
    Michale wrote:

    For those of ya'all who are too embarrassed for Joe Biden to actually watch the videos of Odumbo dumping on Biden, the afore article gives a vivid and factual play by play on what actually occurred..

    I was laughing my ass off.. :D

  30. [30] 
    Michale wrote:

    Is ‘The Big Guy’ In Big Trouble?

    The "Big Guy" ("POP" to Hunter Biden) is in big trouble..

  31. [31] 
    Michale wrote:
  32. [32] 
    Michale wrote:

    Vladimir Putin 'wants to build pro-Russia empire from Vladivostok to Portugal'

    World leaders are calling for President Vladimir Putin to be tried for war crimes but experts are concerned these horrors could continue as the despot pushes forward with a grander plan to build a sprawling empire

    Russian President Vladimir Putin is endeavouring to build a pro-Russian empire stretching from "Vladivostok to Lisbon", a former Russian president has warned.

    Ex-president and deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev said Putin launched his brutal invasion of the former Soviet republic to bring peace to Ukraine, in a Telegram post.

    The shocking allegations were made as Western leaders shared fears Moscow is planning a new military offensive in southern and eastern parts of Ukraine.

    Medvedev said: "To change the bloody and full of false myths consciousness of a part of today’s Ukrainians is the most important goal.

    "The goal is for the sake of the peace of future generations of Ukrainians themselves and the opportunity to finally build an open Eurasia – from Lisbon to Vladivostok."

    Sounds very Hitler-esque to me...

  33. [33] 
    Michale wrote:

    Odumbo did not deliver for the American people..

  34. [34] 
    Michale wrote:

    Odumbo didn't even deliver for the Democrat Party, as he left the Party decimated and in shambles..

    Odumbo delivered for Odumbo only..

  35. [35] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    I've gone to great pains to point out that trump is not like Hitler in any way other than his campaign tactics, so that's the dryest of straw men. But JFK,MLK,FDR et al did not regularly engage in a fraction of the shenanigans of the types both trump and Hitler did daily. That's nobody's subjective truth, it's part of the factual record.

  36. [36] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    My "opinion" for what it's worth, is that trump is a John Gill, using tools he doesn't fully understand and can't control.

  37. [37] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    You get an 'A' for effort, Joshua. You know, for the great pains. Heh.

  38. [38] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    By the way, try explaining to m what a factual record is, okay?

  39. [39] 
    nypoet22 wrote:


    i'm right with you bemoaning the fact that obamacare enriched health insurance companies, but it also saved tens of thousands of lives. i know that part of the story doesn't fit your narrative, but it's still the case.

  40. [40] 
    nypoet22 wrote:

    before obamacare people who lacked health insurance were not being saved at all. i don't think you'll find anyone here who thinks it's perfect, but you don't have much of a leg to stand on if you're claiming it was as bad as what existed beforehand.

  41. [41] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    You provided links to other opinions from other Trump haters to support your opinion based on Trump hate.. I really don't need to read other opinions from other Trump haters to support the opinion that ya'all hate Trump..

    Lets reverse that:

    You provided links to other opinions from other Biden haters to support your opinion based on Biden hate.. I really don't need to read other opinions from other Biden haters to support the opinion that ya'all hate Biden..

    Describes almost your entire shtick...

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:


    I've gone to great pains to point out that trump is not like Hitler in any way other than his campaign tactics, so that's the dryest of straw men. But JFK,MLK,FDR et al did not regularly engage in a fraction of the shenanigans of the types both trump and Hitler did daily

    You DO realize that your second statement contradicts your first statement, right??

    Which simply proves my point.. Your opinion is based SOLELY on your hatred of President Trump..

    Nothing more...

  43. [43] 
    Michale wrote:


    By the way, try explaining to m what a factual record is, okay?

    The problem is ya'all's "factual record" is actually nothing but Democrat propaganda.. :D

    Whereas, what I post are FACTS...

    Need proof?? Let's start from Afghanistan and work our way forward, shall we?? :D

    13 American troops died needlessly in Afghanistan due to Joe Biden's incompetence..


    Your turn.. :D

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:


    The mere fact that, in your opinion, President Trump is more comparable to Hitler than Putin simply re-enforces the fact that your opinion is based on hatred of President Trump and not actual historical fact..

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    CBS digs into Hunter, James Biden scandal: Over 150 'concerning' bank transactions

    Sen. Grassley said he thinks James Biden 'was very much a part' of the scandal

    CBS Evening News broke apart from the long-standing "Russian disinformation" narrative by delivering an in-depth report on a number of brow-raising details from a GOP investigative probe on Wednesday – particularly focusing on key bank records tying President Biden's brother, James, and son, Hunter, to over 150 "concerning" transactions.

    "We have people with the Biden name, dealing with Chinese business people that have a relationship to the Communist Party," Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, said during an interview with CBS senior investigative correspondent Catherine Herridge.

    Grassley, who has been on the Bidens' case long before the mainstream outlet decided to take it to the air, sat down with Herridge to divulge the latest goings-on and deliver his take on what these bank records could indicate.

    Looks like even CBS is getting in on the Hunter Biden Laptop news.. :D

    So, that's WaPo, CNN, NY Times and CBS...

    All Democrat Water Carriers.. ALL reporting on the facts of the Hunter Biden Laptop.. :D

    And y'all think this is a nothing burger!! :D Funny...

  46. [46] 
    Michale wrote:


    Except my hatred of and pity for Biden are based on the FACTS of his actions..

    And the links I use to SHOW the facts of his actions are FACTUAL reports of those actions and statements..

    But yea... Other than that??

    Everything you just said was bullshit.. :D

    "Everything that guy said just there was bullshit... Thank you."
    -Joe Pesci, MY COUSIN VINNY

  47. [47] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Yes Michale, we all have come to know and love your complete misuse of the word "fact"...

    Everything you just said was bullshit.. :D

    Then everything you just said was as well...

  48. [48] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:


    Dunno why you're bothering, Bashi. I'm at the point of once again scrolling through the massive spew -- there's too much crap to correct and Michale gives no evidence whatsoever that he's arguing in any kind of good faith. Not with all the dodging and whataboutisms.

    Besides, the poor bastard thinks Trump was a good President(!) and that Joe Biden is racist(!) for nominating an unrepresented America to SCOTUS.

  49. [49] 
    MtnCaddy wrote:

    So I don't think he can be reached.

  50. [50] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    OK Don, but can you take that from politics as usual and show the conspiracy? The Occam's Razor answer is Democrats don't have the votes and the other side is against it, welcome to US politics. If you can get the same results without the conspiracy, maybe the conspiracy is not real.

    Correlation does not automatically assume causation...

  51. [51] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Michale provides too much crap to correct, does not argue in good faith and uses dodges and whataboutisms.

    Yup, that's his shtick closing in on two decades now...

  52. [52] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:


    Here [] is an interesting article why the WHO was not the be all end all when it came to COVID...

  53. [53] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    But Don, that could just as easily be explained by two party politics as usual. Who took what from where? What bills? What specific big money interests benefited? Was everyone involved or just committee members?

    Correlation is easy. Causation not so much...

  54. [54] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Once again, a pattern of correlation leads to the logical conclusion of causation.

    No, it leads to a logical conclusion of correlation. Causation is a much higher bar and needs actual proof. Who paid whom for which votes and how did they profit? Correlation is knowing the dots exist. Causation is connecting them.

  55. [55] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Causation needs actual proof in a criminal court.

    And most of the sciences. Also real logic. Not the casual stuff you find in forums and comment sections but the formal logic found in universities.

    This causation is in the court of public opinion and the verdict can be delivered with our votes.

    True. But if you can provide real connect-the-dots causation your opinion is considerably more persuasive.

    80% of citizens have accepted the pattern of correlation as causation or they would not want the big money out of politics.

    Actually, most those people likely answered yes or no to a poll question and probably did not think much beyond that and if pressed the vin diagram of those who said yes and those likely to support One Demand is closer to a figure 8 than a circle...

    Unless you are saying that big money does not corrupt our political process you are just using the specific requests as a dodge.

    I never said that but I do not think the corruption is an absolute nor does it affect everyone and those who are corrupted do so to different degrees. do I think voluntary methods without any enforcement do not take human nature in to consideration and are doomed to failure.

  56. [56] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    The same shtick as Michale and Mtn Caddy.

    Asking you tough questions that you should but for some reason are unable to answer until you break and call us cowards?

    Ya, I think all three of us are guilty of that one...

  57. [57] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:


    Thanks for the link - read it at work tonight.

    The WHO gets way more than its fair share of criticism and much of it is unwarranted.

    I can make that statement because I have followed the WHO from the beginning of this health crisis and watched most if not all of the WHO virtual press conferences on COVID-19 since January 2020 when they were daily events.

    Questions from the journos weren't always enlightening but, even when they weren't, the WHO responses were beyond comprehensive and chalk full of knowledge and excellent information. If governments had followed all of the advice the WHO was dishing out since day one of this health crisis, then I would wager we would have been out of the acute phase a long time ago.

    I learned so much just listening to Drs Tedros, Ryan and Van Kerkhove and all of their expert colleagues at the WHO during these valuable pressers.

    As for the distinction between droplets and aerosols, well, I find that to be a distinction without much of a difference when it comes to how we all should have behaved in response to this virus - at the individual level through to the national, regional and global levels.

    Yes, the WHO was not advising masks early on. You will recall that at the beginning of this pandemic there weren't enough medical masks for health workers and cloth masks are not the best, especially when they give a false sense of security and other health measures such as keeping physical distance are not followed.

    I have found the WHO to be an invaluable organization through this crisis, despite its inherent structural deficiencies.

  58. [58] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    A photo ID can be easily VERIFIED as a fake ID..

    A utility bill is much harder to VERIFY as a valid ID..

    Please tell me how easy it is for you to verify a person carrying a photo ID is using a fake ID. Growing up by Fort Benning, GA, most high school students learn that there are a few businesses near the base that will make new photo ID’s for those in the service who lose theirs and cannot return to their home state to get a replacement. They can make valid ID’s for all 50 states and US territories. You just have to fill out their form and sign a release stating that you know it’s a crime to give false info in seeking the ID’s.

    Most bars in Columbus know when you have a group of very young looking 21 year olds from 5 different states sitting together, take their ID’s and ask them what their zip code is or what the capital of their state is and those with fake ID’s will usually run out of the place.

    The only time that a utility bill can be used as an ID is when the entity requiring the valid ID already knows the subject’s address. It is meant to prevent someone stealing your identity. How do you fake an utility bill as when being used as a valid ID?

  59. [59] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    So providing connect the dots causation will be more persuasive with the 20% that do not want the biog money out of politics. Good know if I need them.

    Well, at 4 supporters (according to your website) you have .00000002% of the vote. I think you need some persuasion if you want to up your game by 7 or 8 orders of magnitude...

    Of course, people can't support it if they do not know about it.

    Nader mentioned you. What was your supporter bump from that mention?

    While no one here is willing to argue in good faith, when I commented at CommonDreams responses were always more in favor than opposed with the same dodges I get here.

    Yes, CommonDreams is a well known progressive echo chamber. I have no doubt they blew copious amounts of smoke up your behind. Did you make any conversions? Or just smoke?

    What was your plan again? Keep voting for them until they voluntarily decide to stop taking big money?

    No, vote for candidates who support campaign finance reform legislation.

    How well has that worked over the last few decades?

    Better by percentage than you have done with One Demand for almost a decade.

    Again, if you say One Demand won't work then you are saying democracy won't work.

    No, you are saying that and you are wrong. Democracy has worked fairly well for quite sometime...

    Once again I have exposed and answered your bullshit questions which you keep falsely claiming I don't answer.

    Answer by calling them bullshit rather than thoughtful researched rebuttals.

    I expose your bullshit and correctly describe you as cowards when you use dodges to avoid arguing in good faith.

    Now that is bullshit. I always argue in good faith, I just happen to not agree with you. The calling names when you can't handle that disagreement seems to be a problem on your end.

    Your spiel is ineffective and repetitive. It's very obviously not working here, not working on CommonDreams and not working with Nader. The proof is in the pudding. Time to change the recipe...

  60. [60] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    School shutdowns were not only unnecessary, they actually and actively HURT our children..


    School masking was not only ineffective, it actually and actively HURT our children..


    Of course canceling school and being quarantined from others was bad for the mental health of school aged kids… it was also bad for adults’ mental health! Nobody has suggested otherwise.

    No where in the CDC’s report does it ever suggest that the shutdowns or requiring masks were the wrong moves for school systems to take given the threat the pandemic posed.

    And where is your evidence to support your claims that masks do not work and actually harm kids? We saw in multiple school systems that those that did not require masks, the number of positive COVID-19 cases rose higher and quicker than in schools exercising reasonable precautions.

    But go ahead and dismiss all medical advice by the CDC claiming it’s politically motivated and that you know more than those trained in the field of medicine because you watch Dr. Oz. Ya’ll killing off more of your own voters seems like a beauty of a strategy!

  61. [61] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:


    Did you or did you not get any direct supporters from either Nader mentioning you or posting on CommonDreams?

    So, now you know more than Nader? Hilarious. Nader is right, Trump and Bernie did very well with small donor campaigns. They just ran other campaigns for other donors concurrently. They don't like your litmus test either.

    You just throw out whatever shit you can think of, don't you?

    Au contraire. I throw out well thought out deeply probing questions that I know you do not have the ability to answer but if somehow you miraculously could answer them you might move your movement forward.

    The amount of big money has continued to increase with every election over the last forty years we have been doing it your way.

    But is it out of proportion to economic growth/inflation over the same period?

    So at best your way has yielded a negative 20% per election if big money has gone up 20% percent per election over the last forty years.

    "if"? Is it %20 or not?

    One Demand has not been tried yet so it is still operating at 0%.

    You can say that again...

    Why is using your vote to enforce a demand on a politician not how democracy is designed to work?

    You have never come up with anyone to vote for. If you can't come up with a candidate that shares your view then you are not part of democracy.

    It has had it's moments, but the corruption by big money is not in the highlight reel.

    It's not in your highlight reel and that's the root of your problem...

  62. [62] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    But you are such a troll that you can not even acknowledge that as a positive step.

    Is it? If you convinced people then it's a positive step. If you turned people off then it's not a positive step. Bad publicity being better than no publicity at all is not universal and only works for some...

    Not factually correct.

    Copying Michale now? He may be prolific but his style is not particularly persuasive...

    But both Trump and Bernie did very well on small donations. Trump did especially well with sub $50 donations. Look it up. It may not be your definition small donations but it is the definition of everyone else in politics other than you.

    Is big money out of proportion from inflation or is it 20% or not?

    I remember elections when it went from 3-4 billion to 5-6 billion And from 6 to over 10 billion.

    20% was low-balling.

    So basically you have no idea and can't be bothered to spend the short amount of time to figure it out? Dude, that was a gimme...

    A write-in vote is a way to express that demand and is part of democracy.

    No it is not. The write in votes for many states are not separated. Did they not vote for a listed candidate because of "big Money" or did they just want their dog elected? One big number with no division as to why.

    Your canned laughter a side, "highlight reel" is connecting the dots and showing with proof there is a problem. Otherwise, why should anyone take you seriously?

    Be good or be gone.

    Dismissed am I? Good luck with that one...

  63. [63] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    What you said is not factually correct. Nader did not say that Bernie and Trump ran two campaigns. Nader did not even say Bernie and trump did well with small donors. Nader said they ran small donor campaigns.

    OK. I have looked it up. Trump and Bernie did very well with small donations.

    Here are the numbers from 2016. Trump kicked ass in the small donation department. Knocked it out of the park!

    Subtracting the votes counted for candidates form the total votes cast in states where write-in votes are not counted as votes for candidates will provide the number of write-in votes within a margin of error. Citizens will sign up at One Demand before the election to say how they intend to vote and after the election on how they did vote. if those numbers are close it answers how write-in votes were cast and for what purpose.

    And hope it's noticeable from the myriad of other reasons people write in candidates. But first they have to find your site and more importantly trust your site.

    Still demanding proof there is a problem?

    Demonstrating would be the correct term.

    What is wrong with you?

    Well, there's this guy who spams the exact same spiel to a comments section that the intended target neither seems to read or care about that I find mildly annoying. Therefore I am dealing with it in three pronged approach: by pointing out flaws and giving tools to fix them this person will either crap out and give up and go away or fix the flaws of his movement and no longer need to solicit said target. I'm good with either direction. The third prong is to give anyone who searches for said guy a healthy dose of what they are in for dealing with him and are likely to stay far, far away...

    Grow up.

    Been there. Done that. Not as interesting as it seems...

  64. [64] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Trump still did not run a small donor campaign and also had PAC money.

    Trump did not run a purely small donor campaign but he did run a campaign to target small donations and is likely the most successful in history in receiving them.

    But of course, I can't be trusted or the people that would sign up on the website can't be trusted!

    Considering the neglect of your website and that fact it has been hacked twice, only a fool would trust you with any personal information.

    Demonstrating would be the correct term?

    Why do you keep demanding proof that big money is a problem?

    I was referring to the previous paragraph to which I assumed "Still demanding proof there is a problem?" was also referencing. Otherwise it's just floating there without context...

    So you find me annoying and that gives you reason to lie, spew bullshit and not argue in good faith.

    Yes, I do find you annoying but I have not lied...

    The rest of your spew is all lies. You are not doing what you claim. You are just behaving like a child.

    Grow up.

    Ah, yes. Accusations of lying without backup. Something a child would do. Maybe follow your own advice?

  65. [65] 
    BashiBazouk wrote:

    Not running a purely small donor campaign is not running a small donor campaign no matter what "qualifiers" you add on to make it appear to fit.

    And yet it was what Nader was referring to...

    Ah, the website bullshit again.

    Yes, I agree your website is bullshit.

    Yet millions of people continue to use many other sites that have been hacked.

    And those sites have competent web developers behind them that fix the holes. Or they die and no one trusts them anymore...

    You were wrong about it being about the previous paragraph which is just another dodge and not really true. Another example of you being a liar which i did back by referring to your lies about what you are doing.

    Possible but I was not lying and you have yet to prove otherwise.

    Why are you so afraid to act like an adult?

    Why are you so incompetent in running an organization?

Comments for this article are closed.