Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Problems with Podesta’s Take on Obama’s Poll Numbers
The folks around Barack Obama are scratching their heads, wondering why his poll numbers are autumnal, hanging there in the low to mid-40s.
John Podesta, Clinton's old chief of staff who headed up Obama's transition team, recently offered his own view that the President got bogged down in the legislative details, for one, and as a result, he couldn't deliver on his pledge to transcend partisanship. And for two, the economy didn't recover quickly enough.
Well, let's look at these.
Obama's pledge bipartisanship always seemed either gimmicky or naïve, since the Republicans have been set on sabotaging him every step of the way. And this could have been predicted. In fact, it was. By none other than Hillary Clinton.
So Obama should have given up on this sooner, rather than clinging to it for so long. Or he should never have made it a campaign pledge in the first place, since it boxed him in.
As for the economy, it hasn't recovered quickly enough because Obama didn't frontload enough stimulus. And the theory was wrong.
"The idea was that you didn't have to get the unemployment rate to a certain number, but you had to get unemployment going in the right direction," Podesta told the New York Times.
But even if unemployment were dropping slowly, that wouldn't put food on the table for 14 million people still officially out of a job-and the millions more who stopped looking long ago.
It was this miscalculation, more than anything, that has kept Obama's numbers in the dumpster.
Plus, having Robert Gibbs and Rahm Emanuel rip into Obama's progressive base hasn't helped matters much, either.
Single payer, forget it.
Public option, no need.
Afghanistan, more troops.
Obama's opposition will always hate him.
But he's not given his own base enough support to remain energized.
He's not delivered enough for Independents economically to win them over.
And he hasn't stressed a consistent theme of progressive governance, which would give much-needed coherence to the hodge-podge that is his Administration.
54 Comments so far
Show AllObama will either come out soon, get his 'framing' together, and support some progressive legislation strongly -- such as a jobs program similar to FDR's National Recovery Act and the WPA -- and dare the GOP to vote against it, or he'll be buried by a Republican House majority for the next two years under silly bills of impeachment while they subpoena everyone he's ever known.
While he probably won't be impeached, neither will anything get done and he'll be defeated in 2012 as he is blamed for the even-more disastrous economy that will result.
President Palin? Probably not, but President Romney or Huckabee would be bad enough.
" it is only his cult branding that allows him to have 40% support. It should be only about 1%, the top 1% of the ruling elite in our nation, his actual base."
Good read of where we're at Jill, right on.
What I can't figure out is WHY the American people could not or would not face the fact that Obama sold them straight down the river just as much as a McCain/Palin ticket would've.
"Personally, I think it is only his cult branding that allows him to have 40% support. It should be only about 1%, the top 1% of the ruling elite in our nation, his actual base."
Jill, I agree with you 100%. It's the branding.
The same industry who sold Obama also sell sugar frosted processed corn bits to mothers and make them feel like they're giving their children a healthy breakfast. And then the moms wonder why the kids' teeth are rotting.
They sold to America a sugar coated corporate president, vetted and hired by a brutal, war mongering empire - and citizens wonder why their democracy is rotting.
Jill, I saw the article this morning, but didn't dare start to comment because I had to leave for a dr's. app't.
Now I'm back, and must thank you for writing "my" comment for me! ;)
Jill, I can't disagree with you. I supported Obama in 2008 as better than McCain and Palin (and I still think he is marginally better), but he has been a severe disappointment on many fronts, including reneging on his promise to not sign any health care bill that did not contain a public option; closing Gitmo; prosecuting members of the Bush Regime who violated the law (Cheney has admitted publicly he authorized illegal torture -- what more do you need?); continuing the Bush policies on everything from government transparency to drug enforcement; maintaining Bush's 'presidential perogative' to call anyone a terrorist and throw them in jail without due process; trying suspected terrorists in military tribunals instead of open court; extending the contracts of private corporations in the Middle East; and making himself look like a complete sap for pursuing voters, and the good graces of Republicans, at the expense of the people who went out and worked to get him elected.
Two things I've heard: 1) Obama's afraid of himself and his family being assassinated if he 'goes too far'; 2) He's trapped in the Washington bubble and by his advisors and, as smart as he is, takes that for reality rather than what's really going on in the world.
Of course, as other posters here have insisted, he could have been a corporate shill all along. I confess I just don't know, but I suspect that's not true from knowing some of his relatives. I think it's more likely his head was turned by occupying the office, as opposed to campaigning for it.
May be the fix is in? he'll be taking a "nixon" helicopter ride outta town because of the guv's trial. Biden better brush up on his "FDRs". A majority of the TPTB must have decided they don't want the ship-of-state to sink afterall (we can count on parasites to realise what happens if the host dies).
While Rothschild makes a couple of legitimate points, he's complicating a question unnecessarily.
The poll numbers for Obama are abysmal because his performance has been abysmal.
He owes his failure to his own cowardice and perfidy.
q
In other words, what you are describing to us Mr. Rothschild is a general fuckup...right?
History is not going to look kindly on the first black American president. I have a hard time believing that Obama is as incompetent as he appears to be. If he would have made any attempt to be the Obama he campaigned as, he could have been one of the great ones. “I will not sign a bill that does not have a strong pubic option”, where did that Obama go? That entire partisan BS is just that. The cons were going down and we the corporations in order to form a more perfect union could not stop it. They did the next best thing they put in a shill. If that is correct there is no way they will let Obama lose in 2012. An Obama in the hand is worth two bushes any day. How are they going to complete such a task, Obama should not be able to get elected dogcatcher? If it were I, I would keep the immigration fires burning to get out the Hispanic vote, and keep the racism embers hot to get out the black vote. My ace in the hole would be to split the cons and independents with a third party candidate. Palin is for sale to the highest bidder.
Would African Americans vote for OilyBomber purely because he is part African and against their own best interests as do many poor and lower middle class whites often vote against their economic interests?
Somehow I believe the obscene repression of Blacks have given them greater insight into selfpreservation.
Yes.
"If (Flopco) would have made any attempt to be the Obama he campaigned as, he could have been one of the great ones."
But he was never that person to begin with. He was never Obama; he was always Flopco.
Obama was a total phony from the get-go.
The real question, which Mr Rothschild ignores is...who's his daddy?
That is a very good question.
For all his reputation as a great communicator Obama has lived up to the sterotype of the disconnected liberal elitist that doesn't have a clue how to communicate to an increasingly dumbed down population. He whitewashed the crimes of Bush, appointed a Clinton cabinet, pushed a weak stimulus, expanded an unpopular war and then ignored the economy in favor of wasting 18 months on a corporate friendly health care reform bill. All this while pandering to people who were out to destroy him from day one. Not too bright!
He doesn't need to communicate, he needs to do. And if Obama had wanted to communicate on any progressive issues done so. Imagine if he had communicated cogently on Medicare for All? Imagine -- just for a second -- he had the cajones to tell Pharma the AHIP no, thank you -- and pushed ahead from there with the broad support of the people. He didn't. He communicated corporate love over and and over again, and told true progressives no, thank you. You can always change the word progressives to the middle class he told no to again and again.
He has not felt boxed in by many pledges why would he choose to be boxed in by Bi Partisanship?
Look at his appointees and you know who he is and what his agenda is.
OilyBomber is purposely destroying the middle class, the only bulwark against corporate fascism.
All that was needed was a massive renewable energy program and no wars
And everyone would be working and the world would be healthier.
FDR's appointee created 5 million jobs in one year by making up work for the most part,
Today we have massive needs and OilyBomber ignores them in favor of War, Oil, Coal,Highways,Nuclear Power and Weapons
I've written a letter to Daddy-O
His address is good old DC
I've written dear Daddy-O we miss you
And wish your pretty words fit your acts
Instead of a stamp I put kisses
The postman says that's best to do
I've written this letter to Daddeee-O ..
Saying .. the apologists still love youuuuu
He succeeded in transcending partisanship. Those with eyes-to-see, can see there is no substantial difference between R's and D's. They both are wallstreet/cityoflondon parties-of-empire.
President Obama's first mistake was his worst: Not pushing for a full blown prosecution of Bush and Cheney for war crimes.
For that he would've had to prosecute himself and his entire party as aiders, abettors, accessories and accomplices, so forget it.
Plus Obama fully intended to commit, as he is committing, the same exact war crimes, so what's your point?
I think CD's owners need to make a decision about what this site is going be. Is it going to be just another pseudo-liberal, Democrat apologist site with hand-wringing articles about how Obama needs be more responsive to his liberal base? Is it going to be a wingnut site for the left, where conspiracy theorists can tell us that bin Laden and Al Qaeda weren't involved in 9/11? I ask these questions because that's what this site is becoming, and that's most unfortunate, as we on the actual left desperately need cogent, scholarly sites to further our cause. We need content that enlightens us and informs us, not a bunch of ignorant, shallow, sophomoric, pseudo-liberal rubbish. Can't we at least agree to quit wasting time on Obama? He's just another pro-war, corporate Dem, not a failed or struggling liberal as this article implies.
Or it could become filled with people who insist Israel believed they were attacking an Egyptian Horse Carrier when they attacked the USS Liberty, that the Navy of North Vietnam attacked US ships in the Gulf of Tonkin and that Saddam Hussein had WMD's links to Al Qaeda and remote controlled aircraft thay were able to drop biological weapons on New York City.
Can YOU provide your best evidence that Al Qaeda was involved in 9/11 ? Before citing your Government's findings see above.
Yeah yeah, John, that's it...yeah. We demand more bipartisanship! Obama hasn't worked hard enough to appease the "NO-NO" party or reached out far enough to the Palin-drones who are convinced he's an "illegal alien half-breed Marxist-fascist-Nazi Muslim Anti-Christ". We demand more outreach, more going along to get along, more conciliatory transcendence. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Rothschild touched on only a sample of Obama's at least two dozen substantive betrayals, and Podesta's proffer is more absurd distraction. These kleptomaniacal political chessmen are many moves ahead ... toward checkmate, and Obama's briar patch predicament of faux partisan drama is merely an Escher hallucination, as if he was suddenly lobotomized and castrated on inauguration day. Yup, he's stymied alright; they've got him now ... right where he wants them, like frogs in boiling water.
When midterm control of congress "changes", predictably, from one troupe of overpaid partisan thespians to the other, then Social Security "reform" will be Obama's next great "achievement". It will be so traumatic and the GOP performance so theatrically diabolical, that voters will demand a second term for Obama and all his gallant horsemen. In the end they'll be grateful for a VAT tax exemption and price controls on cat food.
Dear Goombah and Democratic Button Man, John Podesta:
You and your man, Barack Flopco, are Herbert Hoover. Disregard everything except the nearly 22% unemployment (see shadowstats.com) and do the political math that even The Great Lout George Wanker Bush could do. Two years from now, it won't be any better because this is the way it's going to be from now on. No "Blue Sky Thinking" or gaggle of outrageous lies ("America's greatest days lie ahead") can save you. My advice to you and Herr Flopco is to make it official - switch parties and become Republicans. Get on that gravy train mach schnell because those asswipes will be succeeding you.
Hmmm
Some posters here seem to feel that the facts should never get in the way of opinion. For example; the outright lie that Al Qaeda was responsible for 9-11. The term "Al Qaeda" was coined by the US intelligence community in the early 1980's to describe the loosely knit group of Afghan "freedom" fighters resisting the Soviet invansion. There is NO actual "Al Qaeda" "terrorist" organization in existence today. This myth is perpetuated by the US media. Second the US including the President of the United States has publicly admitted that there is ZERO proof that Ben Laden was responsible for 9-11. Third the first country the US invaded after 9-11 was Afghanistan. Again the US has publicly admitted that in fact there exists Zero evidence that Afganistan had anything to do with 9-11.
The only "wingnuts" that participate here are those that are either naive enough to believe the zionist press, are actively aiding and abetting those that wish to continue the war and the expansion of Israel and the US oil/war machine, or sadly they are unable to seperate fact from fiction.
The reason that this site is evolving is because people are beginning to wake up to the truth. And that truth is NOT what is being force feed to the masses by the MSM and portions of the US government.
As for Mr. Obama's freefall in the polls the reason is simple. He was elected on a platform based on promises. He has reneged on the most important promises. First that he would end the war. In point of fact he has done the exact opposite. We have far more troops/contractors in the field than when Bush was president. He promised to shut down gitmo and end the secret prisons. Instead he has actually increased the numbers significantly. He promised open and transparent government-just the opposite has occured. Civil rights withered under Bush, they are being crushed under Obama. He appointed 2 zionists to the Supreme court, overlooking many far better and more qualified candidates. Instead of reigning in Wall Street he handed them the keys to the US Treasury. The list of betrayals goes on and on. It is clear at this point that Obama is already rendered himself a lame duck. As such he is far more dangerous to the Republic.
According to Bin Laden's son in the book " Growing up Bin Laden", Osama adopted Al Queda for his groups name (foundation).
And Mullah Omar had nothing to do with 9/11, in fact Omar had already ordered Osama to leave before 9/11.
But I do believe Cheney was aware of and facilitated 9/11 in many ways if not a participant in the original planning.
To discount the continued investigation of an extremely pivotal event is the height of censorship.
FDR had Hoover create a list of Japanese leaders, in Hawaii, to intern over a year before Pearl Harbor and the internment was implemented the very next day after Pearl Harbor.
"But I do believe Cheney was aware of and facilitated 9/11 in many ways if not a participant in the original planning."
And some believe in the Easter Bunny.
Why not first try to figure out the possible meaning of what you KNOW?
Perhaps waiguoren you have a link that shows that Cheney did not have a hand in 9/11. Perhaps you have one for the easter bunny too....
It is one thing to dis what someone says without proof.
It is quite another "to figure out the possible meaning of what you KNOW?".
Please enlighten us.....
waiguren 2:05 And once a majority of institutionally indoctrinated people believed the flat earth was the center of the universe.
Since you are so positive, I suggest you prove that Cheney did not have foreknowledge of 9/11.
There are a number of things like the Breifing Memo saying Bin Laden was planning on flying planes into buildings ( as I remember)
The picture on a Intelligence agency's booklet of planes flying into the WTC
Northwood
The Stock Puts on the involved airliners
Silversteins Insurance Policy
The fact that the attack was a widely shared secret, with many more people attacking the USA's financial system and even highjackers than reported.
And that many people in Kandahar knew of the attack beforehand.
I know from personal reports of a group of men fleeing an airliner in Dallas minutes after 9/11 and of at least one brokerage firm bunkrupted by a Middle Eastern arms dealer on 9/11.
The testimony that at least one building was closed and had cables installed before 9/11
That a Bush brother was head of WTC security.
Are all these coincidences?
And why was the Memo warning of the attack ignored ? Obviously USA intelligence learned of the attack that was a widespread open secret.
But what do I know? I just glean the facts and go where they lead rather than being sure of the conclusion before hand.
The DC rejection for an FBI field agents request for a warrant to examine a suspects computer "before he flew a plane into the WTC"
the Norad exercises concurrently mimicing the very same attacks
You guys nuts? You want proof Cheney was NOT in on 9/11? Come on, you can't prove a negative. Saying Cheney was in on it is an example of an extreme statement. Extreme statements require extreme proof. There isn't any. That is not to say he was not in on it, only that there is not sufficient proof.
If waguaren is so positve it is not true then it needs to proven untrue, if that is impossible than waguaren is ignorant to mock those who believe it may be true.
And some may believe there is enough circumstancial evidence to find him guilty as often happens in court.
It is not an unlikely or extreme statement given the fact that Cheney used 9/11 to start an extremely false, bogus and criminal War Against the Peace that only the braindead did not know before hand was an Extremely Criminal Action.
This resulted in extreme number of dead Iraq's.
Sorry considering everything no opened minded person would consider Cheney facilitating 9/11 as an extreme as only 3,000 died then compared to the 1 million we are sure he caused.
I'd be satisfied if Cheney were prosecuted for what he has admitted in public: he authorized illegal torture, contrary to his oath of office. (Same for his subordinate Bush the Junior.) It doesn't matter if Cheney or his lawyers don't think waterboarding and stress positions are torture -- they've been defined by the Geneva Conventions, international treaties, and the laws of the US as such. But, just as impeachment was 'off the table,' so is the prosecution of the Bush Regime for flagrantly violating the Constitution. Excuse me, that "goddamn piece of paper" as the Dauphin from Crawford called it.
The Khymer Rouge Jailer/Torturer recently convicted of Waterboarding among other crimes.
No such entity as Al Queda. Great observation, thanks. There was never a South Vietnam, it only existed in the mindlessness American public. South Vietnam was concocted by the USG Military Industrial Complex for the CORPORATE WELFARE KINGS, military contractor benefit. Make up countries and/or enemies for the purpose of perpetual wars, very "1984" isn't it. The USG propaganda and the politicians have a few buzz words and phrases. 1st, 'to keep American safe and secure the USG must make the world safe and secure'. What does this mean? It means that the Pentagon must make the world safe for the for the assets of the PREDATORY CAPITALIST WELFARE KINGS.These are the 'Americans'. These WELFARE KINGS locate outside the USA to avoid paying taxes while deriving the benefit of Pentagon protection worldwide, at taxpayers expense.Another favorite of Bush/Cheney 'our way of life is nonnegotiable' means that their wealthy benefactors, WELFARE KINGS, assets WILL BE PROTECTED. The Pentagon/spy agencies are the enforcers of the NSA/NSC mission statements which are to secure and protect the world's resources. The gullible, ignorant, intellectually lazy, mindlessness, the inability to discern thoughts, including the thoughts of others, from facts or truth,the American public construe the words 'our' and 'Americans' to mean them but they only refer to the PREDATORY CAPITALIST WELFARE KINGS.
"But he's not given his own base enough support to remain energized."
Well, if you consider taking a steaming dump on their heads as "support"....
"...Podesta's Take on Obama's Poll Numbers" is simplistic and old school. "The folks around Barack Obama are scratching their heads" because they are using a 20 year old DLC play book. The Internet has changed the political landscape forever. The Internet is the greatest threat to the order of things.
Our two party system operates on a wink and a nod. Harry Reid needs 60 votes - Bush only needed 50. Some entities are too big to fail but, "We" are on our own. Over half of federal revenue goes to defending the homeland while public schools are closing.
When Bush/Cheney were in power the Dem's biggest complaint was the (R)s were not playing fair. The (R)s were stealing too much money. There would be nothing left to steal when it was the (D)s turn. The (R)s had no respect for basic fairness - those bastards!
Today the Internet lets us see what our politicians are doing to US in real time. Past administrations were long gone before "We" knew what they had been up to. The Bush/Cheney gang pulled off the greatest heist since Alexander the Great. The US Treasury was drained and no money was reinvested in maintaining infrastructure. "We" still don't even know that "We" were robbed.
Clinton sent our jobs to China on behalf of his benefactors, the Walton family. Walmart was the number one beneficiary of the Clinton years. Clinton signed banking deregulation which made the crash of 2008 possible. Clinton ended the "Fairness Doctrine." and allowed a right-wing takeover of the media. "We" did not know Bill till he was out of office.
Obama was using the old DLC play book when he gave US ObamaCare, which won't take effect till 2014. Obama will be long gone before anyone even knows what happened. Obama made whole the very people who caused the financial collapse in 2008. "We" lost our 401K's and equity. Obama did not bring home the troops. Obama escalated the war. Obama's Nobel Prize acceptance speech appeared to be written by NeoCon speech writers. "We" see what Obama is doing in real time.
Podesta and the folks around Obama are living in the past. "We" are not. "We" on the left see no difference between (D) and (R). "We" on the left will not all be there on election day for (D)s. "We" on the left know full well that Obama has not been there for US. On the other hand, things are business as usual in (R)ville. The (R)s have not been enlightened by the Internet to the extent that the left has. The (R)s will all show up on election day and vote. (D)s will lose seats in 2010 and 2012.
Obama was given every opportunity this great land has to offer. Even timing was on his side. The times called for greatness. The people wanted change. Obama was too small to deliver. Our two-party system is to blame. Presidential candidates have become Plutocratic avatars.
The other things you posted about Clinton were true, but he did not end the Fairness Doctrine. The FCC repealed the FD in 1987 when Reagan was president.
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=2053
I didn't have the time to fact check the rest of your lengthy post, but I would say that error was a substantial one -- it opened up the airwaves for Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage and the like, and even the cable TV channels for the egregious Fox News and Glenn Beck. (Yes, cable is regulated to some extent by the FCC.) It also freed PBS to air right-wing tripe without an immediate response to correct the distortions and lies. That 1987 decision has had a profound impact on our lives and our politics.
Thanks for the correction. I did not realize the FD went way back to Reagan. You are much more likely to get spell checked than fact checked on CD. The right is entitled to their own facts, aren't we on the left? Blaming Clinton makes my case much stronger.
I used to really like BC. I bought his book - "My Life" in hardcover when it first came out. I could not read it. It was Bill blowhardin' about Bill. He just went on and on about himself. Thought about signing his name on the inside cover and selling it on ebay. (:<)
SJRyan, Bubba has enough to answer for -- including letting a mentally-disabled man, Ricky Ray Rector, be executed in Arkansas during the presidential campaign of 1992 because he didn't want to be accused of being 'soft on crime' by Poppy Bush -- without loading the ending of the Fairness Doctrine on him.
Perhaps you've heard the possibly apocryphal story about Wall St. bigwig Robert Rubin and 'free market' nutjob Alan Greenspan sitting Bill down in private just after he was elected and telling him in no uncertain terms that he was not going to be allowed to enact any 'liberal' economic policies while president. If he tried, the entire weight of the corporate-backed US media would come down on his head and they would make sure he was removed from office. Obviously, Clinton ran left and ruled right, especially in the economic sphere. Maybe he did the best he could under the circumstances -- maybe he even believed the rot he signed.
who cares what his poll numbers are?
I'd add he hasn't proven that he is on the side of WE THE PEOPLE over the banksters and the other multi-national corporate interests......
which is EXACTLY how FDR won the presidency 4 times!
People are waking up to the Uncle Tom. Something that we in the real left did at least 3 years ago. The "professional left" however is still giving the creep the benefit of the doubt.
I'll repeat, we would've been better off with McCain in the White House. Obama and the Democrats are getting away with right-wing and reactionary policies that Republicans could never pull off.
Obama was a brilliant move on the part of the American elite.
So true.
I reached that conclusion a year ago. By effectively fracturing the left and leading them into agreeing with the institutionalizing into 'legality' Cheney's agenda, Obama is FAR more dangerous to the future of this country than McCain/Palin ever could have been, who wouldn't have been able to do squat with a still ostensibly progressive minded and united democratic congress keeping them in check and investigated and still professing outrage against the exact same actions that, under Obama, they have fallen into into line supporting 'for the good of the party'.
Spigzone, do you mean the "ostensibly progressive minded and united democratic congress keeping them in check and investigated" that came into the majority in Congress in 2007? Yeah, they did a great job of investigating and keeping in check Junior Bush, didn't they? Why do you think they would go after McCain more than Obama? Under a President Top Gun, the Dems would be shivering in their boots, as usual, and the DLC would be collecting their fair share of corporate money no matter who's president.
How progressive is Rothschild and his ideas really? They seem very classically liberal to me. That is, he seems to want the people to be continued clients of the great server in the sky. Vote for the lesser elitevil and get jobz and other rewardz in return.
That isn't how it's supposed to work. We're supposed to build our own society/economy according to our own better interests.
What's stopping Rothschild from saying it?
Exactly!
I was thinking "Hodge-podge"? That is the best they can come up with? This is WAY beyond hodge-podge! This is flat out betrayal, and lies.
And I was FOR him, but after what went down with health care, and more - NOPE.
Mind you, I wouldn't trust John "Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran" (sneering) McCain, nor Sarah "Drill baby, drill" (smirking) Palin, one IOTA!
How sad.
The one I REALLY wanted was Edwards: Carolinas, southern boy, raised poor, made his own money, etc. Alas, he's just as awash with his own ego of warped thinking as anyone.
Given what we know NOW about Edwards, I am dumbfounded that he was arrogant enough to think that he could successfully run for the Presidency with a HIDDEN INFIDELITY and an ILLEGITIMATE baby and NOT think that this would BLOW UP IN HIS FACE AS PRESIDENT?
Of COURSE it would have, and it would have made SC Sanford's and DeMint's international embarrassments look like child's play.
SIGH.
Maybe we should have put Clinton in, but looking at her in her current role, she looks so haggard and worn. I'm not sure she would really be up to it then, and even less so, now.
Bottom line is we are always stuck with who is the least of all the evils.
What rot!
I wonder if all of you models of perfection could tell me just what you are doing to make this world a better place? How many of you are working to create change in this sick, corrupt society? Or is attacking Obama 24/7 the aim of your life? Do you have any positive ideas, or do you just get off by being negative? Common Dreams used to be a place where compassionate people could communicate with each other about the news. Now it has turned into a cesspool where those who dare to offer positive comments and constructive ideas are attacked and jeered at. How sad is that?