Obama's Presidency: Why Liberals Are Mad

[deacon blues]

One of the underreported things that is beginning to emerge in BO's presidency is the fact some of his biggest supporters that got him elected in 2008 are growing discontented about his performance. He hasn't governed liberally enough.

BO bent over backwards to accommodate the banking industry and Wall Street with bailout money. He re-appointed Republican Ben Bernanke to head up the Fed. He appointed Wall Street insider Tim Geihtner as Treasury Secretary. He got Obamacare passed, but he didn't even slightly push the public option and he didn't get it. His "stimulus" bill was more tax cuts than anything else. He escalated the war in Afghanistan and he started a new one in Libya. He made nice to the Chinese even though they continue to play unfair with trade and currency manipulation and as they continue to persecute dissidents and artists. He promised to close Guantanimo Bay the first day of his presidency but hasn't yet. He caved on allowing military tribunals for Gitmo terrorists rather than civil trials stateside. He has done nothing about gun control, even in the wake of the assassination attempt on Gabby Giffords, a prime opportunity for such a move missed. He made freeloader GE CEO Jeffrey Immelt, whose company has not paid any taxes for some time, and who has sent thousands of jobs overseas, the head of his so-called jobs commission. And now BO proudly has signed on to "the largest annual spending cut in our history".

With rising gas prices, a slow moving economy, a sluggish housing market, possible increase in interest rates and nearly 9% unemployment, Obama's vulnerabilities may increase. Could a liberal challenger rise up for the Democratic primaries in 2012?

Liberals will vote for him regardless in 2012 if there is no alternative on the Democratic side in order to retain him versus allowing a GOP candidate in the White House.

They will do it however pinching their noses.