"I thought him a better politician and statesman than he has turned out to be. He is run of the mill ..."

Remember what those reforms were? The legislation that created HMOs, PPOs, etc. Those technocratic ideas also promised to lower cost and broaden access. They did nothing of the sort. But they did help increase consumer disatisfaction.

It's pointless to try to figure out the ideology of this bunch, because they consider themselves above and beyond both ideology and partisanship. While at the same time they consider the mere mortals who raise objections to their ideas as purely ideological or merely ill-informed.

There is a difference between being technocratic and being pragmatic. Unfortunately, we all are going to have lots of opportunities in the real world to experience exactly what those differences are.

Robert Kuttner on Moyers held out hope that by Fall 2010 Obama might realize his timidity is a problem and start acting more forthrightly as a progressive.  I think that unlikely and even if Obama does it will be too late.  He will almost certainly lose ground in Congress and he is perceived by the public [accurately with respect to HCR (by Leiberman et al), stimulus (Snow and Collins), continuing Bush big bank bailouts (Geithner & Summers), continuing/defending Bush detention policies & torture (by Cheney unbelievably enough)] not as a leader but as one who is led.

had he really, truly been passionately interested in a public option, he'd have expended political capital on it. he might still not have gotten it, but his constituency would have been heartened by the effort. he couldn't be bothered.

his political history, as came out during the primaries, told us this. people don't change what works for them.

Anyway, I realize that this stuff shouldn't matter, but it's all part of the mix. And while I still like both candidates a lot (which is what's kept me on the fence for so long), I guess I finally decided that Bill Clinton was right: voting for Obama is a roll of the dice. I still don't know whether Obama is likely to be the Democratic Ronald Reagan (my hope) or the next Democratic Jimmy Carter (my fear), but I like his temperament, I like his judgment, I like his foreign policy, I like his obvious ability to inspire, and I think he's more likely to be RR than JC. I guess I'm willing to roll the dice.[added emphasis]

as a self-affirmed longtime Democrat, where would you go really?

Can intelligent people please stop asking this question? See if this analogy helps: Think of the Democratic Party as an abusive spouse, and the voters as the beat-up, constantly taken-for-granted, humiliated and cheated-on abused spouse. Would you ask that person, "How can you leave your wife/husband? I mean, realistically, where would you go?"

Of course not. Because the obvious answer is the same: Anywhere is better than here. And sticking around is not going to change anything, except maybe for the worse.

Some people still don't understand the point of a protest vote. Or the point of entirely ditching a person, or group of people, who consistently oppose your interests and your values.

After the primary debacle I happily left the Democratic Party and at this point I have no intention of returning. I voted Green. (I could also have voted Republican, Socialist, Nader, or Libertarian. See? Lotsa choices.) I still vote for Dems in my local elections but recently, just last week, a local Dem who I not only voted for but donated to and campaigned for, just voted the wrong (i.e., opposite of why we voted for him) way on a very important issue to a lot of people in this county.

I expect that without the banking crisis, we would have easily passed a better health care bill and a better climate/energy bill. The national conversation would have been entirely different.

Yes, Obama campaigned on health care and green jobs during the election, and won. But between the election and the inauguration, the downturn went freefall.

* our wise POTUS needed no (Mc)Chrystal ball *

Obama dared not reject the sunk-cost fallacy of continuing external warfare -- he had capitulated already by taking up his destined role as quasi-god POTUS. His military advisers only needed him to see in his shaving mirror Marcus Aurelius, wise guardian of the Empire.

Could our semi-divinized POTUS cut the military budget by 50%, could his divine genius recall within our borders our far-flung military, could his nobly crowned brow conceive and make real a peaceful and provident life here? It cannot happen.

POTUS can't hold on to power unless he embraces his Fate. Obama and the elites, military and civilian, must alienate most people and sacrifice the lower ranks of the military. Pfc Boots-on-the-Ground might just catch a whisper of Kipling's advice: To a young British soldier.

When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains,
And the women come out to cut up what remains,
Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier.

Armies from Alexander's to those of the current incarnation of POTUS find in Afghanistan their non plus ultra.

Look at the failing corporate state of Ameristan: its lobbyists fund brown shirts, its churches endorse xian thugs, its dominionist ("C" Street--Family) agents infest both House and Senate, its laws feed the avaricious instead of using power to "provide for the general welfare."  

The Romans understood the behavior of all ensnared by the logic of power as an end -- "Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make demented."