Let's put aside the promises Obama made but didn't come through on, as of this date. I was watching MSNBC Live just now, and Cenk Uygur asked a Congressman who is a member of the Progressive Caucus about possible cuts to Social Security. This guy, who is supposed to represent "progressive" causes, kept talking about how the retirement age may need to be raised in the near future because the elderly may be living longer in the distant future. Uygur pointed out that the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy should be done away with before there is any talk of changing Social Security, which certainly makes sense, unless you believe in some sort of social Darwinistic vision of society, presumably.
What is wrong with the Democratic Party of today? With "friends" like this guy, do we need a two party system? Why not just let corporations make all the decisions for us, which seems to be the Republican idea? The key question, for me at least, is why is this Congressman willing to essentially give something up that the majority wants while not insisting upon an end to the Bush tax cuts, before even agreeing to talk about budget cuts of any kind? And why does he keep repeating something that later in the show Uygur and his guests debunked, which is the idea that it's a near certainty that a couple decades from now, those over the age of 65 and not well-to-do are going to live much longer than they do now? Where is the evidence for that? Uygur or one of his guests pointed out that in fact there has been little or no change among that group's longevity over the last hundred years or so. Do any of you have any idea why so many Democrats seem to lack the basic skills for their jobs?
For most Democrats, the image that comes to mind is the "90 pound weakling" who gets sand kicked in his face while lying on the beach (by the muscular guy, who of course represents the Republicans of today). As a young man of today might say, "hit the gym, dude, or find a job that's right for you !"