1.) I said that deregulation policies began under Reagan, and I won’t dispute the fact that Clinton had some pretty dumb deregulation policies as well.

2.) Corporations may not be people in a legal sense, but they’re made up of, yep, people. Thus, human emotion (in this case, greed) does play a huge role. There’s a difference between companies being “competitive,” and manipulating the market by colluding in some areas, and ceding ground in others to maximize profits.

3.) To say that Obama’s been extreme as president is silly, to keep this friendly. With the exception of advancing stem cell research, he hasn’t been terribly successful in passing what’s truly a progressive cause. The fact that Republicans were allowed to gut the healthcare bill left and right shows that, or that 60 votes, not 51, was portrayed as a majority (the civil rights act was passed after a long filibuster ran its course, they all come to an end at some point) showed that Obama was definitely going for bipartisanship where there was none to be found. Republicans have no right to bitch and moan about “Democrats pushing through legislation” when they refuse to accept any compromises that they don’t come up with. At this point, Obama’s best move would be to call their bluff and say “you don’t want to truly compromise? ok, see ya.”

4.) If Americans didn’t want an at least somewhat progressive agenda, they wouldn’t have voted him into office. That simple. Much of our frustration is that he ran as a progressive, but now would seem to rather make Republican friends than reward us.

5.) Cronies? Dude. Seriously. Come on.

6.) The appointed positions you’re referring to that weren’t/aren’t filled because Republicans were/are blocking them out of spite for Obama.

7.) I agree 100% on the unemployment thing, I’ll be unleashing a column on that some time soon.

8.) I guess we don’t share the same definition of “progressive.” I would assume that my definition has a wider reach than yours?

Overall, I think that a progressive agenda would be embraced by far more people than one would think, we just need a president who’s willing to take that leap. Obama has definitely been very moderate in his policies to the point where some are questioning his competency. If he’s wondering if he needs to try even harder to be bipartisan, I hope someone asks him, did trying earlier do jack for you?

First of all, the deregulation to which to allude began under Clinton, not Bush. It was everyone’s dream to flood the market with the cash of home buyers. They got their wish until the banks realized that they’d never pay it back.

And secondly, corporations are not persons, despite what the Supreme Court might have convinced you. They don’t have feelings, emotions, nor the personal, emotion-driven behaviors of persons. Corporations cannot be “greedy.” They are supposed to be competitive. If you call that “greedy,” I suggest that you learn how a capitalist economy functions at the most basic of levels (even barter or two children in the sandbox deciding which toy to play with demonstrates this point).

I also think you’re absolutely incorrect about an already extreme president gaining political capital from taking even more extreme views. If anything, legitimate bipartisan effort is his last possible option, not burning the remainder of his political capital on “progressive” agendas that the majority of Americans do not want and will not tolerate at the ballot box next November.

It’s about time that Obama, you, and your cronies wake up. Obama’s nonsensical and meaningless catch phrases are over. Reliving the worst of Bush’s policies, sidestepping legitimate government things that are essential (like, perhaps, filling his cabinet), and figuring out what to do with millions of unemployed better become his top priority. Americans are angry, and for good reason. Obama pretended to be a fresh voice, but he has shown himself to be nothing less than a partisan hack no more worthy of compromise than his enemies.

I also have issues with you suggesting that Obama’s “base” is “progressives.” No matter how you define the political spectrum, progressives are an extreme fringe of American politics located far from Obama’s base. He’s going to find out just how true that is next November, which will stick us with a bunch of worthless Republican duds, because the democratic party has nothing to rally around except a president with no plan, extreme views, and no sense of compromise.