A certain absence of cognitive dissonance
[#1]We have to have Obama's back. As he is blocked and attacked by the Right, we need to be there with him. We are the majority. Let's act like it.
[#2]And please Mr. President, [a]make the banks and Wall Street pay. You're the boss, not them. [b] Lead the fight to get money out of politics – the spending on this election is shameful and dangerous. [c] Don't wait til 2014 to bring the troops home – bring 'em home now. [d] Stop the drone strikes on civilians. [e] End the senseless war on drugs. [f] Act like a pit bull when it comes to climate change – ignore the nuts, and fix this now. [g] Take the profit motive out of things that any civilized country would say, "this is for the common good." [h] Make higher educational affordable for everyone and don't send 22-year-olds out into the world already in massive debt. [i] Order a moratorium on home foreclosures and evictions. [j] Enact economic policy that will create good-paying jobs and spend the money that's needed to do that. Make your second term one for the history books.
Yes, paragraph #2 really does immediately follow paragraph #1.
But nothing in #2 will happen, why #1?
Mean Republicans did not stop Obama from doing [a], [b], [c], [d], [e], [f], and [i]. These can all be done at the President's discretion or by Executive Order.
Mean Republicans only stopped Obama from doing [j] because the Democrats didn't abolish the filibuster in 2009 (which Reid is only now talking about, in 2013). Ditto [h].
And [g] is so vague nobody can know what it means. But what cannot be done at the President's discretion or by Executive Order could be done by abolishing the filibuster.
So why do we have the President's back when he doens't have ours?