Almost three years ago, way before Barack Obama was even the Democratic nominee, Michael Tomasky wrote a column titled "Obama the anti-Bush," presciently predicting that Obama’s bipartisany oppositeness to The Worst President Ever would be a huge asset should he run for president. A year later, Paul Krugman even more presciently referenced that same column while exhorting Democrats to be more like Bush:
So, here’s my worry: Democrats, with the encouragement of people in the news media who seek bipartisanship for its own sake, may fall into the trap of trying to be anti-Bushes—of trying to transcend partisanship, seeking some middle ground between the parties.
That middle ground doesn’t exist—and if Democrats try to find it, they’ll squander a huge opportunity. Right now, the stars are aligned for a major change in America’s direction. If the Democrats play nice, that opportunity may soon be gone.
Two years later, we are staring Krugman’s prediction square in the face. If Obama were a Democratic Dubya doppelganger, he would have made it clear from Day 1 that he would not settle for anything less than big wins on financial and healthcare reform, economic stimulus, and carbon emissions, and he would have used the presidential megaphone to make the case for them loudly and aggressively. He’d talk about his mandate from the American people, lean on Congress, accuse the Republicans of obstructionism, and refuse to sign any bill that was not to his liking. If he failed, so be it, but at least he’d go down swinging.
There would be no question about what policies Obama favored, and there would be a nonstop drumbeat to build public demand for those policies. If Bush could win as much support as he did for nakedly wrongheaded policies like invading Iraq, torturing prisoners, and illegally wiretapping Americans, just imagine how much support Obama could get with an all-out PR blitz for saving the economy, saving the planet, and saving Americans from the insurance industry.
Instead, Obama has shown little fire and little urgency, standing on the sidelines while Blue Dogs and Republicans stall Dawn Johnsen and whittle his campaign initiatives down to nubs. On healthcare, his support for the public option is fickle and unconvincing: He says he wants the public option, he prefers the public option, yet he was perfectly fine with letting Max Baucus stall it so that the teaturfers could turn Democratic town halls into armed madhouses. He made it very clear that he’s willing to jettison the public option to pass something he can call healthcare reform, and backtracked (slightly) only when the Progressive Caucus refused to roll over as planned.
This all might not be quite so hard to take if Obama were at least the Anti-Bush on policy, but that’s where he’s chosen to be Bush Lite. Yes, he pushed for a stimulus bill and a climate bill and healthcare reform, but he also let Republicans and conservadems turn them into corporate giveaways… probably because he’s surrounded himself with an economic team so pro-corporate that it believes in rewarding the people who sank our economy at the expense of everyone else. He’s escalated our military presence in Afghanistan, and resisted releasing the next wave of Abu Ghraib photos or prosecuting Bush’s torture architects.
President Obama took office at a moment of great risk and great opportunity, with the winds of recession and broken government in his face, and popular support and huge congressional majorities at his back. The situation was tailor-made for a president who is the Anti-Bush on policy and Bush Lite on politics, who would battle to roll back everything Bush did wrong. What we got was President Broder, who values bipartisanship above all else, and still believes that the party that drove America off a cliff is worth listening to. How’s that working out for us?
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Actally he’s Clinton Lite.
Same triangulation. Same insincerity.
Being gay I tend to notice this sort of mendacity first. It’s the world you “let” me live in cha-cha cha.
Crap, I really should have included his godawfulness on gay rights in my Bush Lite inventory. Mea maxima culpa.
Same here. You can sniff the mendacity from a mile away. It’s like the smell-test version of a “dog whistle.”
Once he had Rick Warren do the invocation, I knew it was going to be all downhill.
I never expected him to be a progressive, but I hoped that he would at least be able to use his charm and popularity and eloquence to advance some well-thought-out policies, but I’ve been pretty disappointed on both fronts.
And Heckuva Job Brownie appears to be running his political team.
This about catches it:
From the comments at http://icantbelieveitsnotademo…..#comments:
Comments
Let’s look at what obama has done, shall we?
* Advancing policy of “indefinite preventive detention” – more accurately called “permanent incarceration”, even when no proof of crime exists.
* Betraying workers by ignoring campaign pledges to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and pass labor reform (the Employee Free Choice Act).
*Choosing Monsanto hacks Michael Taylor & Dennis Wolff to be in charge of food safety.
* Continuing Bush’s illegal spying programs.
* Continuing torture policies.
* Despite campaign promises to the contrary, beginning to signal an intent to roll back and partially privatize Social Security and Medicare benefits.
* Escalating wars in South Asia and continuation of war crimes, crimes against humanity (depleted uranium weapons, wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians)
* Hiding behind rhetoric of withdrawl while actually maintaining and increasing war crimes in Iraq.
* Increasing funding of the military-industrial complex.
* Installing war criminal Lt. General Stanley A McChrystal, George Bush’s Commanding General, Joint Special Operations Command, as Commander of U.S. Forces, stepping up wars in South Asia.
* Invoking the “state secrets” and refusing to release information or respond to lawsuits emerging from Bush era policies.
* Justifying treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity with a faux and manufactured “”global war on terror”.
* Maintaining secret prisons.
* Promoting public funds for the auto industry that will be used to cut U jobs, wages and benefits while subsidizing GM’s continuing shifting of jobs overseas.
*Promoting the lie of a “jobless recovery”, that somehow we have “put out the fire” even though the assault against middle class and working American jobs is increasing.
* Refusing to hold anyone in previous administration accountable for crimes, treason, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.
* Reviving military commissions and supporting indefinite detentions without due process.
* Spending trillions of federal dollars on taxpayer handouts to benefit Wall Street firms and not “main street” – directly contradicting his campaign rhetoric.
* Suppressing of U.S. torture practices.
* Sustaining Bush’s abrogation of habeas corpus rights.
* Taking the only option that even he admits provides universal coverage, single payer, out of the debate.
* Capitulating to marginalized repugs and the blue dogs, watering down healthcare reform to the point where it approaches little more than public give-aways to insurance companies and providers instead of promoting universal access and cost controls.
I have seen enough of this fool
Posted by: joe | August 18, 2009 at 09:29 AM
Obama is a fraud. Reid is a fraud. Steny Hoyer, Rahm, etc. They’re all corporatists, beholden only to their corporate masters. As are all repugs and most dems. Wake up, folks. We’ve been had once again. There will be no change. It’s all a dog and pony show while the real players continue to rape and pillage, hoping we’ll be content to get a few scraps from their lavish banquet.
Yeah, that’s about where I’m at. But this post was running a little long as it was…
We did not hire Obama. The corporate oligarchy did, and their choice was a clever one.
I voted for him in the California primary. He said he would filibuster retroactive immunity for the telephone companies for helping the NSA illegally wiretap us.
When the bill came up in the Senate, he voted to kill the filibuster. Then he voted to give the phone companies retroactive immunity. I voted for Nader, and I haven’t regretted my vote.
My God, it’s even worse than I thought.
Neither did I expect him to be progressive, Eli. Once last summer my dad busted out the “most liberal senator” line and I laughed out loud at him. I said, “no that’s code for the most BLACK senator dad. He’s no liberal.”
And he’s not.
There just wasn’t an alternative vote; what was I gonna do, not vote or vote McCain? One just gets to a point of feeling held hostage.
Exactly. It is Clinton all over again. And Hillary would have been the same. Edwards had a chance of being liberal, but I don’t know if he was being honest about that.
We’re going to have to work with what we have. Our strongest play is keeping the progressive caucus together to vote down bills.
Hahaha! Yeah, I laughed at the most liberal senator line, and how it wouldn’t die despite being so patently ridiculous.
Even in the primary, there wasn’t a whole lot of choice. Hillary might have been *slightly* more progressive, but I found most of her campaign team to be seriously repellent. I was pulling for Edwards, and… well.
Soon you’ll be able to add:
* Forced the public to guarantee Health Insurance Company profits
It’s sobering to think that if we do get healthcare reform with a meaningful public option, it will be *in spite of* Obama, not because of him.
I do wonder whether that was the plan all along, that healthcare “reform” was *always* sleight-of-hand, or if he merely acquiesced when his plan got hijacked and perverted into a corporate giveaway.
God dammit.
Sorry, great post, and what a great list @5.
God dammit.
I’m telling you I’m getting angrier now at this administration than I was at the last.
OK, that might be a stretch. But it’s close.
What in the hell are we supposed to do???
Vote for the Democrat, we get this shit. Vote for the Republican we get that shit. Don’t vote or vote for a third party, we likely get Republican shit.
Seems to me like we’re doomed to get shit.
Huh, life in the good ‘ol USA today.
You’ll get shit and like it!
God dammit.
As have I. He’s a total fraud. Change my ass. It’s business as usual, and the dems are all a bunch of cowering pussies. I hate Reid almost as much as I do Lieberman. They’re nothing but traitors.
If blow jobs and sex remained in private, and weren’t job killers for DEMS (cough – Vitter -cough) Edwards would have been fine.
I could care less who he had sex with.
Yeah, but at least you’re not getting shit!
I don’t think he’s clinton lite at all, I think he’s a republican dressed up as a democrat, I think he’s a blue dog
I’m coming to believe it was the plan all along; for both him and Hillary. The tip off was in the mandatory coverage pieces of their plans, and how they danced around it. Both of them.
They were both looking down the road, with the same available Dem talent pool for the next admin, and figured, “What we’ll have to do, is co opt the big money away from the Republicans. That’ll work to get 2 terms.”
It might seem tinfoilhattish of me, but that’s what I think in retrospect.
I have no doubt that Mr. Obama has a set of testicles, he has two beautiful little daughters, the reproductive function works.
Unfortunately, Testosterone also fuels the aggressive side of the human male.
I have yet to see that manifested.
In other words, grab yerself and man up.
Tell these crazy motherfuckers where the bear shits in the woods
and start swinging like a drunk on a bender.
Eventually you will hit one of these recalcitrant bastards square in the mouth and draw blood.
That will garner the attention of the rest of the 27%’rs and like any self serving hyeana, they will run the fuck away.
I seem to see a pattern of No Balls.
Does anybody remember SCTV’s Perry Como/”Mr. Relaxation” parodies?
The one where he was so mellow he was lying prone on the stage, crooning “I Will Survive”?
Well, that.
LOL!
BTW, saw your comment over at Digby’s about President Hamsher; rock on!
I assume you’re describing your own state of perfect calm and equanimity, right?
I don’t normally blogwhore or photowhore, but if you’re Digby fans, you might like this pic here:
Helloooo!!!
Terrific! I just love her. It’s stupid how much of a fanboy I am for her.
I want to make her dinner, and make her drink too much merlot so she just starts channeling Perlstein but in her funny, pithy way.
Yes, I am a dork.
Obama is nothing more than a blatant political opportunist who prides himself as a blank slate onto which one can project their aspirations and ideology. He will continue to be an enigma because it is his defining characteristic. He is a tragically flawed individual who has no real sense of who he is beyond what others say they would like him to be. How else could you even attempt to label him both the Anti-Bush and Bush lite all in the same breath?
The real question is, ‘what are progressives going to do about it?’
The public option is out. What will you all do now?
She is really, really sweet in person. Another Pittsburgh blogger and I caught her by herself at the end of the closing keynote, and she was very nice, and very generous with her time. I think we mainly talked about how much effort we put into our respective blognames and aliases…
Hey, FDR could be described as both Bush Lite and the Anti-Bush, and he worked out pretty well.
But his Bush-Liteness on policy kinda feeds into his Anti-Bushness on politics – he doesn’t press for progressive reforms because he doesn’t especially want them.
Rather than rant (I agree with the rants, but as I was not an Obama fan from the getgo, it’s old for me), I’ll make an observation. If you read “Dreams” the same way I did, it’s all about process; results never make an appearance. That is, what’s important to Obama, qua community organizer, is getting people together to talk. There’s very little (if anything) in the book about what all this “gettogetherness” accomplished.
Of course, now he’s in a position of national responsibility and some expect results. Seems he’s short suited on how to accomplish that.
Great illustration, Eli. Bush as Blue Dog giving us the finger. That sounds like our man BO all the way.
But is at least some of it not his fault? My phrase for the day is:
Rahm = Rove
That’s a very revealing observations, which dovetails perfectly with bipartisanship for its own sake. As long as you get a bill – of some kind – at the end, it’s a win.
He hired him, and he knew who and what he was when he hired him. Ditto for Summers and Geithner.
What is really heart-breaking about Obama is that we know he has the intellect to understand why single-payer is the only effective solution to reduce cost and provide universal coverage. We know he understands the requirements of our Constitution and our treaties and laws. We know he understands why union check-off is so crucial to reviving our unions. He knows all these things, yet ignores them and continues Bush’s reactionary policies.
The articulate and charismatic Obama could have been a great president, but he is selling out all the people who worked so hard to get him elected. He has thrown his lot in with the DLC corporatists and imperialists. He is becoming the real American Tragedy.
Reads like a Hugh’s list..
Keep it up!
Yep. At least Dubya was too stupid and unevolved to know better. Obama almost always comes across as a very smart, cool, in-control guy, but as a president he’s ranged mostly between weak and corrupt.
I think we should get Betsy to help us. In the Jon Stewart interview she was moaning about taking the $500 billion from medicare and extoling the benefits of the program. Saying Medicare has changed seniors’ lives.
Also? Sean Hannity just introduced her as DR. Betsy McCaughey.
Who knew?
I’ve been noodling that observation for a long time, waiting for the right time to make it. The other very revealing part about “Dreams” is that he wrote it a long time after he had the experience. There’s nothing in the book, like an epilogue, to tell the reader how life worked out for all those people who were “important” to him in those years. From which I concluded that he doesn’t give a FF about them. They were cogs in his wheel of power. Just like the progressives. Once he got what he wanted, they and we are dead to him.
that’s a great post, accept for this
he’s no fool, we are, we are still supporting him like he’s gonna change or something
And you know, I am tired of people saying that I am unSerious if I want to vote 3rd party.
I’m not talking Nader, and I’m not talking greens. I’m talking something new. Because I am just having trouble justifying my own personal behavior of voting Dem, Dem, Dem and expecting a different result.
I’m not in it for the party, I’m in it for results and I want different ones, and I think it’s rational to then do something different.
I think that it may be important to consider that maybe presidents, whether Bush or Obama, are creatures of their times. We live in diminished times, with a government infested at levels with the decades-old rot of corruption. Key American institutions, including healthcare and the economic-jobs creation engine, are broken almost beyond repair – certainly beyond easy solutions. Armed thugs are in the streets and theocon conspirators are waiting in the wings (and probably in the military rank and file). Domestic terrorism is legitimized and now on Main Street. Government is now militarized, vast and inhumane, left over from the last guy. Our morale, our hopes and our dreams have all taken a huge hit. We have just emerged with an 8 year flirtation with fascism, with many of its agents still working at the desks they were put in by the ancien regime. This is the country that Obama inherited, and he’s part of it too.. we all are, in some way. Nothing gets fixed over night. You can’t just wipe away the cob webs. There are no clean breaks.
Obama promised not progressivism but bipartisanship and healing. That was the change he wanted to give us. I wanted progressivism, which is why I did not support him in the primary, and only supported him in the general because the alternative would have meant that the shrubbish flirtation with fascism would continue, if not worsen, under McCain and Palin. This must have been completely and absolutely clear to anybody listening to any of his campaign speeches with a critical ear – what Obama stood for, and I shouted it here and elsewhere, generally to deaf years.
Well, now he’s our president, and he IS delivering on the core of what he promised, with the tools he promised to use. And, yes, some of those tools may even be a little authoritarian (although much less so than under shrub) because those are the times we live in. So why are we all blaming him all of a sudden? He deserves time, and we’ll ultimately have to hold him accountable. If I remember my history correctly, even JFK didn’t find his footing in his first year or even his first couple of years. Its been 7 months here. With an imperfect man for imperfect times. We need to give it time and keep on fighting for what we believe in. But if we think that Obama is Bush-lite, we’re so, so wrong.
Your point about institutional corruption is well taken. Bush was swimming with the tide on that one, but his progressive double would be swimming against it. That being said, I still don’t get the sense that Obama particularly wants to even try, or that he views progressives as anything more than occasionally useful, but often recalcitrant tools.
If only Superman could spin the world backwards and we could take another look at Hillary.
That’s right.
Cindy McCain = Buffalo Chip (remember?)
Progressives = Bargaining Chip.
Bleh.
I think it would play out much the same, actually. We’d just have rampant sexism on the right instead of rampant racism.
I honestly don’t see anything getting fixed at all. There’s been no significant change in much of what’s been wrong. “Bipartisanship”, at least as it’s been defined in DC, isn’t going to get it done.
What’s sad is that Obama is exactly what many people wanted – that “new kind of politics”, “post-partisan” form of politics where you don’t have to risk anything to get what you want. His Administration is proof that you get what you pay for.
his administration is proof yet again, power corrupts, as soon as he saw he had power he began corupting himself
this man will not only destroy our country, he will destroy any hope of returning it for we will ALL lose faith in democracy
this is not going well at all
bed for me, nite all
Oh jeezus, thank you. I’ve been traveling a few days and come back to this post and comments and think I might have to leave here for good. I agree.
Do people study history at all? So many issues took generations of activism and organizing to correct in society.
It amazes me that anyone could have seriously believed that Obama would somehow be able to charm Republicans across the aisle, or even Blue Dogs into *not* crossing the aisle. I hoped that maybe he would be able to appeal directly to their constituents to put pressure on them, but that really hasn’t happened.
Sure, if he can get bipartisan support for a good bill, that’s fantastic, but compromising to pass a watered-down piece of shit that’s *still* totally Democrat-owned? That’s just nuts.
but Obama isn’t that progressive double. He never said he was. He said he was for a new center- building bipartisanship at the middle. He never liked us. We were never his people. But he will work with us, I truly believe… but we have to work all the more diligently to persuade him to do so, not accuse him of betraying a side he was never on. As for charming Blue Dogs.. he’s practically one of ‘em. But he’s a pragmatist. They’re resisting him now only because he did the right and listened to us.. letting us guide him a bit toward the left, where we needed him to go but possibly beyond his comfort lone.
I don’t even know why I’m defending him. I never campaigned for him. But we do need to rebuild our country, and, for that, we need him.
It’s proof that NO one can be elected president that isn’t beholden to corporations. I don’t see that genie going back into the bottle.
Democracy my ass….
Obama’s contributions were overwhelming on the side of the smaller donations, shattering all records for this. He could send out one email blast and raise the total amount he received from Wall St firms for instance. Most politicians cannot do that.
How would this make Obama a slave to BigMoney exactly? Did this dynamic exist by chance, or by Obama knowing what he was doing?
Read this. Not so much.
http://www.cfinst.org/pr/prRel…..easeID=216
I don’t have a link, but I think Obama raised much more money from corp donors than from small donors. He certainly raised record amounts from small donors, but I think even that was swamped by the corp donations, esp from Wall St. Anyone here who has the link, correct me if I’m wrong.
And there we have. Thanks for the honesty. PUMAs want the healthcare proposal to fail so they can say, “See, we were right!1!!” Just ignore the majority of time when we were fantastically wrong.
Sister (Harriet) Christians.
Look at opensecrets.org and see who got the most PHrMA money of the Pres candidates. It was Obama.
Little people are great, but they’re bargaining chips. You can deal them away, a couple at a time, unlike the BigMoneyBoyz.
I think you are right….and the lobby money right now on health care is going all directions.
I don’t think I ever said that I thought he was a progressive and I most certainly never did, but that doesn’t make it any less frustrating to watch him squander a golden opportunity to both fix the country *and* enhance the Democratic Party’s image.
He’s pushing bipartisanship and compromise even when it’s obviously not working, and he’s going to hand the country back to the Republicans so they can finish what Bush started.
As for working to persuade him… how? It took an all-out full-court press to get the progressive caucus to stop fake healthcare reform that he was very ready to sign, and he was clearly neither prepared for it nor happy about it. I don’t see any way to get in his ear at all, other than indirectly by trying to influence Congress.
He was the wrong choice for this moment, but unfortunately we didn’t really have any alternatives, at least not for the last 6-8 months of the campaign season.
Respectfully, if you think this is about PUMAs you’re really mistaken in my opinion.
It’s about the results we are seeing unwind in front of us, which are not acceptable to those who voted for the AGENDA, not the man.
DING!
There’s always 2012. If Obama tanks (he can, especially if he keeps following advice from Rahm, Summers, and Geithner), Hillary could pick up the pieces.
President Broder – that’s gotta sting.
Time to think through your entire strategy while on vacation, Barack. A first great step would be a change in the Chief of Staff. He’s absolutely ruining your brand — or the brand the American people thought they were buying last year.
I suspect he’d take it as a compliment, actually…
It would have amazed me, too, but I’ve seen too many examples of the power of wishful thinking. Obama capitalized on that big time. During the first half of last year, checking his ads for information content was a joke. Even by the standards of such things, they said nothing meaningful about what he thought we should do to make the country better. He just let people fill in the blanks, and they did.
There are certainly times when compromise is necessary. We’ve actually done a lot of that in our history. But we’re not there now, and it’s not necessary or desirable. So, yes, it’s nuts.
Hillary’s even worse than Obama. Pay attention to what she sez about foreign policy. For example, she’s sending $80 million in weapons to Somalia which ends up on the weapons market PDQ. Somalia is the worst human rights disaster on the planet, except for Congo and what the U.S. has created in Iraq-Af-Pak, all courtesy of the U.S. Hillary is fully supportive of these destabilizing U.S. efforts.
Haven’t read that one, but remember another group (forget the name) who was trying to peddle the same idea that Obama’s small donor numbers were inflated, but careful reading showed they were being very misleading limiting time frames and the comparisons they were using.
Even using your link, this is what I was referring to, and my statement stands:
Yes, he even shattered corporate donations as well. I ask again…did this happen by chance, or does he know how to get shit done?
Im not sure i buy the meme that Obama is failing because he is too “nice” . I am thinking about all the appointments made( and NOT made)..why is John Kerry not sec. of state? he practically BEGGED for that job.Its probably why he was one of the first to jump on the Obama bandwagon.Hilary Clinton was ( and probably is) not high on Obamas people to look out for list.. but that would have left Hillary Clinton in the senate, instead of the “10 year trigger” man john kerry. I think Axlrod has very very very big ambitions, and so does his protege, but they dont necessarily have to do with “change we need”. Money and power, power and money. so keep up the good work.The Media is starting to change its tune and scrappy progressive taking down Obamas corporate agenda is as great a tag line as any as far as they are concrened.
There may actually come a time when the birthers, baggers and Republicans are actually defending and praising Obama. They’ll soon realize he’s really on their side and Obama will be so pleased and go on the TV machine, dripping with charm and “elequence” and tell the public that bipartisanship has finally worked for the benefit of the average American. Vindication at last and the corporatists will be giving each other high fives out of camera range and the pundits and newsreaders will have a collective orgasm.
I think he genuinely has faith in corporations and their leadership. It’s hard not to if you went to school with their CEOs. Again, he’s a man of his times.. at the older end of my own generation. I kinda understand what he’s all about. I don’t agree, but I think I get him.
Thanks for that. Obama did receive a lot of small donations, but he received a lot of big money donations as well. In fact, I suspect that it’s hard to get all those small donations without at least a few of the big ones to get a candidacy started. Otherwise, how do you pay for those receipt envelopes and websites?
He’s doing the shit that he wants to get done. That’s the point. And the shit he’s getting done is not what I, and a lot of others, want done.
I’m sorry but I’m old enough to realize that things don’t change overnight.
However, you usually do see the direction change quickly. And I’m not seeing that here. His stances on detention, military tribunals instead of court trials, and stuff like them could have been changed quickly, overnight in fact, because they don’t require Congressional action. Plus, I believe he is out and out violating some of what he DID spell out in the campaign.
Transparency anyone??? Remember the era of the most transparent government ever??? And yet everytime push comes to shove he reverts to the default rather than even nudge toward change. And his continued insistence on “looking ahead” instead of holding people accountable for breaking the law is another position that’s his choice, and his choice alone, and could’ve changed overnight.
I didn’t expect health care overnight (in fact was perfectly conent with the 1913 start date even though IMO that’s too long), but on issues where he, and he alone, could have made changes, or at least change directions quickly, he either hasn’t done it, or done it with talk only (no action to back it up).
My opinion, of course, YMMV, and I’m wrong so often it hurts, and I hope I’m wrong on this administration. But I’ve gotta be honest, if another election were held today, I would either not vote or pick a third party much like I did in 2000 when I voted for Nader.
He won’t have the time to rethink anything. Tiger Woods is going to help him with his golf game. Will come in handy when he wants to play a round or two with Jack Welch or Rupert Murdoch.
I hate to say it here, but I actually agree with her hawkishnes on foreign policy in general. She would, however, have taken a much more solidly liberal tack on healthcare reform and the economy though.
The corporate media played up the “small donations” while ignoring the really big money he was collecting from the high rollers.
It also says he raised about as much in small donations as bush did in ‘04. Alot of those supposed small donations were from repeaters. Corporate america paid for his campaign. What we are seeing now is him doing their bidding. SSDD…
Hope you weren’t living in Florida in 2000!
I’ve noticed that the comment threads at TPM still trend toward knee-jerk support of Obama, with some earlier today, while acknowledging Krugman’s expertise in other areas suggesting he was off the mark with his column about Obama losing progressives and basically that he should STFU.
I’ve never been much in the blind faith department, personally.
Why do you think it is wise for the U.S. to arm the world? Or frame the foreign policy issue any way you want to defend being a hawk.
Can you say anything more about that/your frame of mind? I had thought by the time of his generation the authority/flannel suit figure had waned.
Not anymore. Every time I get one of those e-mails now, I write back to say, “Until I get my gay rights, you don’t get any more of my gay money.”
Well, if we get it in 1913 at least it’ll be in time for the 1918 flu epidemic.:)
What Obama represents is not progressive policies but an opportunity for progressives to broaden their base to the point of being a majority. And that is done institutionally. And this week, the most important event was and ActBlue campaign raising $350,000 for the 65 Congressional Progressive Caucus members who pledged to hold the line, and doing it in what? less than four days.
Now here’s how we can broaden the base. Tap our own personal networks to donate and add to the total contributions. Tap into other coalitions who might consider a similar drive in the future for another legislative priority.
A second institutional priority. Finding out where the lobbyist money is going and and holding the Representatives accountable for doing the people’s work. I’m not sure we need to send Mike Stark out again, but there needs to be some way of getting behind the communication machines to demand straight answers from members of Congress.
A third institutional change is the use made of video to inform constituents of what their representatives were doing. Viral YouTube and local market placement of ads. And we need some continuing way of funding these efforts because we are in a long-term struggle beyond healthcare.
A fourth institutional change was our attention to the markup sessions and the fact that most of them were streamed by the committee as well as by C-SPAN
Last, there needs to be a progressive candidate recruitment and vetting process to find and fund progressive Democrats to run against the compromised representatives (not ideology but honesty with their constituents) and win the seat. In principle, voters in 2010 should have the opportunity to vote for a progressive candidate in all 435 Congressional Districts. When progressives become a choice in all 435 districts and we have credible candidates, we can put to rest this Red State-Blue State nonsense and this “left of the left” bullshit.
If voters move in a more progressive direction (and they certainly have on healthcare), over time the political calculus changes and the White House either moves with it or sees Congress driving the agenda in a progressive direction without them.
Whether intended or not, the effect of the White House charm offensive is to get progressives angry enough to do something, to keep the Republicans occupied thinking that the Senate Finance Committee will bottle it up again (and it may yet), to hold the industry propaganda machine at bay until the legislation made it through markup. And the August recess might just have allowed the craziness to surface long enough for Americans to remember the threatening Palin rallies at the end of the 2008 campaign. In spite of the fuckups, we might be in a stronger position as a progressive movement today than we would have been if Obama went to the mat for healthcare beginning in May. That soon into the process, we might not have noticed the serious compromises.
Eli – been reading all the comments in this post, it’s sad that Obama has chosen to ignore and abandon those less fortunate than himslef, those who have lost their jobs and have medical concitions that the insurers and HMOs now have an excuse not to touch. Perhaps it’s time to change tactics. The logical approach doesn’t seem to work. Left a message for you at multimedium.
the eminence grise in amerikan politics is david rockefeller.
his family created, empowered the clinton’s in one of their pocket boroughs[arkansas]. then did the same for hilary in new york[another rockefeller pocket borough].
david rockefeller and his courtiers[especially zbig] created obombya.
the rockefeller’s have been running the usa via their puppets since the end of ww2 at the very least. they made ike appear scholarly, less military, by making him the prexy of columbia[a university that they control].
after ike, virtually all the prexies were creations of the rockefellers. the only guy they couldn’t get installed was nelson, but, if you study the record it wasn’t for a lack of trying.
the bushies were rockefeller creations. as was dick’em, coming from another rockefeller pocket borough[wyoming].
you want to understand post ww2 amerikan presidential selection, you have to recognize the real cardinal richelieu, david rockefeller.
I ask again…did this happen by chance, or does he know how to get shit done?
That’s not what it sounded like you were asking before. Anyway, Obama is obviously very good at selling himself. He’s great at running for office, and if there is something he knows how to get done, then it’s working P.T. Barnum’s favorite demographic for all it’s worth.
What I saw of his career as a legislator convinced me he wasn’t a terribly effective one.
I’d say is that the shit he knows how to do isn’t helping the rest of us very much.
I think PUMAs are one part of it. Another big part is the Veruca Salt wing of the DemocratIC Party. In fact, I scored an undercover video of their last organizing meeting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dU7nG3KvZDA
This attitude you describe has dominated many of the Liberal blogs since long before President Barack Hussein Obama was elected, so there’s nothing new happening here. These various factions having waiting for things to pounce on to justify their incessant railing against Obama for the last 2 years.
As Blub pointed out above, given how corrupt Warshington is, especially within the the DemocratIC Party, I think it’s reasonable to assume it might take more than 7 months to get to all the issues. He’s already tackled more than most Presidents have ever tried is such a short time, with some good successes, so I don’t think it’s wise to bail right on the home stretch.
Aha. Another twist on Obama’s “secret plan.” I have been so blind.
he’s about 10 yrs older than I am. Ivy educated.. like me. We put our faith in investment banks, globalization and on our own over-confidence, working for those who created big bubbles. I soured on it, but most of my friends didn’t. He didn’t.. hence Geithner et al. I guess the difference with me is that I’m the child of a Cold War soldier, suspicious of the allure of compromise, globalization, world peace, the brotherhood of man, benign corporations, and postpartisanship…. all things that Obama and most of my own friends still buy into. Unlike them, I don’t believe that things necessarily turn out well.
Hiya! Working on a response now.
The bad news is that he’s totally blowing it. The good news is that he could turn all this around with one 45 minute speech. Just tell us in clear, simple terms what sort of “health care reform” you want, and then tell us why. Right now, I have no idea what Obama is even fighting for. A public option? Universal coverage? Co-ops? No discrimination against pre-existing conditions? He just keeps going on and on about how important it is to “reform” health care, but he won’t say what that means. There’s nothing concrete for anyone to get behind. That’s why Sarah Palin can get away with saying he wants to send death panels to kill her baby–his “reform” is a complete vacuum, and anyone is free to just toss things into it. He’d have a lot more luck if he’d just articulate a clear policy.
What?
A guy who comes from nothing, works his way up to become America’s first melanin-enhanced President doesn’t know much about accomplishments? All these things he’s done in life are about “process?”
Wow.
I’m not the one bailing on the AGENDA.
All the signals from the administration is that the ADMINISTRATION is bailing on the AGENDA.
I am not married to the people we elect, and have no reason to trust or have a relationship with them. Any of them. What I want is the AGENDA, and I don’t care who delivers it.
Yet another Obama “secret plan.” How could I have missed them all?
Gregg Levine is upstairs!
Late Night: Elephants on Parade
His “accomplishments” are about him, not anything else. And as for his personal goals, he’s been brilliant.
I ask again…did this happen by chance, or does he know how to get shit done
But for whom? I guess it depends on what side of the isle you’re on. If you’re a repuke and get the dems to concede on everything and then don’t vote for the bill anyway then yeah, I guess so. They win without even having to vote. How much better can it be?
Obama’s great at saying things so that your hopes fill in the blanks. It’s a great way of getting elected, but it’s a lousy way to make changes happen.
Actually I have an Obama’s scandals list with 70 entries. I posted an oxdown diary of the table of contents a while ago when it was in the 50s but I haven’t published the full text to the web yet.
I think healthcare is the issue where Obama jumped the shark. It is one of the moments that changes how you view something or someone forever. Some of us parted ways with Obama a long time ago. It looks like the rest of the country is catching up. The Republicans will be ecstatic and take credit for doing him in. Progressives almost certainly will be blamed for not being sufficiently supportive and loyal. But the truth is this is something that Obama and those around him did to themselves. When Obama was out speechifying, he embraced change and a new way of doing things. He promised reform and action. At heart, however, Obama remained an Establishment corporatist. He never squared his actions with his rhetoric. Even in the face of mounting evidence, many Americans were willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. What we are seeing now is that suspension of judgment coming to an end. Neither he nor his team are up to the task. It is going to be a long 3 1/2 years for all of us.
Thank you….funny to read benign corporations..seems not to fit into that list, yet has become such an oxymoron.
Right. On.
Interesting insights.
(now back to the regularly scheduled “Obama suckZ!!1!” all day, every day, same comments over and over)
He’s pushing to pass a healthcare reform bill. Doesn’t really matter what’s in it, which is why he’s so hard to pin down – he wants to be able to declare victory no matter what the outcome.
Yes, to all you said. But there is also: consider the alternative. We didn’t have a very good choice.
Late night’s up.
And for that matter his policies are keeping others from accomplishing the very things he did. For a pithy UC campus next fall registration has already been closed. And registration fees have quadrupled in one year.
Well said…it would be more interesting if he could decide he wants a different path….maybe Michelle could guide him. Biden? As said he’s with us for a long time.
Yes, healthcare was really the last straw for me, when it became apparent that he was perfectly willing to throw out the public option and declare a terrible insurance mandate bill to be a victory. And if the Progressive Caucus hadn’t been whipped into making a rare stand, that’s what would have happened.
It wasn’t 11-dimensional chess, he was genuinely willing to sell us out.
Why is it that every time I watch one of his speeches, town halls, or press conferences, from the very beginning of this and even during the campaign, Obama does make really clear what he’s fighting for and why, and delivers with much gusto.
Yet, 98% of the time I come here all I see is how he needs to use the “bully pulpit” more and deliver the message more clearly and forcefully.
Guess I’m just the rube I’m consistently told I am, and all y’all are so much smarter. If Obama would’ve only listened to the Liberal blog Conventional Wisdom, he would’ve become President. Or something.
i dont think many beleive washington democrats are any more corrupt than washington republicans. BTW im looking forward to the final release of the CIA memo on Monday. thats the deadling the a federal judge set and the government has said they will comply.
we’re the Shampoo Planet, microserfs generation David Coupland wrote about. Corporations were supposed to be our friends.. bringing fast food and civilization to the whole world. Our MBAs would end all war and suffering.
I think I saw that exact same comment at RedState before.
No, he should continue to negotiate with people who are now saying it should take 80 votes to pass legislation that no matter how many things we concede the republics will NEVER vote for. I’m glad that you have so much patience but for some of us we don’t have that luxury. I’m trying to keep my kid alive while the repukes and insurance companies are trying to use their “death panels” on him.
I’d love to know that’s there’s a way to make some lemonade out of all this. Sadly, my opinion hasn’t changed since March, when I wrote this. Executive summary is that Obama’s only going to do what he thinks he has to do. Figure out a way to make him think that, and I think we’ll have a plan.
Defensive much?
I haven’t been here “for two years railing against Obama” and in fact, could hardly contain my excitement at the chance to vote for him. I enthusiasitcally supported him.
Blaming his falling numbers on us seems strange. His numbers are falling because we now see the actions he’s taking don’t match up to the words he spoke during the campaign.
His numbers aren’t falling because we’re being too unrealistic in our expectations; they’re falling because we’re seeing too realistic maintaining of the status quo.
Wait? It’s over?!?
I missed that.
Like I said, he generally does say that he wants the public option, or that it’s the best option. But he doesn’t say it’s essential, he doesn’t say he’s fighting for it, he doesn’t say he’ll veto any bill that doesn’t have it. The sense I get is that he’s kind of rooting for it, but if he doesn’t get it that’s fine too, as long as he gets a bill.
His and Sebelius’s recent statements about how it’s not essential, and it’s just a little sliver of healthcare reform were very telling.
I’ll note, for the record, that you did not provide any evidence that my comment was inaccurate, but merely tried to slam me.
yes,please stop writing the history of the health care battle. i feel like im watching the MSM sunday lineup.
Obama is either blowing it, or wants us to understand it’s the republican’s fault. Er, just why hasn’t he made his case? What is he for? Why can’t Mr SilverTongue clearly articulate what his plan is all about, and yes…..the details? This is either total political folly and incompetence, or Obama is jerking us around and means to cave with just a few fixes of no real meaning. He has lost control of the debate and has allowed the minority party to frame and control the debate. Inexcusable. Is he a clone of Rham Emanuel? What group of writers are crafting those hideous speeches that say nothing but are supposed to offer him political cover? His slide in the polls should tell him by now that his speeches and strategy or lack thereof is falling. And falling fast. He can’t seem to articulate a clear policy because he doesn’t have one, and so whatever happens he can claim some positive part of. We are being manipulated by an inordinately articulate speechifier, who suddenly cannot make a decent presentation of his most prized project? I don’t believe it.
The only change that Obama has created so far is to cede power to the party out of power. And having 6 Senators on the crucial committee that passes the bill foreward comprised of 3 republicans and 3 senators, all from small states, along with the committee Health Honcho Bauccus who takes hefty donations from Healthcare/Drug lobby.And he’s against public option.
I think we’re being snookered and I’m mad as hell.
No, it’s not over. But only because the Progressive Caucus refused to vote for a crappy mandate bill, and *not* because of Obama.
Again, the public option is still alive *in spite of* Obama, not because of him.
I was convinced hes betraying his own movement because that was part of his evil plan. maybe ive been at FDL too much recently. I am really starting to wonder if its just pure incompetence. yes he had a great PR operation. that dosent = policy and governance. it dosent really matter. Congressman anthony weiner really lays it out well. its not “armageddon” really, its just that we dont want, cant accept, a terrible bill.
it said he raised the same percentage in small donations. the actual amount was greater.
Right, and it’s gonna die because of him.
He is going to make the choice, mark my words, and it’s his choice to go either way, but he’ll choose to pressure the progressives to cave on the public option in order to get a bill rather than pressuring the moderates to support the public option in the name of party unity.
And FWIW, I think there’s probably less than a 50% chance that we’ll get a public option, or that we’ll get a public option that isn’t watered-down crap. But at least there still is a chance.
Which would be especially shitty of him, since his surrogate at Netroots Nation told us flat-out that he was not going to pressure the Blue Dogs to support the public option, that he was looking to us to do that for him.
You know they ARE going to pass a bill right?The house cant hold out forever (whether or not they even try remains to be seen) so in the end, what do we really want? most progressives arent more concerened about the budget than peoples well being. if we force them to pay for everyones insurace upt 3 or 4 times the rate of poverty, to 100% with a graduated increase of premiums based on income, does anyone really care if it bankrupts the country? i dont. Because then they will have to “fix” it again and Single payer will HAVE to be on the table
I think we’re doing the right thing. Obama’s in the middle and can bend either way. By getting 60 to 100 progressives in the House we gain negotiating leverage. Once he sees he’ll fail altogether unless he gives us the strong PO I suspect he’ll go
back to being a strong proponent of it. As long as we hold the power, he’ll listen. Sometimes it pays to be a little hawkish, even with other Dems ;-). But we do need to lay off these ad hominen attacks and focus on the fight.. not our disappointment with one man.
Obama’s reps personally told me to go fish at NN in 08. (”So what’s your choice” they said in response to my complaint about his reversal on FISA.) I didn’t take it personally as they were young whipper snappers and content to pass along Obama’s talking points. But by now there’s plenty of evidence that Obama wants the progressives to recede into the wallpaper.
Ah, yet another secret plan. Pass a bill that covers everyone (dream on) that bankrupts the system so that the next time a real plan can be passed. Suddenly the scales have been lifted from my eyes.
agreed. its only the bill that matters in the end. nothing else.again, the progressive have done what needs to be done to get what you need. force them to bargain. we havent been good at that before. it took them all week, and the speaker of the house, for them to figure out its no joke they are going to have to deal.
I agree with the first part of that wholeheartedly. Obama really does not give a damn what we say, we can only influence him by moving other resources to block or guide his actions. As I said in my Tuesday post, the progressives need to be the path of most resistance.
But if he decides to attack the progressives instead of the Blue Dogs and actively push for something without a public option, he’s going to repel even more supporters than he has already.
I realize it might seem strange when living in an echo chamber.
His actions are exactly backing up what he ran on. He said first, he wants to keep the Economy from going off a cliff. This has happened or seems to be getting better, correct? Liberal blog heroes Roubini and Krugman just said this last week when they argued that Bernanke should stay on. Didn’t see much about that in these parts, did you?
Then, he always used to say next, he can then focus on institutional changes to keep this stuff from happening again. Everything he talks about now, and much of the various Departments in his Admin are moving now with these things, and of course are already getting much pushback from the status quo defenders. The fights are just beginning.
This is why I keep on this, but to little avail around here at least. I just saw Jane’s post earlier today saying that his poll numbers are now down because of Dems.
I actively worked against Bill Clinton in 1992 in the primaries. I gave him the benefit of the doubt for almost 2 years before realizing it was a lost cause and my criticisms were correct. I did this because I understand and agree with the “turning around a freightliner” analogy and realize it takes some time.
This has not happened in certain circles in regard to Obama. People unrealistically think he can rule like a dictator and strongarm anything he wants. Now, we in the final stretch of a big, big issue, and the natural constituency is bailing. Sad.
its no secret. we have to force them to bargain. but if you look at snowes comments, those are actually the kind of terms she was talking about, and shes in NO WAY a liberal. insurance dosent care how much money the govt spends as long as they get all of it
Sounds good…Dean is still projecting the PO; Obama, like others, has been taken aback by the crazy Euthanasia people. Our world is crazy; it is the only one we’ve got. Night all.
Okay, for the record you didn’t offer any evidence that Obama’s friends and family over the years “are dead to him.” Because there wasn’t an epilogue?
Don’t think that would hold in court.
Actually, I wrote a seminal diary taking apart the Roubini endorsement back on July 26 and I have pointed out repeatedly that Krugman has never criticized Bernanke because he owes his job and career to him at Princeton.
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6689
I am also someone who does not buy the happy talk about what is going on in the economy and contend that the chance of depression in 2011 is very high. So I at least have been discussing these things for some time.
futurists are kind of a joke, but nonetheless I take some encouragement:
Post-Partisan Coalitions
the original citation is probably behind a Calente paywall, ’cause futurists always want a little money before they let you see into their crystal ball.
the economy is in free fall, it just hasn’t gone splat yet.
your friend Digby, a reliable Democratic Party advocate notices.
http://market-ticker.denninger…..ezzle.html
Obama has done nothing to cure the systemic ills, he has just turned on a firehose of money to the banksters who wrecked the economy.
What does that have to do with Obama? That’s Ahnold’s job. (Which he isn’t really doing either.)
I wrote another seminal diary on the need for a new party on July 29.
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/6783
I’m getting the feeling that Obama does fine right up until he actually meets with real opposition. Then he tends to back down.
Wish he didn’t do that, but I suspect that if McCain had won, he would have been pushed out the door by now. Sarah is very ambitious.
Well shit…according to ol’ Eli’s logic, all president’s should manufacture national security crises to whip folks into a panicky lather in order to pass their domestic policy objectives, whether they be tax cuts for the uber rich or universal health care. It’s the way the executive should go about Getting Things Done, right, Eli? With a big fucking stick! The ends justify the means, after all, and one shouldn’t stop stoking a crisis until one’s agenda has passed. Let respect for democratic legislative process be damned.
BTW, most of you whining sacks of dung really make me sick. You’re not much better than the Deathers and Birthers, just slamming Obama from the Left instead of the Right in order to justify your smug sense that all politics in this country is pointless until the Nader Revolution comes…or whatever. AFAIK, there is no final health care bill up for a vote yet, DADT has not yet been resolved but soon will be (too slowly? oh no!) and Guantanamo is being closed the fuck down as we speak…so please stop BITCHING and believing all the incredibly STUPID reporting from August and wait til September to declare Obama the Worst President Ever. 8 years of Really Bad Shit does not come undone in 7 months.
Welcome to the Lake.
If you have a point, perhaps turn off the boil and we can have a discussion.
Respectfully…
What you seem to be saying is that George W. Bush was a much more effective political leader at implementing his agenda (regardless of its quality) than Barack Obama is. I agree.
Well I am just waiting to see how this all plays out, as we all are. But I voted for Nader because I didnt hear Obama say anything good about getting out of Iraq, etc. And I felt that if he did the right thing on the war front, that everything else would fall into place. But he hasnt , has he? So I am not expecting anything that I or you would be satisfied with. But he told us first thing right off…he said “Single Payer is OFF the Table”. Listen to what the man says and doesnt say.
Knowing that my vote for Nader was nothing but me holding to my principles, I expect that things have to get Much worse in the U.S.before the people will revolt and bring it back to the Democracy it probably hardly ever actually was . I am not talking violent revolution. But when hope/bones are held out to us , we tend to be pacified and stop whining, or barking. So I was kind of disappointed when Obama won, because I realized that it will be a very long time before things get really Bad.
Anyhow, from a bit of geographical perspective it looks as if the entire U.S. is in some kind of mental breakdown..and its not pretty. Though Europe still thinks Obama is cool. What Ever.
Exactly. I was shocked. It was a Bad Omen. And it really was an omen.
What did he think ? What is he thinking all this time ? Not what we were thinking for sure.
He has shown us his true colors (no pun) and we just dont want to look. He is NOT one of Us.
There may not be a middle in terms of policies or ideology, but there is a voter middle called “Independents” and swing voters, and they got him elected. They loved post-partisan, but it isn’t working as a way of governing unless what one wants is a Republican Lite or “moderate” Democrat corporatocracy. Remember the “Democratic wing of the Democratic party”?
Secret plan? What exactly does “or not” mean? And are you denying that progressives have gotten angry about this? I was being agnostic about the “secret plan”.
what a load…fdr squared off against those bastards. This guy is complicit. Your argument that there is a grey area due to the times we live in is absurd. Good and bad.Right and wrong. Darkness and light.
Re: Respect
“this man will not only destroy our country, he will destroy any hope of returning it for we will ALL lose faith in democracy”
“You can sniff the mendacity from a mile away.”
“I have seen enough of this fool”
“He’s a total fraud.”
Etc, etc, etc.
So you wonder why I don’t respect the majority of posters in this board: You get what you give and I see minimal respect from the unappeasable “No One’s Ever Liberal Enough for Me/America is a FAILED Experiment/Dems & Repugs Are Exactly the Same” crowd here.
Did you already forget Sotomayor? Imagine whom McCain would’ve nominated! But I digress and you guys are right: doesn’t matter who’s president and she’s probably a horrible corporatist beneath all that personal achievement and moderate judicial philosophy anyway so to hell with her…
Must get back to respecting the feelings of the majority of the board here: Obama is a traitor who is going to destroy the country and is a jazillion times worse than Bush I & Bush II & Nixon after a trip through the teleporter from The Fly. All because it’s not happening fast enough and this whole legislative process is really just a horrible misrepresentation of the Peoples’ Will and why won’t Obama just declare Martial Law already and unilaterally proclaim John Edwards’ health plan the law of the land and set up the guillotine in the Mall and begin the beheading of conservatives, moderates, compromisers and those deemed Not Liberal Enough by a Council of Real True Americans from FDL?!? Waaauuuuuaaaawwww!
I think you guys are being way to hard on Obama. He’s doing ok. Maybe not great but ok.
Change needs to come slowly. S-L-O-W-L-Y.
A very complete list. I think you meant something different when you wrote “suppressing of U.S. torture practices”. In fact, Obama made clear that he would stand behind the Bush-generated Army Field Manual on interrogations. The AFM, overseen by Stephen Cambone of the Office of Special Plans, was written precisely to get around the then-McCain proposed amendment to reduce interrogations to AFM rules. So they had to dump the old AFM and introduce a new one which could carve out a special category of prisoners who could be kept in isolation, sleep deprived, subjected to sensory isolation, drugged, phobia-exposed, etc. Meanwhile, the press slept.
Hence, I think one could add to your list an abject and phony press, that has no intention of reporting the truth, whose occasional “exposes” are meant to display show for those who still believe this is a democracy, and not the authoriatarian-controlled plutocracy that is actually is.
I’m almost sorry I read the list. Obama is a bigger fraud than I had imagined. And, since I’m from Maryland, please accept my apologies for Steny Hoyer.
so if change needs to come slowly wouldn’t you think that we ought to be at least starting off in the right direction. On balance and looking at the important issues it looks like this is just an extension of the last administration. So where people get this faith from i don’t know, it is not cognitively based though.
Not my list, although I agree it with entirely subject to your identifying the typo on torture. I think he may have meant something like “suppressing evidence of continuing and past torture.” The keeper of that site also adds to the list in the same comments Obama’s arrant betrayal of his undertaking with the gays:
Joe: Add in how he promised to be a “fierce advocate” for the gay community and now can’t do a fucking thing to move his supposed agenda along, and I think the list is pretty complete. I knew that things were going to blow as soon as I heard that he was picking Rahm for Chief of Staff and Geithner for Treasury. Wall Street and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce won. Us? Not so much. Great work.
from http://icantbelieveitsnotademo…..nths-.html
I am new to this site and what has attratacted me most of all the admirable qualities of Jane Hamsher is her her attitude, which is how I feel as well. This is an attitude of contempt for those who would prey on you.
No one who would act against our public interest should be exempted from this contempt. While it is true that Obama and the present congress is what has to be dealt with, they do need to be dealt with. Action is called for not just grumping.
Donating money to our supporters is one aspect surely and one should should reward those officials who act on our behalf, although it is rather unseemly to go that route. But there are many other options for the public who is being taken for fools and dupes to react. There is something craven in not doing so.
Obama is unreliable and has made his proclivities for siding with big comapnies already clear, there is no need to doubt that these are his truly held preferences because he acts on those. What we need to do is to likewise act on our own behalf. It is action that is called for.
Whatever form this action takes it must show results. Incessant protesting to our reprentatatives to commit to the PO publicly and factually revealing in print whatever may be compromising their reluctance to do so should be pursued.
However one should seriously think about forming a concerted campaign based on the single issue of public finacing of health care at least to a significant extent. The goal should be to make our representatives, congressmen and senators alike, commit to that publicly. That is an attainable goal and it will make a difference. Their unwillingness to do so will mean that we will support a candidate who is willing to commit to that.
Leperosy or the Plague?
I’m saddened for all of my friends and relatives who worked so hard on the pavement and on the phone to get Obama elected. And I wished Obama well. He could have been a great President.
But I didn’t vote for him in 2008. And I certainly won’t in 2012, either. I refuse to cast a vote for any candidate for any office with a D or R after their name. (I will consider any other candidates on the ballot, but I seldom vote for minor parties for national office.)
My usual practice is to patiently write in the name of a person I respect and admire who meets the legal requirements of each office. (This involves a modest amount of effort, expecially for local and state elections. For example, I must find an Attorney General write-in who has been admitted to the bar in my state.)
I don’t subscribe to the notion that “there are no differences” between the Democrats and Republicans. That would be a silly as saying there are no differences between leperosy and the plague. Leperosy is a disfiguring disease that leads to lingering death. The plague kills much quicker and leads to an agonizing death.
So I refuese to vote for either leperosy or the plague. But I always vote, in every election, for every office. The vote is the only weapon I have. And it is far too precious to waste on Democrats or Republicans.
I don’t imagine that the Two-Party system will be destroyed in my lifetime. [I have developed a plausible model of how the joint D-R stanglehold on American democracy might be broken eventually. (It doesn’t involve the sudden rise of any of the minor parties, incidentally.) No reason to bore anyone with it here.]
Whenever I despair, I return to the wonderful vision of ordinary people with sledgehammers bringing down the Berlin Wall. I never, ever thought that would happen in my lifetime either.
So each time I walk into a voting booth, I take another swing at the Two-Party system with my sledgehammer–my vote–chipping away as best I can, trying to weaken the Two-Party wall.
For what it’s worth, I wrote in Bernie Sanders in 2008.