Bob, Welcome to the Lake.

Mark, Thank you for Hosting today’s Book Salon.

Thanks. Welcome everyone.

Hello, welcome to Firedoglake – glad you could be with us today!

Bob Kuttner should be with us in a moment.

Good afternoon Robert and Mark and welcome to FDL.

Robert, I have not had an opportunity to read your book but based on Mark’s intro, I have to say that I do agree with your premise. I for one find it almost ludicrous when folks argue that the Republicans could have been any more unified on issues than they have already been, especially when Obama gave away positions even before he started negotiations.

Do you see any chances of his actions EVER matching his rhetoric?

When he does arrive, the first thing I want to ask is whether I left anything important out of the introductory post. One thing that I may not have emphasized enough is the “corporatization” of the Obama presidency that began with his cabinet picks, and his picks to fill important agencies.

Hi, I’m on the site. Thanks for the comments on the Book, Mark. I think the question now is whether Obama will go beyond election year rhetoric and really put forth a strong recovery program and date Republicans to oppose it, Truman style.

Bob

Thanks dakine01. That’s the second topic I want to get into, what Obama can do to repair the damage that has been done to date, particularly on the jobs front.

Here’s something Bob wrote recently on this general topic:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-kuttner/my-private-obama_b_635289.html

It depends on how panicky they get about losing control of Congress, and how much of a priority it is for them to keep a Democratic Congress. There are some pundits who say he’d be happier with a Republican Congress and then there would be no pressure from the left and he could focus on his own re-election in 2012. I think that’s just a shade too cynical, but keeping Dems in control doesn’t seem to be a top priority

Thanks for stopping by today to discuss your book, Mr Kuttner.

I’m interested to know how the So-Called Liberal Media has responded to it. Many bookings on talk shows for you? Lots daytime appearances? Late-night television? And do you get a lavish book tour for an effort that seems so counter to the prevailing Village narrative?

I appreciate your writing this book, it’s a story that needs to be told. I’m curious to know how Legacy Media, so in the tank for Obama being a centrist, is responding to the idea of broken promises and dashed expectations.

Chiming in as an Oberlin grad when Robert Kuttner was a classmate–very brilliant, I might add. I am a bit perplexed by Mr. Kuttner’s erratic views about Obama as reflected in his blogs at Huff Post, and during his appearance on Moyers Journal during the heat of the health care debate.
I remember his saying that a vote against the legislation would usher in an era of Right Wing fervor. It seems to me that regardless, we are already in that era and maybe it would have been a better idea to oppose the corporate welfare padded HCR just on principle. Obama has NOT lived up to his promises and he should be called on it, and not be given a pass when he talks out of one side of his mouth about the public option, for instance, and then signs a back door deal with pharma and the insurance companies.

As a technical note, there’s a “Reply” button in the lower right corner of each comment. By pressing “Reply” it will pre-fill the commenter name and comment number so that it is easier for all to follow the conversation.

Note: Some browsers don’t like to work correctly with Reply if it is pressed before the page completes loading after a refresh.

I liked the book a lot. Beyond the political analysis, it’s a very nice chronology of the major events in he Obama presidency so far. It was nice to have the background material and connections between the key players identifed so clearly.

Yeah, seeing and hearing Obama the past week, my response has been, “Oh, right. That guy, I remember him. It must be election time again.”

Mark,

I think part of the story, as you said, is the deference to the power of the corporate and financial elite. But another big part is his own temperament and self-conception as a bridge-builder and conciliator. How many times does the other side have to laugh at that before you give it up. It’s like a fellow who came dressed for tennis and found himself in a rugby match.

I would put forth a very bold jobs program — direct public works, fiscal relief to the states, serious infrastructure spending, and make the Republicans explain why they are opposed to putting America back to work.

Mr. Kutner. Do you think Obama’s disappointing performance is a matter of unintended results and mostly external factors? Or is he really setting about implementing policies that represent his view of governing, economics, civil liberties etc?

I think movement on the jobs front is essential.

But is it too late? Is the score so lop-sided that there’s no hope of a comeback?

Thanks so much. The sad truth is that much of the liberal media is very protective of Obama and wants to defend him against attacks from the right; and so doesn’t really want to hear what I’d consider constructive criticism from the moderate left. I want this guy to succeed, despite his own often self-defeating instincts.

How does he do that and still project concerns about the deficit? Obama has been trying to appease deficit peacocks for some time now.

Does he need something like the I-35 bridge collapse to make the point that infrastructure spending is needed, and this spending will also put US back to work?

Welcome to Robert and Mark. If the book ends on a hopeful note, still recommending ways in which Obama and his advisers can rescue some progressive agenda and regain the trust of progressives, there has to be a basis for that hope. I think many here are skeptical that exists. So the question is: what are the signs, either way, beyond those Mark mentions in the intro?

How do you account for the continued mixed messages on jobs vs deficit hysteria?

How do you account for encouraging a bipartisan hit on Social Security, especially the notion of raising the retirement age?

Thanks -

Your comment is basically my view. But when Moyers asked me if I’d vote yes or no on the health bill, despite its flaws, I said I’d vote yes because a defeat of the bill would have been even more of a victory for the right. But it is at best a down payment on what needs to be done, and at worst a reinforecment of insurance company and drug company dominance of the health system–and only a modest plus, if that, politically for O and the Dems

And wouldn’t part of that hope be finding some measure of trust again among those who believe he has not been candid/transparent about torture, Bush accountability, etc.? Can some measure of trust be regained?

I broke with Obama back in July 2008 over his reneging on his pledge to filibuster the FISA Amendments Act if it contained immunity for telecoms. It did, and not only did Obama vote for it, he whipped other Democrats to support it as well. Ditto with the TARP later.

There was no promise. Obama was not well intentioned. He lied. Obama is not FDR. He is Hoover, although some would say that this is unfair to Hoover. Many of us here have been writing for an age on how Obama and the Democrats are as corporatist as the Republicans, how what we see are only pseudo-fights, kabuki. While the corporate agenda wins every time, we ordinary Americans lose every time.

Obama’s Presidency is not in peril. It is a done deal. Nor is it just in economic policy. It is the same across the board, national security, the wars, indefinite detention, the cat food commission, the slashing of Medicare in the healthcare package, the individual mandate, the sellout to corps. Obama has not only continued but extended what was worst in the Bush Administration. Many of these things were independent of Republican obstructionism in the Congress. Indeed as I said Republican actions have only served as a screen for Obama to accomplish a corporate, neocon agenda. The evidence is there not only in the actions but in what Obama has chosen to fight, and not fight, for.

The thing I think a lot of folks here at FDL have been distressed by are those in the media AND among the supposed progressive issue groups that have kept quiet when the Obama Admin does things that would have had them up in arms if done by BushCo (or a McCain admin).

The Veal Pen members as Ms Hamsher termed it

For the most part, he is implementing policies that he belives in. I have the sense that even if he had a commanding majority in Congress, he’d be only slightly better on jobs, health reform, progressive taxation, mortgage relief, civil liberties, and of course defense. This isn’t the situation he inherited, but his own policy views

He could have made that same argument about the GOP when they allowed the bill to extend unemployment benefits to sit unpassed in the Senate while everyone went home for the fireworks.

I don’t seem to recall much of that from the White House.

As a “moderate liberal” progressive I became offended and alarmed early on when they did not even permit single payer health care on the table.

I have since been frustrated, if not really angered, with the Obama administration not only ignoring us but their ongoing undermining of this core component of the base.

It now seems our best strategy is to pressure and convince and not assume he is automatically sympathetic to our causes.

It’s a huge mistake, as both policy and politics, to appease the deficit hawks, because that only paints him into a corner where he can’t propose spending the money that the recovery needs. When Republicans and Blue Dogs oppose unemployment insurance extension because it’s not “paid for” (that is, it increases the deficit), they can quote the President’s own advisers on the need to reduce the deficit. This is the price we pay for the continued dominance of the Rubin wing of the Dems.

As time goes on, it appears to me that the evidence is mounting that Obama’s “reform” & “change” platform was essentially just a cynical campaign ploy to first beat Hillary Clinton in the primary and then that crazy old guy and his incompetent running mate. For one thing, Obama’s platform served as a vehicle to give the illusion that he was a populist and hide the fact that he was receiving huge amounts of cash from the moneyed elite.

The sad conclusion that I have come to is that the guy’s been lying to us all along and that he has no intention of changing his game plan- he thinks that blowing smoke up our collective progressive asses is what Democrats do to win. I was wonder what your take on this is?

Thanks. I think recognizing this is critical in how the liberals progressives plan strategy.

Yes, he reflects the overwhelming political power of corporate America, and unlike FDR does not choose to use the power of the presidency to contest. In my earlier book, “Obama’s Challenge,” part of me was hoping that the extreme crisis and need for radical reform would push him to the left once in office, as it did FDR. But so far, no such luck.

Robert and Mark:

There were two important speeches lately: one by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, setting forth the “spend now, save later” mantra, but basically signaling to the deficit commission that cuts in Social Security were acceptable. The second by AFL-CIO’s Trumpka to the deficit commission, which I read as setting forth a more traditional liberal Democratic response — there’s no crisis, jobs and economic recovery are the basis for a sound economy, income inequality has to be addressed, Wall street was responsible and should pay for the damage (via deficit reduction, if any) and Social Security is not part of the problem, so stop pretending that cutting it does anything other than punish the most vulnerable.

The response from the WH was favorable toward Steny Hoyer and hostile towards Trumka, following up on the anonymous WH slam at labor for supporting a primary Senate opponent in Arkansas.

Doesn’t this tell us everything we need to know about where the WH is? Labor supports the Democratic principles, but the WH doesn’t, and neither does the Congressional leadership. If that’s where we are — and I’d like to know what evidence there is to contradict it — then what does that mean for progressive strategy from here on?

Right. And one of the most perverse things is that he’s doing next to nothing for the labor movement, which provided a lot of ground troops in 2008. So now, when and the Dems need them to be fully engaged, they are having to use up resources fighting the latest trade deal and lobbying for more aid to the states and trying to persuade their own base that he’s better than the alternative. I think the progressive movement needs to increase the pressure.

This is also in reply to BevRev:

I think he could get a lot of mileage out of fighting the battle even if there isn’t much to show for it by November. The most important thing is for people to think he cares — right now I don’t think the people who put him in office believe he s on their side.

Bob has a flurry of questions right now, so generally, is the fight itself enough to reclaim lost leadership and support, or does Obama need to have something to show for it?

I think movement on the jobs front is essential.

My own view, for the last 18 months, is that we will be in depression in 2011. Obama and Geithner have done effectively zilch on jobs, mortgages, aid to state budgets, and personal endebtedness. Yes, there was a too small, poorly designed stimulus but its effects are already dying out. At best, it seemly delayed the onset of depression. The fundamentals continue to deteriorate. The bubble in stocks continues to age and show cracks. Now we are also seeing sovereign debt problems in Europe and deflationary policies there. Then there are the bubbles and overcapacity in China. Meanwhile Team Obama remains willfully oblivious. Indeed like the Europeans, they are going into deficit hawk/deflationary mode. For me, this spells depression, and isn’t even a close call.

I think he was, and is, basically a centrist, not inclined to tamper with Wall Street, and even worse than we thought on military and civil liberties. And most of the pressure on him is coming from financial elites. So we need a lot of counterpressure

And on that note, we all know that it was Obama’s CHOICE to pick the Clinton mafioso for his cabinet including Geithner, Summers, et al. The moment he announced these picks, it WAS Obama himself declaring what he believed in.. Add in Rahm Emanuel.. so the Republican smokescreen is just that. Obama’s triangulation is what is so glaring. He has his autograph on it.

Forgive me, Mr. Kuttner. I have not yet read this book. Did you engage the civil rights issues in it? I am also struck by one important difference from FDR’s first two terms: the USA was then an isolationist power, and we are now an internationalist military power, involved in two on-going wars, and numerous other conflicts globally.

Right, and it’s also dumb politics. The Republicans are no defenders of Social Security, but they will whack him for threatening to cut it, the same hypocritical game they played with Medicare in the health bill fight

But when Moyers asked me if I’d vote yes or no on the health bill, despite its flaws, I said I’d vote yes because a defeat of the bill would have been even more of a victory for the right.

This ignores that there were those of us on the left that thought it was better to kill the bill than let it go through with all of its sellouts to industry, the individual mandate, and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare.

What if anything does Obama plan to do for green power? Or do the big coal and oil section of WallStreet own him?

This has been both puzzling and frustrating. I expected more on this front. Increasing ineqaulity and stagnant middle class middle class wages speak volumes about where Obama ought to direct his efforts, but he seems to be afraid that if he embraces this agenda, it will somehow cost him politically. I don’t get it.

If Obama doesn’t get something to show for “fighting” why would voters think it is anything more than Kabuki? There’s been plenty of that already, look at HCR for examples (public option being a favorite at FDL).

We didn’t vote for and organize for Kabuki we can be dazzled by, we worked for change we could believe in. On jobs there needs to be some tangible achievements.

Yes, showing himself as a leader on behalf of regular Americans would do a huge amount to show people that he is on their side.

They are certainly risking a double dip recession and a period of prolonged stagnation where GDP growth is positive but the economy is still not performing well or delivering jobs. The pity is that we learned this once in the 30s, but he hired center-right economists and they reinforce his own caution.

What Hugh said. O and the Ds are corp whores (apologies to whores) and incompetent ones at that. For example, despite caving in to almost every Wall St. wish, their contributions to Ds are down 65% (it’s an midterm, so that explains some of it but not that magnitude of falloff I’d guess).

An example of O’s incompetence is Gitmo. Almost everyone there is innocent. O made a big deal about closing it, could have done so on his promised schedule by revealing that everyone is innocent, which has been known in D.C. all along. Now that the story is coming out, he’s forced to defend continued jailing of innocent people in a U.S. gulag. Gee, real winner the way he’s handled that one.

The Obama strategy and tactics for re-election boil down to four words: He’s not President Palin.

This, they believe, will be enough to mobilize the hundreds of thousands of Americans who voted for change and got more war, more defense spending, more bailouts, and more unemployment.

If Obama was a GOP, the Democratic party would be in open revolt to his unemployment policies. People are hurting and the President and his men don’t care.

Otherwise they’d do something.

“What if anything does Obama plan to do for green power?”

He’s actually already done quite a bit. Secretary of Energy Chu was formerly director of the leading national lab which works in that area, and the funding to green technologies and research is flowing after a drought of 30 years. This is an area where conservatives and liberals largely agree, and Obama is in fact supporting it.

But I think part of the fight is showing voters who is standing in the way of this agenda, and he really hasn’t done that. Bob talks in the book about using legislation that has no chance of passing to clarify party differences to voters, something Republicnas are masters at doing. This isn’t the only method of contrasting differences, but in my view there’s been far too few attempts to draw these sharp distinctions.

If he does that, and voters blame the right party, then I think the fight carries him forward.

But drawing the contrast in the parties has to be part of the strategy.

I was wondering how much of health care reform was geared to take care of Wall Street’s biggest customers – the insurance companies? Similarly, how much of the cat food commission is designed to free up Social Security money to be thrown at the banksters?

I don’t address civil rights directly. This is mainly a book on his disappointing performance on the economy. The fact that he is African American, paradoxically, has often caused him to bend over backwards to show that he is calm, moderate, and not angry. But America today needs a fighter for regular people.

Yes, it was a close question. I think it would have been seen (wrongly in my view) as proof that he overreached and that the Republicans had the power to destroy his agenda. He would have moved even more to the right. But I was certainly tempted to embrace your view.

For this person he is going to have to show a lot before I vote for him again. My guess is there are a lot on both sides of the center spectrum who at best will stay home and not vote. IMO the polls showing his loss of support among independents are being misinterpreted as by the those on the right.

Do you think he knows or cares about the degree of disappointment? Or, is it from a quarter that can be ignored?

How much of the problem is due to campaign finance and the capture of legislators through this mechanism?

How can this problem (campaign finance) be fixed?

Japanification is a best case scenario. A lot of liberal economists still adhere to it. I would note though that even the very Establishment Krugman has raised the issue of depression. If you look at the deteriorating fundamentals, the aging bubbles, the corporatism of our elites, and not only their incapacity to deal meaningfully with any aspect of our economic crisis but their complete lack of interest in doing so, I think depression is far more likely.

Whatever one thinks about Obama himself, I think it’s now fair to conclude that his policy/political advisers are unbelievably incompetent. As you, Krugman, DeLong, Baker, et al have been hammering in your respective blogs, nothing could be clearer than the need for substantial continued stimulus, in one form or another, and not just unemployment comp and rescues for states. And yet despite polls showing jobs and economic recovery are number one concerns for public, his advisers keep stumbling over each other on deficits vs recovery, and when they talk recovery, it’s nonsense like a Bush era trade agreement with Korea.

And who in their right mind would send out Rahm and Tim Geithner as political advocates? I was astonished at how Rahm insulted Jim Lehrer on PBS the other night, and Tim is not the guy who will persuade the folks at CNBC. What are they thinking?

Questions for Robert and Mark: So you have to wonder, is there any reason left to take these people seriously? Are they just going through the motions, knowing they’re going to take the party down in November and are reconciled to that — and if so, is there a positive interpretation of what they must be thinking?

Mostly token stuff, unfortunately. Absent a major industrial policy and commitment to a complete energy conversion, green power wont create the jobs, and we will still be reliant mostly on carbon. However, let’s admit it, this one presents really difficult politics. Most Americans dont like banks, but they do like cheap fuels and big cars. Now, he could be doing a lot more to lead public opinion. But for someone whose trademark was “Audacity,” the last big risk he took was running for president. Once in office, he has been risk-averse.

And then there’s O’s $9 billion taxpayer giveaway for nuclear power, to Exelon, one of O’s big campaign contributors.

And this analysis incorporating a social psychological dimension about how race might influence this first African American President, is a verboten topic for the most part. The fact is he bends over backwards, as you say, to be lukewarm, calm in the face of injustice, and all the rest. It is frankly maddening for whatever reason.

If that’s his strategy, he has it dead wrong. The Democratic base is disillusioned; the independents who gave Obama a try are even more so.

We’ve put too much faith in what we want him to do. We need a much stronger movement.

COPENHAGEN — Is saving $40,000 at the showroom enough to get drivers behind the wheel of an electric car? With a program in the works to add easy access to charging stations, Denmark is about to find out.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/business/energy-environment/02electric.html

What if anything has or will Obama do thats half as good as this? Every dollar not spent on gas is a Dollar our economy gets. The less demand for gas the lower the Price goes which means less Arab oil money for Ossama.
Which means less money for Iran’s nuclear program.

As political discourse sharp contrasts have some utility. But to get people to work for you? I don’t see myself making phone calls or ringing doorbells because Obama talks a good game.

I worked to elect Obama in 2008 during the primaries. I stopped after the FISA amendment cloture vote, and returned to working for him reluctantly for te general election (500 phone calls total).

At this point voting for him in 2012 isn’t certain, and to get me motivated to work for his election again I’d need to see “Change I believe in”, not just talking a good game. He has to walk the walk as well.

There’s also something self-defeating in talking the talk. Obama’s cynical public option talk is very much on point. Obama talked it up, but didn’t bring any political muscle to getting it passed.

Rahm Emanuel’s strategy of cutting a deal with the insurance companies deprived health reform of its populist edge. As I write in the book, it became the president and the special interests versus the people instead of the president and the people against the interests

They know. But they think the base has nowhere else to go. Huge mistake. People can sit on their hands. He won only because the base was fired up

Plus Ethanol we waste money on that program when we could pay farmers to put up wind turbines and still farm with electric tractors.

Obama and crew have no interrest in listening to those who worked to elect him/them. After a number of emails, I heard Obama prattle on about how many emails he gets, yadda, yadda. I sent him a final one: Condolences on your failed presidency. I’m still waiting for the Secret Service to show up at my door. What Obama’s goal was — besides just getting elected — is unclear. He’s a wimp.

“We’ve put too much faith in what we want him to do. We need a much stronger movement.”

That seems to be where your books ends up, so what in your view is the most important thing folks can be doing now to build that movement?

I think that is the most important point. What’s left when people no longer believe you….voters would not even know what they are voting for.

And where were the critics when O cut the deals with PhRMA & insurance corps? I mean the ones who criticized Cheney for his back room deals with oil?

Well, it’s a huge problem. But the power of people, if galvanized, can be a match for the power of money. It’s the progressive populists in Congress who are fairly secure because they voters know where they stand. Obama could be galvanizing popular resentment against banks, insurance companies, outsourcers, etc. But that doesnt seem to be who he is.

Why did Obama waste that money on a foreign Nuclear Reactor Stimulus money should stimulate our economy. Just who is advising Obama on the economy?

I think so many of us are tired of his frilly speeches and oratory.. Red flag goes up every time he stages another teleprompted appearance..I turn the TV off pronto.

But I think part of the fight is showing voters who is standing in the way of this agenda

This gets to the crux of the difference in how we view Obama and the Democrats. Some think that they have a more traditionally Democratic agenda which is being stymied by the Republicans. Then there are those of us who think that the agenda of Obama and the Democratic Congress is virtually identical to that of the Republicans and that the various fights and obstruction are really atmospherics.

There are several reasons to believe the second. Those cases where Obama has opted for a rightwing course even where no Congressional action was needed, Guantanamo, habeas petitions, DADT, pullouts from Iraq and Afghanistan. That the Democrats have had the largest majorities in 80 years but profess to be blocked by Congressional Republicans, even though Republicans had no such problems under Bush, the failure to punish wayward Democrats. The failure to fight coupled with the tendency to pre-compromise.

The people inside who I talk to give me a lot of alibis–Congress won’t pass their program; voters don’t trust government to fix the economy. But much of this is their own fault, for not having Obama be a fighter for ordinary Americans. So they say they are doing the best they can, with a lot of constraints. I say, many of those constraints were worsened by Obama’s own temporizing.

I’m not so sure that they have given up, I think they have made a bad political calculation on the jobs versus deficit question. So good faith, bad analysis. That’s the best spin I have.

But they have given up in the sense of being resigned that no more stimulus can be passed (so why try). What’s frustrating to me is that many of us were calling for Obama to take the mantle of more stimulus far before anyone had hear do Greece, Italy, PIGS generally (add or subtract letters as needed…), before the deficit had been brought into the discussion so effectively by the deficit hawks. The deficit question was there, but not like now. There was an opportunity for leadership to bring about more help, particularly to create jobs, but the leadership was missing.

At this point, given the lags in the process and not that long before votes are cast, it’s hard to imagine making much progress in terms of actual action on jobs and other issues. So perhaps getting what they can politically out of the deficit issue is the plan. If so, it’s not a very good one.

So, it just sounds like they are deliberately not paying attention…don’t want to “get it”.

Robert please before you leave do share your suggestions as to how to nurture the liberal progressive movement and get our way at least part of the time with this president and the likely more conservative Congress.

He’s a wimp.

Agreed he puts a hole in the King of the Mountain Alpha Male theory His struggle to control our economic future seems to be based on NeoHooverism.
Forget about taxing the rich to pay for his stupid wars he wants our Social Security to pay for it. That and I’m sure he wants Wall street to invest it.
An unregulated Wallstreet I smell another stock market bubble coming if that happens.
How come the NeoHoovers run a Dem WH why not listen to Keynes he got us out of the last great depression.

What was disturbing during the HCR marathon, was how Howard Dean was basically abandoned by the so called liberal media, and so called Progressives in Congress, when he spoke up against the legislation saying he would not vote for it…Where was Dennis K in the end.. taking a ride on Air Force one and then capitulating. This spoke volumes about Obama’s arm twisting, double talk, and the Progressives like Kucinich and Bernie Sanders just going under when the going got tough. The movement has no leaders with any guts.

The three most hopeful movements I see are elements of the labor movement, the immigrants rights movement, and the movement to get some mortgage relief for regular people. Over the past three decades, the movements for respect and inclusion–womens rights, LGBT rights, civil rights, disability rights–have been much more effective than the movements for economic justice. But every one of them was a true movement and they changed laws, norms, and the course of history. Its amazing what a real movement can achieve. There is more on this in the book.

Mark and Robert,

My major problem with Obama is that he never really defined any problem for the American people, nor outlined the ideal solution to the problem.

In short, he NEVER took any problem to the people who elected him, never tried to build popular support for the right approach. Rather, on every issue, he chose to give away what was critically important to his most ardent supporters for nothing in return.

I think that this is particularly damning. He simply did not trust the American people to rise above politics as usual.

Great observation!

Seconded or how do we get Presidents to keep their campaign promises.

Much of our electricity comes from coal, so pushing electric cars may not be a good solution for the USA. Fact of the matter is, we don’t know what to do. There are some obvious things: building a modern passenger rail network would be a big win, but it would also be a big push. What I see is a crying need for the research program that Al Gore called for back in 1991, and the redirection of the Department of Energy from its focus on fossil fuels and nuclear energy. With the appointment of Secretary of Energy Chu, Obama has taken a big step in that direction.

Anyhow, back to Mr. Kuttner. If you want to discuss this more, e-mail me at raven268@gmail.com.

Full disclosure: I work for Lawrence Berkeley Labs.

What’s dismaying is that the Republican base and the leaders of the Republican right are willing to play hardball even with allies like George W. Bush. They destroyed his preferred nominee to the Supreme Court, White House Counsel Harriet Miers. Can you imagine Dems doing this? Our base needs to play hardball.

I see the Gulf oil disaster as perhaps radicalizing the South. Do you agree?

O is very much an alpha male when it comes to getting what he wants. Don’t confuse his not supporting your causes with his not supporting his own ‘unitary’ executive powers.

I like Chu, and as noted, this transition will be really hard. It’s political death to propose a ten cent increase in the gas tax. Presidential leadership needed big time here. And not coming.

Is there anyone coming up who would be an effective challenger to BO in 2012?

Is there anyone now that Moyers is gone who works as hard as he did to get the truth out on big issues?

Maybe not. People are all over the place on this one, and they blame everyone, from the oil companies to the government (and sadly, they’re rigth). Historically, the government has been our instrument as a counterweight to corporate abuses. But when both parties are captured by corporate elites, people don’t trust government and that strategy doesn’t work. So the radicalization is private mistrust and cynicism and doesnt add up to a coherent progressive movement. More leadership needed at all levels.

On the progressive side, no. On the right, any number of people could beat him if he doesn’t pick up his game. Huckaby, most likely.

You’re losing me here. Harriet Myers was a total joke of a nominee…..and Bush was a frontman, anyway. Thank goodness the Repubs stood up and said a resounding, “Ain’t gonna happen.” And Obama just nominated a woman with no record except as a get-along law school dean…..no written record. Another wimpism by Obama the Weakling/Unknown.

If you were advising Obama on environmental legislation, what are the biggest lessons he should learn from health care and financial reform?

What’s the one mistake to avoid?

I’d say its giving the appearance of caving to corporate/special interests at the drop of a hat to make sure something gets passed, that he has something to show for the effort, rather than fighting to improve the legislation and being willing to walk away if he doesn’t get what he wants. Spell out the terms, and fight for them

But the threat of walking away may not be in his nature.

I’m still looking — and praying! (Not that I actually believe in prayer, of course.)

BTW how do you like the waters here? Firedoglake tends to be more progressive than Democratic. Huff Po seems the reverse and dailyKos seems almost entirely straight line Democratic to the point of being Obamabot. This raises the issue of how you/we can reach out to the Obamabots. Their President is failing big time but they are more angry at those who point this out and suggest alternatives than they are with Obama and the Democrats for starting with so much and accomplishing so little.

For myself, I no longer see any possibility of working with Obama and Democratic officeholders. I can only oppose them. I still hold out hope though for the Democratic rank and file.

No, and there are no celebrity media lefties coming up that are his equal. Rachel Maddow or Amy Goodman or Arianna Huffington are the closest, but Moyers had cred as an even handed journalist even though he was a true progressive.

Obama’s Promise ?!!

Who knew!

The question, then, is how to encourage people to express that energy in a positive way and, if possible, to provide a channel for that. Is it perhaps actually time for a new party, with the Republicans in disarray, and the Democrats now dominated by their conservatives?

As a southerner and one who has particular knowledge of the lingering feudalism in the symbiosis between big business and working people I also doubt the Gulf disaster will change that or their politics. They will defend the “Company” until the last fish dies and the last mountain is flattened.

We need strong union movements but they traditionally are not attractive to southern workers.

Yes but my point is that the Republican base faced down Bush in Miers but on both moderately liberal Obama nominees the Dem base said, Thank you very much.

I actually think both will be pretty decent.

Start out with much more transformative legislation, then compromise if you have to. But don’t start out with the compromise and then immediately offer to compromise further.

It’s political death to propose a ten cent increase in the gas tax.

I don’t know about this. If you banned non-commercial traders from the oil futures market, oil would drop from $75/bbl to $35 (at least as long as the current economic weakness and trend to depression continues). You could easily increase the tax on gas and still end up with lower gas prices, at least for the next few years.

Well, there is no shortage of good posts on a lot of the progressive blogs. I guess my question is how it adds up to a movement.

Remember that most Americans are not ideological. When Converse did his famous studies, he found that the largest group votes on affiliation and dis-afilliation, and the second largest on things that don’t have much connection to political reality. People with ideologies, even loosely defined, were only 10% of us. I don’t think things have changed that much: there are more O-bots than progressives.

Put is simply: for most voters it has to be made personal or, “All politics is local.”

I think Obama will be lucky if he can say — years from now — I had a “pretty decent” one-term presidency.

I think the US system makes third parties almost impossible, though Bernie Sanders did pull it off, and so did Lincoln. My preference would be to take over the Democratic party, one primary at a time, the way the right took over the Republican Party.

Robert, you say that it was a mistake early on to try and appease “deficit hawks”, wasn’t it an even bigger mistake to believe in the voodoo of “bipartisanship” in the post-Newt/Delay era of politics? Wasn’t that the biggest sign of Obama’s naiveté?

Is there any chance that Obama might redeem himself in the remaining two-and-a-half years, or do you think that he’ll be relected because of a Perot-like split on the right in 2012 between the Tea Partiers and the more doctrinaire conservatives?

Right, but great presidents can change that to some extent. Voters who didnt think of themselves as ideological loved FDR, because he was on their side, and they imbibed the progressive ideology along the way

I think we’re past that point and into a single-party system now: the Republicans have no hold on younger voters, and that seems unlikely to change. So, just maybe…

Sotomayor is more of a legal technician, a lukewarm liberal at best, something like Ginsburg. Kagan is awful. She believes strongly in the powers of the Imperial Presidency.

Robert, don’t you get the feeling that ALL of the statements coming out of politicians these days is just a bunch of shit?

So you’re saying that Rahm needs to go?

Well, yes. But this is the hope of a good king and, in our system just as in European history, good kings are hard to come by. I think I want to read your book and find out how you propose to persuade Obama to become one.

I dont have a crystal ball. I think it would take a miracle for him to reinvent himself as a progressive, especially if there are big Republican gains this fall. He might get re-elected in 2012 if the R’s nominate a true lunatic, but the potential of a progressive moment will have been squandered; and with unemployment still high in 2012, he’s the underdog.

I will send the first contribution for his campaign for mayor of Chicago

I was thinking of asking earlier how much a purge of the Clintonites, key ones anyway, might help with political optics.

Secondarily, why is seem to be so attached to this set of advisors?

Personally, I don’t find the fact that the pope of hope is taking on a populist tone during a fundraiser encouraging … nor surprising … especially since his actions have matched poorly with similar rhetoric that he adopted during the 2008 elections.

Z

Agreed. My initial impression of Obama was a man in a nice suit with a good speech from a good law school. I’m not convinced I was wrong.

I think the chances of the r’s nominating a loony-toon in 2012 statistically high. Which might give him a second term.

Please do read the book. You’re right about good kings being rare and the wrong remedy. He may decide to save his skin by having a political near-death experiencing and doing the right thing as a last resort

A purge of the Clintonistas is overdue. But he likes these people because they reinforce his own centrist, cautious instincts.

Agree – lots of good posts on progressive blogs does not make a movement. So what role do you see for the blogs, and how can they maximize their influence and usefulness? And where are the “movements” it not there?

Yes, and a heartening life story, and we all felt good about making history.

This brings up the possibility of an independent run à la Ross Perot. If the economy tanks in 2011, populist anger will increase exponentially. It will come down to who can embody and focus it.

I’ve got an acquaintance that basically plugs her ears and starts saying “la la la la” when I point out places Obama hasn’t walked the walk. It’s frustrating to say the least. I suspect she’ll be donating to him in 2012.

There have been a number of acknowledgments that Obama isn’t leading in a way that makes political sense. He is alienating the activist portion of his base in a way that makes organizing for 2012 problematic.

Talking up better policies was suggested earlier. I have doubts that will bring activists back, I certainly would want to see results. Then again I wonder if a second term might have fewer corporate constraints – Obama wouldn’t have re-election funding as a consideration, so possibly he could act in ways that aren’t feasible today. The trouble is why would anyone believe he’d act differently?

That is the tragedy. The nation had a progressive moment when we elected Obama. But he was the wrong choice to implement it. Great hopes. Who knew?

I’d like to see more real investigation and analysis in blogs, and not just opinion. The internet can be an organizing tool via groups, not just via blogs. Americans for Financial Reform shared info and strategy through the net, but the hard work was old fashioned organizing

Hard to see that moment coming back anytime soon, IMO

Yes, there is a hard core of Obama loyalists who defend him no matter what. The problem is that they dont add up to enough people to spare us a Republican Congress

His turn toward Paul Volcker when the uproar was loudest was encouraging in terms of his ability to move beyond the intial, core set of advisors that he chose. I thought this might be a sign that he was going to listen to new voices and take them seriously as I think he needs to do. But there seems to be quite a bit of regression since then back to the same old core group that has led him to this point. I’m not as hopeful now.

Mr. Kuttner, I will put your book on my reading list.

& now, I’ve got to fly away. Thank you very, very much for making time to discuss this with us.

Biggest downside of all IMHO: We are losing the battle of ideas. The small so-called “wins” are coming at tremendous ideological cost.

But he likes these people because they reinforce his own centrist, cautious instincts.

My shorthand for Obama is a Blue Dog status quo corporatist. He is in his actions very rightwing. How else could he be seen as a continuation of the Bush Administration? There was also a post here recently asking if Obama was further right than Ronald Reagan. Given that Bush was further right than Reagan and Obama is following in Bush’s footsteps, it is a legitimate question. Calling him a centrist gives him to much credit.

I think that is cynical, but I’m often naive. I actually thought that Obama had heart and strength. I was wrong. I wasn’t interested in electing a black man (who might have been so ‘compromised’ had his white mother lived to stand on stage with him) as much as I was interested in electing someone who spoke to bringing citizens out of the dark morass of the Bush years. That Obama is such an abyssmal failure is his problem — but not because I wanted to make history.

Thanks so much to everyone who participated. There are things Obama could do to recoup, and things we can do to keep the heat on.

Hope you enjoy the book — over and out.

Bob Kuttner

There’s still progressives and they would coalesce into a movement given the chance. There aren’t any progressive pols to run as candidates, however.

I think FDL has about the best reporting and research I have seen. I do think on the ground organizing is the next step. Move On had a lot of success with Meetups for the Kerry Campaign. I would love to see FDL organize some.

An aside, it was interesting how the Obama campaign discouraged the meetups and even state and local Democratic Parties from initiating campaign activities.

Yes. The tragedy.

Robert, let’s turn to Congress for a minute. Obama (and every president) has to work with the leadership on the Hill. Who do you see as the strongest progressives on the Hill — the folks who might be in a position to push the WH in a more progressive direction?

Consider the possibility that Orahma turns to people to shut them up, i.e., inside pissing out, or whatever other cliche you prefer.

We’re still the people we’ve been waiting for; we just need to keep working together.

That’s actually something Obama got right – when he said this was about us, not him during his victory speech. We have to revitalize the movement that elected Obama and put it to work to enact progressive policy. Even in the face of opposition from Obama and establishment Democrats.

Thanks.

there seems to be quite a bit of regression since then

Thats Standard Operating Procedure for Obama. Say something that might sound progressive or be a grounds for hope, and then walk it back and walk it back into the same old same old.

His turn toward Paul Volcker when the uproar was loudest was encouraging in terms of his ability to move beyond the intial, core set of advisors that he chose. I thought this might be a sign that he was going to listen to new voices and take them seriously. But there seems to be quite a bit of regression since then back to the same old core group that has led him to this point. I’m not as hopeful now.

I do believe it’s all kabuki, and that Obama never turned toward Volcker. They simply leaked that he did. Easy enough. Nothing that comes from these people has any basis in fact, they just lie and coddle their bankers. Everyday.

: )

Take it easy, Robert.

Yes. And we have the truth and the rest on our side. Lakhoff had another blog on this in Huff Po on Thursday. We have to speak and act the message,

Okay, where are we lacking investigative analysis? Can you explain more how such investivative analysis would fit into/support a progressive movement?

I would have thought the problem is that progressive ideas are being ignored and/or drowned out by Fox propaganda and CBS gibberish, but not that we would be winning more if we could just prove our case better.

Robert, thanks for being here today. Mark, thanks for hosting.

Thanks for dropping by, if the book is on the Kindle, I’m getting it today!

You’ve presented a valuable salon…Thank you.

Gee, I find your evaluation generous. More often O’s speeches say the opposite to what he does.

?

This isn’t quite what you have in mind in terms of investigative analysis I don’t think, but when it comes to issues like the deficit versus jobs question, I think the analysis has been there (similarly for toher issues, particularly related to economics). Blogs have been both the source of that analysis and the bullhorn for academic and other work on the issue. But the message has been clouded in the political process. Leadership from the top could have helped.

Groups like CBPP have been essential in helping to provide real data to work with in making the case.

Robert, Thank you for being here today on the Book Salon.

Mark will be here for a few more minutes – to answer your questions and comments.

One thing I wanted to ask Bob was this:

Even though this wasn’t the topic of your book, I’d be curious to hear your answer to the following:

How much have issues like Afghanistan, Iraq, civil liberties, torture, and Guantanamo hurt Obama? I’ve been surprised these haven’t been bigger issues. Why haven’t Democrats given Obama more grief over this?

So let me toss that question out more generally.

Yes, but he doesn’t do the opposite immediately. He takes it in steps.

I don’t believe as Robert Kuttner does that Obama and his Presidency are redeemable, but I enjoyed his lack of defensiveness.

Where we have access to the primary sources we in the blogosphere can investigate as well as anyone. Economic data and legal cases we have more access to. Congressional legislation less so before the fact because so much of it isn’t put up until after the fact. Although on hearings, we are pretty good at liveblogging.

Thanks everyone.

Mark, Thank you for Hosting this great Book Salon today.

Everyone, if you would like more information,
Robert Kuttner - website

Mark Thoma’s – website

Thanks all.

Oh and BP in the Gulf, the Oil Drum was the go to place for everyone on the oil blowout. The blogosphere was also good at pushing the need for more accurate numbers for the flow rate and chronicled how in bed federal agencies have been with BP throughout the disaster.

Fair enough.

He handled my more aggressive comments by ignoring them. Which is OK. I didn’t expect a response.

I didn’t vote for Obama in 2008. I will not be voting for him in 2012.

Ruth Calvo is upstairs!
Wingnut Law; Individuals Financially Responsible for Corporate Ooopsies

That’s the maddening thing about all of this. There is simply no substantive agenda or commitment coming from the Obama administration, other than serving the interests of the wealthy elite and demonizing the Republicans for political gain. People have seen through this charade for some time now.

Am I the only one who is wondering about the “filibuster-proof majority” that FDR supposedly had? He only had a maximum of 60 Senators in 1933, when he got the first round of New Deal legislation passed. That wasn’t filibuster-proof at the time. It wasn’t until 1935 that there were enough Democrats to vote for cloture with no Republican help.

Agreed. And the fact that foreign troops are over here training for when the collapse comes gives credence to your view. Posse Comitatus is still dead, another victim of Obama/Soetoro’s refusing to “look back,” so we can expect the use of militarized police and National Guard to be shooting at us very soon. I frankly can’t fathom people on this blog still holding out hope that this fascist is going to come around, although it is a credit to Obama/Soetoro’s cult of personality and the power of denial that they still do so.

Jeez, Dearie, don’t worry about the Secret Service… I’ve written emails that were WAY more worse than that!!

I disagree. McChrystal, even though I think he’s just as bad or worse than Obama, could mount a credible campaign based on the “Obama/Soetoro is a wimp” angle. And I think that’s what he has in mind.