Yesterday was probably the most embarrassing day yet for the progressive blogosphere during the short reign of the Obama administration. So, now is probably a good time to just let loose and register my disgust with the movement I’ve been a part of for the last five years.
If you supported Obama during the primaries, you know who you are and this does not necessarily apply to you. For the rest of you, you spent the primaries either shilling for Clinton and telling us our guy was all talk and no show, or you spent them bitching that David Plouffe wouldn’t respond to and obey your emailed wisdom. As soon as he won the presidency, you started bitching about his appointments. As soon as he became president, you started bitching about his messaging, his framing, his agenda, and his lack of deference to your opinion. I want to know where the point was in this process when Obama was supposed to conclude that you were his allies and that you were responsible for his victory. When was he supposed to conclude that he owed you something, or that you had any respect for him, or that you credited his good intentions, or that you understood the myriad responsibilities of the job might mean that your pet issues might have to wait six months, a year, or two years to get to the top of his agenda.
You call him a warmonger, but he gets the Nobel Peace Prize. He ends torture and allows his Attorney General to investigate it, and you call him a torturer. He tries to enact health care reform with a robust public option and you accuse him of seeking every opportunity to sell-out to the insurance industry. He bails out the cratering financial services industry and prevents a second Great Depression, and you accuse him of selling his soul to corporate CEO’s. I’m not saying that all of these criticisms lack validity. I’m not saying that people shouldn’t advocate for the things they care about passionately. I just want to know where you get the fucking idea that an anonymous White House staffer who gets asked about all this criticism would feel obligated to show you deference and respect.
What’s he supposed to say? That all the criticism is right on the mark?
The truth of the matter is, right or wrong, the progressive blogosphere has been a more severe and on point critic of the Obama administration than any teabagger. And, in many ways, that is to the community’s credit. We don’t embrace the cheerleader’s role and that gives us more credibility. When the president screws up, we’re willing to call him on it. But, Jesus Christ, do you expect the administration to lie down and say, ‘Thank you, sir, may I have another’?
If you berate them for not closing Guantanamo fast enough, not ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell fast enough, not evacuating Iraq fast enough, not passing a health care bill fast enough, and so on…do you not expect one of their number to at some point push back and point out that making these kind of changes takes time and is a bit difficult?
And, where the hell do you get off taking it personally? Aren’t you the ones accusing them of being whores to the insurance industry and Wall Street and the military-industrial complex? Do you think they are going to find that criticism generous and well-intended?
Criticism is fine. But the sense of entitlement involved here is staggering. Ooh, some big, bad White House adviser defended the administration against one more heated attack. My feelings are hurt. Guess what? You should get over it.
I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much.
Wow, that’s a great rant. Sums up a lot of my feelings on the matter. Any chance you’ll cross-post to Daily Kos?
I’d put a dollar down it’d start a major flame war….
hmmmmm…..maybe Booman should post it over there.
I agree. There are some people commenting at Ameriblog who need to hear this too.
I’ve been getting more and more disgusted with what I thought were my fellow progressives/liberals. I’m all for constructive criticism and rational dialogue around such criticism, but some of this “I want mine and I want it now” ranting and whining is beginning to make me wonder if there aren’t some people out there who really don’t want change so much as they want to bitch about the lack of it. I’ve been at this a long time, since the 60s, and I’ve never seen such a lack of cohesion, such selfishness and narcissism. We’re going through a very difficult time and rather than pulling together and working even harder to get things accomplished, we’re sniping at each other and waving the white flag for the entrenched interests. The teabaggers and the birthers and the 9/12ers and the white supremacists and the right-wing media and the generally deranged and seditious have been taking potshots at Obama and picking off chunks wherever they can find them, so some on the opposite end of the political spectrum have decided to take up arms against him, too. And why? Because some television commenter made a comment about a comment.
If that’s what they want to do, yammer among themselves about what somebody said somebody else said, rather than join in the fight to right some wrongs and try to put this country on an even keel again after 30 years (at least) of jackass administrations trying to scuttle the ship, then have at it. I’m done with wasting my time even reading what they have to say. I’ll make my phone calls, write my letters and emails, go to rallies and meetings, send money if and when I have it, and do everything I can to help leave this country in better shape for my children and grandchildren. Obama asked for our help, and I’m willing to give it to him, and I’m also willing to give him time to do the things he said he would do.
How long a delay is acceptable to you until the Bill of Rights is extended to prisoners? (Please excuse the yammering here.)
Delay? Soemtime after we figure out a way to stop 45,000 americans a year from dying becuase of lack of Helathcare. I know this hard for those who demand immediate , right now, do it before I scream my lungs, reponse to this issue, but beleive it or not , those prisoners are just not a simple problem to solve, it will take a lot of political capital and in all likelihood they are getting better Healthcare than we are. They are also not being killed as they step off the plane as many of them wood when they went home.
Undoing Bush’s mistakes in addition to mistakes that were started way before Bush is just not a snap your figure proposition even for a White Christian male much less our first African American President. So as selfish as it sounds, I’m saying “put the emphasis on stopping the insurance companies from torturing and killing 45,000 Americans first”. One might say the imprisonment and torture that Bush started are different. Tell me how when you can’t leave your house and have pain so bad you scream because the you have no money or insurance to get pain pills much less get treated.
Yes I feel bad. But I feel much worse about the hundred Americans who died today because of kowtowing to insurance companies. Your issues are a few years a way yet. If the GOP takes power because you have demonized Obama so much, then , as they say in the airline industry, the delay will be inevitable or this flight is canceled.
So Keep doing what you are doing and insure that 45,000 Americans die each year and growing and no policy from the Bush administration ever gets reversed.
Excellent rant.
The Attack On Barak (yes, named in tribute to Somersby’s War on Gore) is something I am seeing in way too many progressive blogs and in their commenters. Smears and insults are not constructive criticisms, and just play into Republican memes that Obama is an empty suit, a teleprompter president, an egotist, all talk and no walk, etc etc — you know the drill. It is greatly to their interest to frame every accomplishment as meaningless and every setback as a cowardly betrayal. The Republican goal is to make Obama a one-term president. Progressives shouldn’t be aiding and abetting.
and five Norwegians don’t suddenly make a warmonger a peacenik. Obama has maintained troop levels in Iraq even though his main campaign pledge was to reduce them, and has transformed and enlarged Afghanistan into AfPak with a larger war — a “war of necessity” — on the way. He has balked on gay rights, domestic repression and climate control, and failed to lead on healthcare (not “trying” at all), leaving it to the Congress.
Domestically, while he continued the Bush bail-out of the banks and investment houses, and not consumers, his stimulus bill was ineffective, and foreclosures and unemployment are up, with no end in sight. The budget deficit is out of sight while Pentagon corporate welfare continues unabated. It looks like people will be forced to purchase health insurance or pay a fine, which is great for insurance companies, but how will unemployed twenty-somethings like that? Some “change.”
Obama is the president of all the people, not just those (his “allies”) who voted for him. He knew that when he ran. “There is no Democratic America, etc.” So he’d better get used the heat in the kitchen. It looks like it’s going to get warmer.
Bullshit. And I’m not sorry for the lack of civility. Calling President Obama a warmonger displays an outrageous lack of comprehension of exactly what constitutes a warmonger. Read some history.
You don’t come into office and abruptly pull troops out of a country or countries, especially after you’ve gone into a country and nearly leveled it (in the case of Iraq). This isn’t a game. You can’t take your GI Joes and popguns and go home, leaving someone else to clean up the mess. And if Obama had not won the election, we wouldn’t even be having discussions about gay rights, climate change or healthcare PERIOD. (I have no idea what you mean by domestic repression. And, as I understand the Constitution, having read it often, we have three branches of government, and Congress legislates.)
He had no choice but to continue the bailout and, contrary to what people like Boehner say (he who doesn’t even consult with his own constituents or his own state), the stimulus bill has been effective, and will continue to be so. It’s positive impact on the education system has been especially notable. Employment is always the last thing to come back after a recession or depression, and there was no doubt among the more insightful economists that foreclosures had not peaked and that unemployment would rise.
I could give you a list of at least 50 positive things that have happened just since January 20, but, judging from your comment, I doubt that you would be interested. If you are, you could do some checking yourself and start with the Departments of Energy and the Interior and Health and Human Services, the EPA, FEMA, and some Executive Orders.
“…if Obama had not won the election, we wouldn’t even be having discussions about gay rights, climate change or healthcare PERIOD.”
That fact gets by most people, but really needs to be pointed out. Well said…
“I could give you a list of at least 50 positive things that have happened just since January 20, but, judging from your comment, I doubt that you would be interested.”
Ever since Joe McCarthy’s famous claim to have a list, when I hear someone claim that he has one, too, then, by God, I want to see it.
So, big-talker, let’s see this list of 50 things.
When, as a ‘fly-on-the-wall’, I overheard the early White House chit-chat, it went something like this:
(in the White House residence)
PotUS: Hmm. “Close Guantanamo”. Okay. I’m going to issue a statement that we’re working on doing that; in the meantime, I’m gonna order no more torturing–imprisonment without trial or charge, well.
First-Lady: I think I’ll put in an organic garden.
——————————-
I’d love to see your list. Since you claim to have one or to know of these things (fifty of them), I say “put up or shut up”, please.
So then why don’t you do something constructive, such as 1) Working at the grass roots to elect more progressive candidates who will be more supportive of the President’s agenda, 2) Calling your elected representatives to emphasize your priorities as their constituent, or 3) You can just take your ball and go home, don’t bother to vote in 2010 or 2012 while the rethugs come out in droves (as usual), and then ring your hands and wonder “what the fuck” when none of the shit that Obama wants to do becomes even remotely possible when Congress starts debating flag burning amendments, drilling for oil in ANWR, and more bullshit bans on gay rights. Then I hope you’re fucking happy because then we all have to live with it…
I am doing something constructive. I’m pointing out clearly and without favor the long-sttanding and continuing mistakes and stupidity which plague (and doom) from the start vitally important reform.
The political system as it is today is profoundly broken. Nothing about Obama’s election in and of itself changes that fact. Before there can be a replacement of the now-failed socio-political-economic structures there has to be some broad understanding and acceptance of where, how and why our social order has failed. The president is practically the only person of important influence who can carry that charge. But Obama apparently has no intention of doing this work. We could speculate as to why that is. It may be that he doesn’t recognize the need; or he recognizes it but doesn’t want to address it; or doesn’t know how to go about it, etc.
This recommendation,
‘why don’t you do something constructive, such as 1) Working at the grass roots to elect more progressive candidates who will be more supportive of the President’s agenda‘
shows the depth of your lack of understanding of the nature of the crisis which confronts us. It’s as though you were on the 98th floor of WTC building 1 or 2 after the impact of the hijacked airliners and you reasoned and urged others,
“Maybe we can’t save everything here but we can at least work on saving this floor.”
You should know that our system as it is now arranged pits armies of the most expert, organized and well-equipped-and-financed professional lobbyists against an “opposition” which is practically defenseless, one which has no clear and central direction, no financial means to speak, virtually no coherent staff of any experience or knowledge. In short, it is as though the NFL Superbowl champions were facing an impromptu band of homeless children who had no knowledge or experience of the game—and who then simply forfeited by not showing up. More “progressive” office-holders within this corrupted system would pose not the slightest problem to the professional lobbyists whose job is to simply render those “progressive” obedient and trained to their masters’ interests.
as for,
… 2) Calling your elected representatives to emphasize your priorities as their constituent, …
Please. See above. At best, I could speak to a staffer who doesn’t care and who’d note, “Some guy phoned. He didn’t like your position regarding (blah, blah, blah)….” While the professional lobbyists come in and sit down personally with the office-holder and literally make him or her sweat nervously.
and this,
3) You can just take your ball and go home, don’t bother to vote in 2010 or 2012 while the rethugs come out in droves (as usual), and then ring your hands and wonder “what the fuck” when none of the shit that Obama wants to do becomes even remotely possible when Congress starts debating flag burning amendments, drilling for oil in ANWR, and more bullshit bans on gay rights. Then I hope you’re fucking happy because then we all have to live with it…
I don’t have to wonder, “what the fuck”[?!?]—because I’ve been conscientiously studying the continuing decline and fall of U.S. society for the past decade (and before that I followed it almost as closely for decades).
The very best thing you and others could do for the time being is to invest much greater effort in understanding what is and has been done to completely corrupt the social and political order. So far, that immense task hasn’t even been scratched on the surface.
Consider, for starters, that the collapse of the U.S.S.R about 18 years ago is perhaps best understood as being, in addition to other things, a presage of what is in store for U.S.-style capitalism. The Soviet leaders were essentially asleep at the switch as their system collapsed into chaos around them. The “West’s” leaders were no better prepared and, instead of helping the Soviet system’s leadership find their way to a more livable transition to a post-Soviet order, the West’s leadership, though they had plenty of reason to be better advised and aware of what was impending, basically watched and congratulated themselves on having “won the Cold War’.
Now, the West’s ruin, already very advanced and no less-deserved than that of the Soviet system, draws nearer. What are you, what are we going to do before things reach the point of complete break-down? Phone our Congressman? Canvas for more progressive candidates?
You show no indication of appreciating what is gaining on you. Of course, the Republicans are, if anything, even more lost. But you should take no comfort in that. You don’t have time for such a luxury. “Saving the 98th floor” is not an option. But people first have to understand that and, right now, they don’t.
So, I am doing something constructive. You could, too; that might include, among other things, such things as that you STFU and pay better attention.
Yeah — you sure talk a really great game in offering “thoughtful” analysis of practically everything that ails our society, but people like you are nowhere to be found when it comes time to do the hard work of actually rolling up the sleeves and finding difficult solutions to complex problems. Your essay writing skills are fabulous; your track record on actually producing any real results that actually improve the situation: not so much I’m betting…
Seems as though your “eloquent” analysis and social commentary really offers nothing in the way of real solutions or practical alternatives. Until you can do that, maybe you’re the one that needs to pay better attention instead of trying to show everyone how “enlightened” you are. “Thinkers” like you are a dime a dozen; we need DOERS.
You cannot, except by dumb luck, improve a situation which you don’t understand. But relying on random dulmb luck, working without an understanding, is more likely to worsen the situation– for that certainly is possible. One doesn’t need any understanding to make things even worse.
If you can’t be bothered to read, think, reflect and understand the basis of the predicament we’re in and instead just want to busy yourself with something, then I’d suggest that you devote your efforts to attacking the death-grip which corporate-interest paid lobbyists have on the system. It’s really there that one finds where and how things have gone wrong at the core of so much else.
So, Mr “DOER” whatchya gonna do, hmm? There, spelled out for you, is one of the keys of what is wrong. A very powerful and sophisticated lobbying system has, for decades on decaddes, made sheer hash of the political institutions you’re relying on to help those others of us who aren’t represented by expert and weell-financed lobbies.
You’ll notice that this problem, though central in importance, rarely enters the talking agenda, and, when it does occasionally appear there, it doesn’t last long. It’s soon shoved to the back-burner where it normally remains while other things of much less signifficance take precedence in the public debate.
If I were Obama, I’d have made lobby-reform, not health-care reform, my single most important objective. The reason is that EVERYTHING else of value can be scuttled by the looby-driven world of Washington politics. Right now, Americans are anything but accutomed to thinking straight about lobbyist power and influence. They live in a schizophrenic world in which they tend to think, on one hand, that business lobbies are very powerful while, on the other hand, they regard the Israel lobby as a creature of the imagination of rabid anti-semites. Thus, they’re divided and confused about the prevalence and power of lobbyists in general.
This issue is one which is going to require an immense and extended effort in public education. Does that_ qualify as “doing something” by your estimation, Mr “DOER”? Or is it just time-wasting “thinkers’ ” work?
If you work backward, (as I have) in trying to grasp how it could be that lobbyists could gain and maintain such an amazing corruptive power over our political institutions, one of the things that may strike you is a very discouraging fact—practically inescapable for anyone who refuses to run away from a reasoned application of the evidence: the American public are very largely (with only a small minority as an exception) political simpletons, morons, in the world of political affairs. And the reason they are so politically stupid is that they refuse to take an interest in those affairs, learn the facts and act on them.
This only makes the work of professional lobbyists easier. The one thing that lobbyists fear most is that the public one day become interested and aware. If that were ever to happen, their ability to shamelessly flim-flam the public for profit and power would face a serious challenge for the first time. And, as you might guess, they’d pull out absolutely all the stops to prevent that from happening. More routinely, however, they don’t approach things in such a last-ditch manner. Instead, as a regular part of keeping things orderly, they regularly attend to all manner of aspects of social and political life which tend to lead people to continue to not take an interest in becoming aware and involved in understanding how the system has been corrupted. That entails countless seemingly insignificant things, such as stoking the national myths by which Americans consider themselves hardy, rugged individualists who neither want nor need a socially-conscious welfare state working in the interests of those who have the least in money and influence.
The following essay, by Roger Cohen, presents one of the most insightful analyses I’ve seen so far of why and how the anti-healthcare lobbies have had such success in rounding up popular opposition to something that is so clearly in the best interests of the general public that it seems just incredible that there could be any popular opposition to it.
I think that, in reviewing the strategy and tactics of the Obama administration’s healthcare reform initiative (not to mention that of the Clinton administration, the errors of which Obama was so concerned not to repeat!), it appears that neither Obama nor his advisors understood the key insights which Roger Cohen presents, or, if they did understand them, they somehow didn’t apply them in any timely or effective way because, from all indications that I can see, they basically left the delusions Cohen addresses untreated, unanswered. That may have proved a fatal error. Whatever comes through the Congress as healthcare “reform” is going to largely reflect what the corporate healthcare industries wanted their lobbyists to deliver. And I think their success owes a tremendous debt to their having been supremely astute in understanding about Americans and their society and culture the very points which Cohen shows us about mythical beliefs.
All of the foregoing is intended to help impress on you what you’ve so stubbornly resisted grasping:
It’s little use to work up a great sweat in activities which are ill-conceived and founded upon mistaken understanding of the situation.
Because their livelihoods and the wealth and power and prosperity of their employers depends upon getting things right, upon avoiding those kinds of mistakes, the expert professional lobbyists do what no one in the Obama (or Clinton) administrations took the time to do: gain a true and profound understanding of the public’s beliefs and motivations as these pertain to the place and role of government as a key actor in managing healthcare’s “delivery”, (as well those of the lobbies’ political opposition and their aims and interests) and, in a carefully planned and executed campaign, use these against them for full effect .
Apparently, the Clinton and Obama administrations acted on the reasoning which assumed that, because practically every other advanced nation in the civilized world has some form of universal healthcare, and because the benefits of that are so obvious to so many millions of people around the world, that these facts would also be clear and apparent to the American public. The healthcare industries’ paid lobbyists, however, had and have a much more sophisticated understanding of not just the political processes of Washington, but, also the public’s myth-filled beliefs and mistakes of understanding. And, using these, the lobbies deftly beat the shit out of the Obama effort to put through meaningful reform, wringing out of the measures all the best and most important features so that what is left does not too greatly inconvenience the fortunes of the healthcare industries.
So, unlike your approach, which places the premium on action, on rounding up more eager “doers”, the professional lobbyists spend tremendous time and effort on the tedious daily work of “thinking”, understanding, and preparing meticulously before they go out and bust a sweat.
So, I wonder, Mr “DOER”: how long before these insights begin to make a crack into that clever made-up mind of yours? The lobby pros would be delighted if you and your comrades focused on being very busy on the ground while skipping as much as possible the “thinking” work which you disdain.
proximity, this is the best posting I have ever read on any blog, anywhere, anytime. Thank you for the time and energy that you put into its preparation. Your analysis of how the professional lobbiests work and think is spot on and, depends as I have written several times, on the sheer stupidity and mental laziness of the American electorate. If I thought that this electorate would heed your well chosen words, I would give up my cynicism for the hope that America could still finds its way.
Regrettably, many postings, yesterday, reveal that this is a forlorn wish. The empire is still in great trouble and heading for a collapse. Your efforts to obviate this lamentable fate are simply magnificent.
Dongi 2,
One of the points I have been trying to make is that (as you pointed out) the American electorate is lazy and unwilling to take ACTION to address the problem (about half of our voting age population could get off to a good start by actually showing up on election days and casting a vote). Yes, the lobbyists are running the show, but that’s because we (collectively) let them get away with it. What annoys me are the attitudes of people like proximity who have basically resigned themselves to complaining about the state of affairs while at the same time insisting that there is no solution without “thinking about it” some more. The solution is easy — elect people that won’t be influenced by money, lobbying, and influence peddling. Achieving that goal is what’s exceptionally difficult, which causes many to stay on their asses and lament that the situation is unfixable. Hence, the status quo continues, and proximity writes another analysis.
I agree that breaking the hold of the lobbyists is an exceptionally difficult goal; probably as difficult as getting the rank and file out on election day to vote their true interests by supporting politicians who are not bought off by corporate America. But, unless this rank and file has some idea of what is going on and how dedicated and talented the lobbyists are, there is no chance, imo, that they will get out and vote. I admire proximity for what he is trying to do – enlighten the masses as to their own self interest. You do him, I think, a great disservice and your list of insults in your reply to him makes me wonder where, bogenrim, you are really coming from. I have fought the big boys of corporate america both as a union rep and as a whistle blower. I identify a lot more with proximity than I do with you.
Funny how you berate me for my “insults,” yet at the same time question my motives and perspective while knowing absolutely nothing about me or my views. If you are loathe to take action in the face of difficult circumstances, and share proximity’s view that action in the face of adversity is essentially futile, then I truly wonder what kind of union rep you truly are (probably one of the types that gives wingnuts fodder for trashing unions). If you can dish it out, you sure as hell be ready for a counterpunch…
Sometimes when you’re in a hole and just digging yourself deeper the best thing to do is put the shovel down and put the thinking cap on and come up with a different plan of action.
I think Dongi and Proximity are not opposed to action. In fact, I bet you would mock their plan of action as unrealistic.
They are pointing out that mindlessly supporting the same corrupted politicians on their own corrupted playing field is a suckers game. You’re not doing any good through your “activisim”, such as it is.
And the fact you immediately question Dongi’s work as a union rep says all we need to know about you. The fact you disparage her as “the type that trashes unions” is despicable and shows you don’t know the first thing about activism or anything for that matter.
Lecturing a union rep on liberal values! Ha. I love the Obamabots–they think they invented activism when all they did was organize the biggest fan club evah! What is it you guys stand for again? Any particular policies or just the ones that Obama tells you to care about at some particular time? Oh yeah, there’s the organizing principle where you guys go bananas and fight like hell with people that dare criticize your Messiah. So that’s one thing you guys believe in–defending Obama’s honor.
You suggest that neither of them are opposed to action, yet I have not seen a single good idea as to how to fix the problems, other than a lot of simulated eloquent talk about “understanding” the situation. Meanwhile, the status quo continues as well as the slew of problems that face us and our country. When I dared suggest that proximity work to elect more responsive candidates, I was berated with a diatribe about how I just don’t “get it.” Speaking of that shovel — I think you are currently in clear possession of that instrument, so give it a rest.
Well, I have indeed been a member of a team where I felt we were making things worse by digging and it frustrated me to no end. That’s why I work better by myself or in a small group 🙂 In the one case I have in mind I really went out on a limb to argue to the group that the group should stop digging (metaphorically–the few jobs I’ve had where I worked with actual digging instruments–I was astounded by the situational intelligence of the career workers and never felt like we were digging a useless hole).
It’s really hard for a few soothsayers to convince a large group to reverse course and engage in dramatic change. That’s why our proposed action always seems so radical for you that are more conservative (using the literal meaning of the word) and have a hard time employing new strategies.
Which is what proximity and Dongi were proposing–I think–radical changes. Proximity proposed a really good idea; that we must fix the corruption in our system and enact public financing of campaigns and to limit the money politicians can receive after service and to limit lobbying–is a really good idea. Promiximity has suggested a call to action. I agree. But it will take radical change. Maybe we have to gum up the system and stop everything from happening until that’s done. It may even take a constitutional amendment. Anway, to truly bring that about will require a lot of work and we would be given a million excuses by centrists and the Dem party why that won’t happen and to just give up.
Another action is to leave the Democratic party.
There are no easy solutions but I am convinced continuing under the present system with only minimal changes is doomed to fail. It will make it worse in fact.
It’s just frustrating because so many of our putative allies are stuck in the rut of digging the same damn hole and it probably won’t be apparent to you guys until the whole thing caves in on us.
How could I possibly mock their plan of action? I haven’t even seen anything remotely representing a “plan of action” from either of them! By all means — if they have any plan other than thinking about the situation some more and bemoaning it’s complexity and how the rest of us are intellectually inferior and really don’t understand, let’s see it…
Follow this very thread up to Proximity’s last comment. S/He notes that fixing the playing field is the most important first step, i.e. campaign finance reform.
You’re not reading with your eyes and mind opened.
Apparently, you have not followed my posts too carefully. If you had, you might remember that I have argued as strongly as I could for campaign reform; that if the reformers could not get private funds out of the electoral process, then, the entire system would keep corrupting until it collapsed from its own internal rot. The outward sign of this would probably be the crash of the almighty dollar, currently losing value against, of all things, the Russian ruble.
Another thing the Progressives might do is reestablish their own party and run candidates once again at the state and federal level. They could form a solid block for reform, a fairer distribution of the nation’s wealth through a progressive income tax and a single payer health plan that would cover everybody. You know like those backward European countries do.
Finally, I am not surprised that you attack my past activities as a union grievance chairman and chief negotiator. An empty suit like yourself will always indulge in character assassination when reason and logic desert him. I have been posting on this blog for several months now.
Where in hell have you been?
That’s odd, because it seems that many of the things you propose (e.g.: running more progressive candidates) are the same things that proximity mocked me mercilessly for a few posts back, as if I were somehow a naive Obama drone wearing rose-colored glasses.
The idea of campaign finance reform, while noble in principle, is not realistic at this point, given the current litigation before SCOTUS that could literally turn any such efforts on their head (i.e.: the Hillary Clinton “documentary” case). I think we are completely in agreement in principle regarding the undue influence peddling in the process, however. It just seems like it would be more appropriate to await the outcome of the SC ruling.
As for the personal attacks, I will admit that I came on a little strong, and perhaps expressed myself in some ways that might have been interpreted as overly aggressive. For that, I sincerely apologize. I think all of us need to acknowledge some level of frustration, and direct our efforts to obtaining favorable results that progressives can be satisfied with, vice engaging in shouting matches. I have no reason to doubt your dedication to your union, nor should you have any reason to doubt my dedication to achieving a truly progressive agenda.
It’s also rather ironic that you would feel so compelled to lecture me on my tone, while at the same time becoming kindred spirits with Mr. proximity. In case you didn’t notice, proximity seems more than willing to insult me and others all over this post who dare do disagree with him, and personally attack our insight and perspective, while at the same time lauding his own personal understanding of affairs. You seem to be more than willing to climb on your high horse about the tone of discourse, when practically everything I have said in rebuttal that might be regarded as “insulting” was in response to the implication that I’m some sort of ignoramus that just doesn’t understand the ways of the system. How about some consistency in applying your standards, then?
You misstate in important ways what I’m arguing.
There is a very significant proportion of the American public which remain essentially ignorant of so much in understanding of the working of their society’s political, economic and wider cultural affairs. Instead, they (just as, to a lesser extent, so many others of us do) remain trapped in myth-based thinking which leaves them vulnerable to the sophisticated manipulations of mass media. So, in a very real sense they can be described as basically politically “innocent” and “defenseless” against the measures used so effectively by corporate mass-media and its sponsors.
I do indeed argue that no workable solution can exist which leaves unaddressed the ignorance of so many people about so much concerning their society’s political affairs. This seems to me so obvious that to deny it suggests that one is dangerously out of touch with reality. In my view, there is no more practical “action” than making oneself as well-informed as possible about political affairs, and, yes, that entails much thought, reading, and discussion—especially on the parts of those who so far have done little or none of it. While that group might not include you, it seems foolish to me to deny that it includes what is perhaps a majority of the contemporary public.
I go back to my analogy of being on the 98th floor of the WTC tower 1 or 2: it’s delusional to imagine that you can save your floor while the rest of the building burns. It’s no less delusional, I argue, to suppose that such a large part of the American public can be left in such astounding ignorance about so many essential facts about their political affairs.
There are no such people. The professional lobbies understand this even if you do not. Their livelihoods depend on meeting and dealing with what the (so successfully corrupted) political processes deal out. Their expertise consists in a superb understanding and exploitation of the intricate workings of local, state and national politics and government and, just as much, on a superb understanding of human nature and how to “play” it to achieve their employers’ aims—which are, necessarily, to circumvent the faithful representation of the best interests of the average general public in law and public policy.
There is a simple and essential truth which you miss: there are certain political responsibilities which only the general public can fulfill. And, chief among these is keeping watch over their elected officials’ practice of government. If, for whatever reason— ignorance, or the lack of time and other means, or lack of understanding or interest— they don’t meet that responsibility, then there is little or nothing to prevent the class of political officials to sink gradually to greater and greater depths of corruption and depravity. This process is now very advanced from years of scandalous negligence and inattention AND a broad lack of understanding of the facts and what is at stake in this situation.
And, to close this comment out, I point out that what we’re here specifically engaged in is, after all, a discussion blog for crying out loud! And, moreover, it’s first and foremost a political discussion blog. If that isn’t the place for the very thing I’m engaged in trying to do here—explain, argue, debate, discuss, analyze, etc., then, really, WTF is this place for?
thank you very much for the note of appreciation.
You are most welcome.
Hey, professor — yet another very eloquent essay on why you’re convinced that you need to continue sitting around whining about how the system is corrupt, and ruminating that nothing can be done until you spend some more time capmped out on your mushroom and reflecting on things some more. I suggest you pick up a history book and study the people that actually produced meaningful results (i.e.: the DOERS of which you speak so mockingly), even when the “system” was perceived as being corrupt and impenetrable to the will of the people. Incessant whiners like you (“the system is so fucked, nothing can be done, and I need to sit around and think about it some more”), give liberals a bad name (if you do, in fact, consider yourself a liberal/progressive). If, by some chance, you regard yourself as a conservative, your childish bellyaching and idle “analysis” comes as no surprise, really. Time to change the diaper and pop the pacifier back in your blowhole, baby Sue — it’s starting to stink from both ends.
Since this point is at the core of our disagreement, and since it’s a truly essential difference of view with extremely profound consequences for everything else which is related—and, really, there’s an enormous number of things related— I’ve returned to your post here to respond to it.
What you so stubbornly insist on here is a stark dichotomy: there is “thinking”, that is, mental work on the one hand, and, on the other, there is what you repeatedly refer to as “action” and these are, by your view as I see it, two necessarily distinctly different things. From that, you go on to argue that there are those who doing the mental work and others who do the “action” work. Between them, you clearly believe that it’s the “action” people whose efforts count most and that, at least for present circumstances, there has been quite enough time and effort spent on the mental work and what’s most needed now by far is more “action”—by those who specialize in that.
I reject in block this view of yours. First, I categorically deny that there is any such useful dichotomy between “mental work” and “action”. To me, your view speaks of a failure to recognize a fundamental fact: mental work is not only work, it’s also an essentially active work. Mental work is an effort and requires time and, after prolonged effort, rest.
It’s also an integral part (or certainly ought to be) of everything that you regard as distinctly “action”. In the history you refer to, where we find heroic men and women of “action”, where among them do we find examples who weren’t also themselves devoted practitioners of mental work? The sort of thing you describe simply doesn’t exist in nature. Even neighborhood canvassers are concerned with mental work as they go about what you call “action” on the ground.
But I don’t want to leave things there and lose sight of something just as essential about the mistakes you make in your view of “action” versus mental work. There is also the fact that, the poorer the preparatory mental work (or, at worst, its total lack), the poorer the so-called “action” which follows.
And that is at the heart of my point. While some have done a great deal of mental work on the issues which concern us here, far too many who are “active” in political action –even if that is only in casting a ballot—have done very little if any of the needed mental work. And that means in practice that they’re ill-equipped or completely unequipped to act wisely. And our larger troubles flow in great part from this. The highest degree of expertise on virtually every citizen’s part is neither required nor expected; but something a good deal better that what we currently see is required and expected—it seems to me.
Regarding,
“I suggest you pick up a history book and study the people that actually produced meaningful results” …
Please tell me: which is (or are) the history text(s) you recommend I read? I’d like to know the titles. Maybe I’ve read them or have them in my library.
And,
…”(i.e.: the DOERS of which you speak so mockingly), even when the “system” was perceived as being corrupt and impenetrable to the will of the people. …
Fortunately, the “system” has never been totally impenetrable to the will of the people; however, our present day must represent in certain aspects what’s fairly called a “high-water mark” in that.
…“Incessant whiners like you (“the system is so fucked, nothing can be done, and I need to sit around and think about it some more”) …
I certainly don’t claim that the system is “so fucked, nothing can be done”. And your assertion that I do shows the poverty of the position you’re taking when you’re left will little but a simple distortion of my argument into an absurd parody.
But, one thing I do readily accept is that there is always more for me to learn, always more to read, to study, to understand. I do not expect that to change–ever. Nor do I expect to cease be a complainer—though you prefer to call it “whining”. Without what you call “whining”, we’re going to remain stuck where we are, in an extremely dangerous predicament. It’s the devoted mental work I’ve done that allows me to understand this.
A commenter named Hunter L. Cook posted a list of 23 things on Fivethirtyeight.com last week.:
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/10/delaware-leaps-to-1-in-senate-rankings.html#comments
I’m starting to get really tired of this “Democrats can’t get anything done” bullshit. In 9 months Obama and the Democrats in Congress have:
1)Passed a stimulus act that pulled us back from the brink of an honest-to-God Great Depression II.
2)Passed the Ledbetter act that corrected an unbelievable injustice in employment discrimination law.
3)Pulled more concessions from Iran than Bush got in 8 years of senseless saber-rattling.
4)Increased the minimum wage, sorely needed by the workers in this country who currently have lower real wages than they did in 1970, even as our GDP has grown 18-fold.
5)Made it to the homestretch on the healthcare reform we’ve been trying to pass for 40 years.
6)Set a real timetable for getting out of Iraq.
7)Oversaw the killing of Al-Qaeda’s top man in Pakistan and a host of other terrorist leaders.
8)Finally reworked our military budget from an ancient and ineffective cold-war focus to a high-tech-focused counterinsurgency tool…something Bush never even touched, even as his “war on terror” rhetoric reached a fever pitch.
9)Managed just enough threats against the banks that they’ve started repaying the TARP money Bush paid out.
10)Started the process of re-regulating the banking/insurance/investment industry for the first real time since the 1930’s.
11)Begun placing Guantanamo prisoners elsewhere in preparation for closing the base.
12)Got the politics and pressure out of the Department of Justice.
13)Denounced torture and rescinded the absurd legal theories that allowed it.
14)Threaded the needle on unrest in Iran.
15)Dramatically modernized White House communications and technology, improving the flow of information to the public.
16)Started over 2500 highway projects, with bidding so fierce that the costs are below expectations and should allow even more projects than expected.
17)Created a $2500 tuition tax credit to help shore up our woeful debt-burden on families.
18)Reworked our student loan programs to great improvement.
19)Created and started execution of a plan to save the auto industry. (All you people screaming about 9.8% unemployment should stop and think what it would be if GM and Chrysler had been allowed to fail as prescribed by conservative economics.)
20)Stabilized Pakistan with $5B in aid.
21)Created the Office of Urban Policy and reversed Bush cuts to inner-city anti-gang/anti-gun policies, policies experts say are instrumental in reducing crime.
22)Added over 2 million acres of Federally-protected wilderness.
23)Dramatically improved America’s image abroad.
So, what would convince you guys that Obama can “close the deal?” Does Ahmadinejad have to convert to Christianity or something?
October 6, 2009 6:30 PM
Thanks, but no thank you—as a reply for the other previous post, this is completely inadequate.
My challenge was to “Mum”, who posted above, and it’s from that person that I’m looking for a reply.
That is hilarious, someone provided you with a list and you still don’t listen.
What a joke. You are showing your true colors by being disingenuous. Why don’t you do some research online, instead of throwing a petulant fit.
But something tells me that no matter what list it shown to you, no matter who it’s from you will create your own alternate reality about the way those things haven’t been accomplished.
You’re funny, too. A participant here makes a big show of being able to document the fifty things Obama has accomplished in his tenure so far and, instead of that person presenting those, someone else pipes up with a lame-o list which is what? supposed to be a reasonable answer to my challenge?
You’re in great company with the “ Anything -at-all- -is- -fine, -just-, -please-, don’t-hit-me, -please-! -Democrats.
And, this I especially like:
“something tells me that no matter what list it shown to you, no matter who it’s from you will create your own alternate reality about the way those things haven’t been accomplished”
that is such a classic Liberal cop-out that it must be in the Standard Liberal’s Encyclopedia of Clichéd Cop-Outs. “I don’t have to treat your criticisms responsibly because you’re not really interested”, etc.
Yeah, that’s smart, that’s such a respectable retort. You go with that. It reflects what you bring to the discussion.
Uh-huh…
Some people have time to read a post, write a comment and then, like, do things in real life. For instance a job where they are not permitted to surf the net.
“Some people have time to read a post, write a comment and then, like, do things in real life. For instance a job where they are not permitted to surf the net.”
Yeah. And some people blow hot air and, when challenged, fold up. Which of the two is going on here? I grant that any number of reasonable explanations could account for “Mum” ‘s remaining so far still unable to present the list of accomplishments. Maybe he/she fell ill, had some pressing obligations arise suddenly—there are all sorts of possibilities.
There’s also the possibility that the much-vaunted list of 50 things is not so impressive or so easily available once someone demands to see it.
“Mum” has posted since your comment, above. But still didn’t have time to post the claimed list.
Maybe you can figure it out.
What a list – on the list was “killing AQ’s so called top man in Pakistan !!!
Last I checked Aq’s top man is one Osama bin Laden; and according to US “intelligence” he’s in PAKISTAN hence unless Obama is supposed to have killed OBL, AQ’s top man in Pakistan is alive and well.
1 – the prisoners in Gitmo are STILL in Gitmo hence Obonga Bomba is now admitting he will NOT close Gitmo by January as he promised !!!
4/ Re regulating the banking industry……yeah what a start he made by appointing Mr Larry “Glass -Steagall is unnecessary” Summers as a key adviser and choosing to reappoint Mr Ben “more transparency is needed but you’re not allowed to see who I gave $2 trillion of your money to” Bernanke…….yeah talk to us when he actually PASSES regulations as opposed to gives a speech about regulation eh bubba
5 / Wow he set a timetable to get out of Iraq…..yesterday I se a timetable to fly to the moon…..does that count as a great achievement of mine ???
6/ Dramatically improved america’s image abroard – yeah right……America is hated as much as ever (if not more) in Pakistan (by the people as opposed to Mr Asif 20% Zardari) – the country whose help he desperately needs for his Afghanistan quagmire !!!!
7/ Reworked the student loan programme to great improvement – er exactly HOW has it been improved ??
Pretty easy to rip apart that list of Obama’s “achievements”……you could have covered his “achievements” by just saying “gave a speech” / “gave a speech” / “gave a speech” beause quite bluntly that is ALL that Obama has done of any good – his real ACTIONS have been a NEGATIVE
Mum, what of the following is not true?
“Obama has maintained troop levels in Iraq even though his main campaign pledge was to reduce them, and has transformed and enlarged Afghanistan into AfPak with a larger war — a “war of necessity” — on the way. He has balked on gay rights, domestic repression and climate control, and failed to lead on healthcare (not “trying” at all), leaving it to the Congress.
Domestically, while he continued the Bush bail-out of the banks and investment houses, and not consumers, his stimulus bill was ineffective, and foreclosures and unemployment are up, with no end in sight. The budget deficit is out of sight while Pentagon corporate welfare continues unabated. It looks like people will be forced to purchase health insurance or pay a fine, which is great for insurance companies, but how will unemployed twenty-somethings like that? Some “change.””
Except for the “forced to buy health insurance’, which is a prediction, what from the above is not true?
Lets see. I think combat troops out by 2011. Let me Check ICausailties since all the troops were pulled out of the cities. KIAs down about 50% 9 Months into office and about a year from his promise. Check
Promised that the focus would be on Afghanistan to the agreement of most . Now in the midst of a crucial debate which his vice president is playing a strong roll in advocating a pull back. As Biden showed its getting to the point where it doesn’t make sense, but even when something completely doesn’t make sense, like say rocks falling on someones head in the teabagger party. Maybe someone asks the near headless teabagger to take two steps to his right to save himself and the near headless one says “I need to check with Glenn to see if Obama is going to get some advantage out of this”,
One can easily see things aren’t that simple.
Every time Obama does something right, the anti-Obama crew screams “fanboys” at those who are supporting the president , even the ones that are doing it with caution, then bitch it wasn’t done fast enough or it should have been their cause.
Then the teabaggers take out the nooses and do their Mock Lynchings. I can’t imagine what would happen if he did a series of things right all in a little row.
Because even if we consider them right, the guys that own 40 guns per household at the expense of a few things like food for the family, may start shooting people.
Things are just not rosy no matter which way he goes. I suspect if anyone of us actually walked into a job like this, our first and only action would be to walk right back out. I also suspect he and his crew was not quite prepared for having their own side act as mean spirited , illogical and nasty as the teabaggers.
Wouldn’t that confuse even the brightest people?
Thanks to Boo for pointing out the differences between urban progressives vs the wealthy, mostly white progressives. One should go to New Haven CT or even call it by phone to see the stark differences. I recently had that displeasure and I can tell you that those who have no economic worries, no health insurance worries and sometimes no set schedule to worry about are in a totally different world.
Hardship is not something they have experienced in the true meaning of the word. I see a lot of those people on Daily Kos and I also see some of them here. They also don’t seem concerned about inflicting hardship on others if not doing it costs a little extra money.
I suppose they must have something to occupy themselves with. You know no wealthy progressive is ever going to show up for brunch with out their cause.
Maybe it’s not quite that bad here. But I’ll tell you, when people are willing to toss 45,000 Americans a year under the bus literally to protest this seemingly ineffectual president’s lack of action on their causes, I have to wonder.
Sorry for jumping into Your Blog Boo. I usually don’t win friends nor influence people on DailyKos. I got lost tonight after someone linked here. I have been here before though. I was registered. It’s been awhile. I’m just in a strange place. I really want to support the President of the United States. Isn’t that peculiar?
I love that you are outraged at the lack of civility toward the president.
Here’s what one of the brown people on the receiving end of the bombs says about Obama’s War and his bombs:
But I guess Obama’s feelings are more important to you than people getting blown to pieces. Poor Obama.
Lucky he’s got an army of Democrats ready to justify everything he does (even when these same people where holloring when Bush did it).
Let me ask you what your position was when Bush escalated in Iraq? Did you question it or just clap along and like Brittany Spears and restrain from questioning the president in a time of war? Or is is just presidents with Ds behind their names that you give a free pass too.
You are correct, Mum, you just don’t go home after wrecking someone’s country and inflicting all kinds of casualties in an unjust and unprovoked war. You make restitution for all the damage and carnage that you caused. Like putting a special tax on the American citizenry to provide such compensation. Is that what you are suggesting? Or is justice to the people of Iraq a concept foreign to the United States of America?
Bullshit to you too Miss Soccer Mommy.
Facts are facts – Obama or as I now refer to him OBOMBA is a 100% war monger. He now has MORE troops depoyed to war zones than Chimpy, he has EXTENDED the war into Pakistan; under his war mongering Presidency MORE civilians are being killed by his “super smart” drones.
Oh yeah and OBOMBA wonders why the people in Afghanistan etc hate americans and like Chimpy he laughably believes its because “they envy our freedom fries”
No doubt that the WH doesn’t want to hear from Independents like me, but — get this — we’re the largest voting block and we’re venting about the lack of change that was promised but not delivered, and I’m not talking about the easy-to-do, obvious things like stopping torture. How much courage did that take? Or the Ledbetter Act?
Again, I guess it didn’t get through, Obama despite his principal campaign pledge, the one he defeated Clinton with, has retained the full occupation force in Iraq. And that’s even with the forced withdrawal of those forces out of Iraqi cities.So what are they doing, and why are they still there? Can anybody explain that simple fact? Further east the Afghanistan war is being expanded not only in that country but into Pakistan — apparently that’s not on anybody’s radar screen but it should be, because “Obama’s War” promises be the defining event of his presidency. On Iran it is ridiculous to say that the US got concessions from a country that has allowed full UN inspection of its facilities. Iran wants to send a small amount of uranium out of the country for higher enrichment because they need it and they can’t do it — no concession there. On Palestine Obama looked silly on additonal settlements and has folded on Goldstone.
Domestically, listen to Robert Reich: “My friends in the Administration and on the Hill repeatedly tell me “don’t make the perfect the enemy of the better,” or words to that effect. Politics is the art of the possible, blah blah blah. True. But in each of these areas — healthcare, financial regulation, environment, and jobs — the “better” is really not that much better. Forget perfect; anything that offered real reform would be enough. But in every case, what should be the centerpieces of reform are being left out. . . Never have so many crucial issues come to a head at the same time, when Democrats run the White House and Congress, with so little real reform to show for it.”
But hey, Obama “Dramatically modernized White House communications and technology” so let’s forget all that other stuff.
Feels like his concerns are being addressed and that Obama is sticking to the agenda he promised during the campaign.Let’s go point for point here:
-Iraq draw down is on schedule for 2011 removal, and in line with the wishes of the Iraqi people who are by and large happy with progress.
-Obama always planned to re-engage in Afghanistan, calling it a “war of necessity”, and he increased troops when he came into office. His current reassessment of strategy there is encouraging and the right step imo.
-Pakistan was always a part of the conflict in Afghanistan, the military in Pakistan has always seen Afghanistan as a buffer to its west and it has historically been a fluid border between the two.
-Getting Iran to put fuel in rods means it is fuel that cannot be put into a nuclear weapon, delaying time between a decision to get nukes and the ability to deploy them. Iran has the capability already, what is lacking is the decision to pursue them.
-Obama continues to push for a halt in settlements, but has decided to move on to final talks. Not letting the two sides diddle on the side and forcing action is the only way to resolve this conflict, which is not what you appear to want.
And domestically, your shrill dismissal of the ball that Obama started rolling with ending torture and the stimulus is just an endorsement of the kind of silly absolutism and “my way or the highway” thinking of Glenn, FDL and Bush.
Obama says Afghanistan is a war of necessity.
Necessary for what? That Unocal pipeline from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean?
It’s not about democracy, because the elections in Afghanistan are fixed. It’s not about catching bin Laden. As much ridicule as Bush got for saying he doesn’t worry about bin Laden anymore, he’s completely off the radar now. The man allegedly behind the murder of three thousand Americans, who was the rationale for two wars and trillions of dollars down the toilet, is now a footnote.
The necessity is to defeat the Taliban who were getting aid from the US before they balked on the pipeline?
BS
And what exactly has that $2 trillion stimulus to the Wall street parasites (Obama’s campaign donors) achieved – oh yeah a $23 BN bonus pool for Obama’s Treasury Sec’s buddie at Goldman Sachs and a 10% unemployment rate for the rest of the US
Are Obama defenders, I guess you’d call Boo and the others here defenders, are they all happy with how things are going in Afghanistan? If not, then how much criticism is allowed?
By the way, why are we in Afghanistan? After the last “election” there you can be sure that it ain’t for democracy anymore.
Yes, I like Obama better than Bush. And yes, Dubya wouldn’t nominate Sotomayor for anything (although Sotomayor was first nominated to the federal bench by his father, George H W Bush). In fact, my criticism of Obama is that where there is failure you can point to his reliance on the same cast of characters in the permanent government who served Bush and Bill Clinton. These people are more ready to serve the interests of the rich and powerful to the detriment of the rest of us. Within this group I would include Hillary Clinton, who is a female Zbigniew Brzezinski. She doesn’t have her finger on the button, but she routinely gets a saber to rattle. If that’s who she is now, did she ever change or was her public persona as a wild feminist socialist just for the consumption of the masses? After all, her child grew up to be an arbitrager. What does that say about Clinton Family Values? I don’t get too excited about this because that’s the nature of our governance. If you get too tied up with politics you are always disappointed when the goalposts are moved on you again (like demanding supermajorities wherein intransigent Repubicans must grant their imprimaturs).
I’m not offended at all with the unidentified source in the White House telling “the blogosphere” to pipe down. The White House, whoever occupies it, wants to quash dissent to some extent. And if someone in the blogosphere says, “Oh yeah? Well what about this?” well that’s just their reason for being. It’s the nature of things.
The more interesting question here is why Booman alternately says he’s bored and that he’s outraged at Obama’s critics to the left. It’s like getting alternately bored and outraged at the rain.
Myself, I find the change of regimes interesting. You can monitor the changes versus continuity and you get a better apprehension of what the permanent government will actually allow. Military still running their wars? Check. No one in the CIA indicted for kidnapping, torture or murder? Check (for now). Elements of the Justice Department still defending the military’s unconstitutional actions? Check. On the other hand, has anyone gotten anywhere with changing the banking system that brought on this worldwide depression? Sorry, Charlie.
I’m bored by the criticism from the administration and I’m annoyed by the puppet-on-a-string knnejerk defensiveness of the blogosphere.
Seconded! Your rant is far nicer and more articulate than anything I could have ever said.
Booman, is DaBomb an alter ego?
No.
No I am not an alter ego of any kind.
Why don’t you ask me for a change instead of the moderator?
I can speak for myself.
I registered just so I could say “YES@!” to this vent.
I’m not sure who needs to listen to this post most, Big Tent Democrat, Jane Hamsher, or John Aravosis…
All of them.
Rating this post ‘Mega Troll’ is ratings abuse. It is not disruptive, not disrespectful, not spam.
.
However, as far as ratings at the pond, we are customed to just ‘4’s (and a ‘3’ by clear accident). The troll rating is for reason of spam comments, not to be used in fair discussion with opposing views. We don’t troll monger in Booman’s Place.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Exactly! – Though there may be a need for an occasional ‘2’ as a fair warning.
Well, this guy signs up and immediately gave out a “1” and his only comment was a dittohead comment “you’re the dreamiest” so I felt he deserved a 1. Seeing a lot of dittohead comments.
SFHawkguy, Assuming you are a trusted user to assign a mega-troll rating, I defend your right to give out such an evaluation. I think such a concept (trusted user) makes a lot of sense since BooMan can’t be expected to be able to monitor his blog every minute of every day. This practically eliminates trolls and their churlish comments and helps make the Tribune such a lively and informative place.
Kudos to you for noticing that “1” rating assigned by the Crusty Dem to Don Bacon, a consistently thoughtful commentator here at the pond. Perhaps, the Crusty Dem was unaware of the protocols here and should have read more and vented later.
He registered and immediately gave Don Williams a 1 so he got a 0 from me.
Whatever. I guess Booman found his new readership–Obama fanboy rejects from DailyKos or something.
I mean Don Bacon immediately below.
I hadn’t seen that, but responding to ratings abuse with more of the same is not the way to go. Better to point it out in a comment.
Whatever. I guess Booman found his new readership–Obama fanboy rejects from DailyKos or something.
Disrespectful – most participants here have been around for years.
Whatever ask. The ratings system was working just fine here and I was a responsible user of it, like I thought you and Oui were so I’m surprised to see you two throwing in your lot with the Obama dittohead fanboys.
Notice this fool’s comment got the most ratings out of all the comments. A dittohead comment that said nothing of substance and then a bunch of fanboys jumped on to defend this original fanboy’s honor, I guess.
I guess these people where looking for a place to vent (and hey–I’m all for venting–even when it’s for a silly reason [to defend Obama’s ego] and it’s totally out of proportion to more serious things going on). And I can understand how reality is a hard place to be for an Obama supporter these days.
I guess Booman runs the show but but I like the fact that this place isn’t Daily Kos and it doesn’t need to have the same rules. I’m comfortable giving a dittohead a 0 when he signs up to troll rate a thoughtful commentator and then simply adds his asinine dittohead comment.
Why not just save pixels and type “Welcome to Booman, some of us are hypersensitive twits”.
Well. I’m sure Booman welcomes you. I’m glad you have a place to vent and like Booman’s writing. I do to.
But there is a variance of opinion here (which is why I like it) and it’s not exactly like DalyKos (another reason I like it) despite the similar style.
I don’t think the ratings matter much at all. They are really insignificant. I don’t think there are ‘trusted users’ like on Daily Kos, although there are front pagers and frequent posters.
So whatever. Live and learn. I look forward to more substantive comments from you and now you know the custom that 0s or 1s aren’t really doled out unless there is good reason (and most people just put a 4 for those they agree with or think are good comments).
Pardon my nOObishness. Perhaps the rating system should be adjusted so that there’s a separation between trolling (which is what I was rating) and spam (which is obviously in a different category).
I would add Greenwald to that list
I keep coming into the comments here to say yes, I completely agree with you. I’m just so relieved and grateful to find perspective and insight instead of the relentless echo chamber populism & cynicism burning up other blogs.
Obama is light years ahead of Bush the Inept that’s for sure. Whether he has the wit and the wisdom to turn around the falling empire is another question entirely. If Afghanistan becomes his Vietnam along with continuing imbroglios with Iraq and Pakistan, not to mention Iran, I doubt he will win in 2012. Perhaps, HR Clinton or some Republican madness like Palin/Huckleby will be our next president and the slide to oblivion will then accelerate into a veritable free fall.
I wish him the best for the sake of all of us. What are the gripings of any political group when the fate of our culture and, maybe, even the world itself, as we know it, is in the balance? Meanwhile, I am spending as much time as I can with friends and family passing up no opportunity to smell the rose blossoms and enjoy the fine things in life. Blessings and best wishes to all members of the pond.
Really good points, especially the last. It’s exactly where I am.
An excellent rant Booman. I have to add some realities that many of these people know but seem to leave out of their arguments.
Going with Obama’s challenge to stay active after the election and essentially as FDR said, make him do it. Grassroots support is best when organized, with a plan. Arguments that fall into no brainer, undeniable categories. Put in as concise a form as possible. Find the (other) people who have been working for your specific goal a long time. Try to put together a message that reaches the moderates and independents. A message that the real powers that be will have a hard time thwarting. Think of the what PricewaterhouseCoopers statement this morning did to the AHIP. There are unlikely sources of real help out there. The anxiety of where this country is headed is not escaping even the powerful.
For some of the best concepts in communication, check out:
The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation by Drew Westen
Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Life by Marshall B. Rosenberg (Author), Arun Gandhi
How could I forget #5?
How the GOP, some Dems and the media are doing everything they can to slow and thwart real change. Just look at health care. Plenty of work already done, bills already out there. And an opposition with lies and distortions that top anything the GOP has ever done. In over reaching they have probably cut their credibility.
Another point that underscores all of them. It takes a good year to get a basic handle on a new job. There are many many hours just learning basics, details. I found out last year that when you try to work on the big goals before the basics are under control, you get fired. That situation was somewhat similar in the degree of a mess it was. It can be close to impossible to figure out what to prioritize. Put in some interruptions, Iran’s elections, nuclear program, South Korea, etc. just puts off getting to what you thought were priorities.
And then get kicked in the teeth for being given an award you did not seek or know you had been nominated for? Asked to disrespect the committee and the country who award it with a refusal?
Teddy Roosevelt: “Any man can withstand adversity. If you want a true test of a man’s character, give him power.”
Supporting someone who has taken the helm of the most disproportionately powerful country in the history of the world, and has turned it’s course 180 degrees in 8 months, means a hell of a lot to the 6 billion other humans the 300 million of us are poorly sharing the planet with.
The is the kind of rant I love to read. Thanks, wish I could send it to a few progs I know.
Constructive criticism is fine, but I’m worried about all of the malcontents that get their panties in a wad, take their ball and go home, and just won’t show up for the 2010 midterm elections. If that happens and we end up with the republican fucks in charge again, see what happens to the agenda then. Hope you’re happy then when you go from having a seat at the table to getting thrown in the back of the bus again (at least then they’ll have a good reason to bitch)…
Is saying that someone has his/her panties in a wad constructive criticism? Does that equate to, say, mentioning that people held in prisons by our government still haven’t been charged with crimes for years? That they are treated so harshly that they are attempting suicide with some regularity? Or that our Bill of Rights explicitly says you can’t do this?
Does that constitute wadded panties or a wadded Constitution? Does seven years of sitting in a cell constitute a speedy trial? Oh, Obama’s only responsible for eight of those months.
Politics and public policy are a contact sport — if you can’t take a punch every now and again and stand up to valid, if not harsh and blunt, criticism, then you’re in the wrong place. That said, my original point was simply this: Expecting your laundry list of priorities (whatever they happen to be) to simply happen by executive fiat is unrealistic. For one thing, when legislators feel as if they are being circumvented in the name of expediency, they tend to be totally unwilling to legislate your agenda. Being noble and taking a stand in the name of “principle” sounds wonderful, but many of us are not willing to jettison important legislative priorities (like meaningful health care reform) in the name of nobility and purity. Regrettable as that may sound to you, that’s just how the process works. If you think that throwing a tantrum and disavowing any support for Obama Democrats is the answer, then be my guest…I guarantee you won’t be happy with the result.
Bob – if Obama moves to fast, he’ll meet JFK’s fate, and he knows it. He’s trying to find allies and build coalitions. He can’t unilaterally do that kind of stuff, no matter how right it is, without putting his entire administration at risk. He’s smart enough not to do that. He has a lot of wrongs to right. He has to prioritize, and build.
I’m frustrated. We’re all right to be frustrated. But when we aim that frustration at Obama, we’re wasting our energy on the wrong target. We should go after the military officials who keep people imprisoned. Vent our anger DIRECTLY, not INDIRECTLY at someone who is trying to help.
But Obama has a constitutional duty to tell those military officials what to do–not the other way around.
If he is to fearful (and he has a lot to be scared of) to do this we need to pick a president that is not scared.
I disagree. It isn’t a matter of cowardice. It’s practicality. I don’t think he’s afraid to die. I think he’s afraid to die THIS EARLY before he has accomplished all he could.
I would do the same. You would too.
I’m not really saying Obama is a personal coward–maybe you’re right that it’s human nature to expect a human to put stand up to a military. But other leaders throughout time have done so at great risk to their personal liberty. I see no evidence Obama is willing to take on the U.S. war machine–either covertly or overtly.
But, as a practical matter, if there really is a military junta running the U.S. that will assassinate a president for, say, letting gays in the military or stopping a war here or there (and while not generally prone to conspiracy theories–I’m open to this possibility) then it seems to me that Obama has a duty to do all he can to minimize this power and to inform the American people in any way he can of this fact.
But at every small step Obama has done the bidding of the generals and warmongers.
If he really was trying to “change things from the inside” I see no evidence of any sort of plan, clever or not, of making this happen. Quite the contrary in fact.
But the best we can do is to hold politicians accountable. Obama made noises about limiting our warmongering and has broken these promises. Whereas the two candidates that did promise radical change, Kucinich and Paul, seemed more than willing to challenge this uncomfortable fact and seems to me they are just as likely, or even more likely, to follow through on their promises than Obama was.
Why not elect a president that is willing to openly challenge the status quo rather than one that does the bidding of the status quo but promises to work from the inside to ameliorate the negative consequences and maybe, someday, do something about it (and you know I think that’s a bunch of baloney to even believe this is Obama’s goal)?
Why should we care about Obama. If a truly peaceful president would be assassinated then we need to see that happen. We can’t be afraid to vote for peace because a secret junta may or may not exist. That’s terrorism.
I’ve already seen that happen.
Do you have any book recommendations on the subject?
I was very interested in the subject while I was in High School and I read a number of books but it’s been a long time and would like to revisit it.
Still. Granting your conclusion . . . giving in to the terrorists that would assassinate a president is not the answer either.
We don’t just give up and elect puppets and make excuses for puppets because of the danger.
We find brave women and men who will stand up to this tyranny and hold them accountable. Like I noted, the only people have come close recently are Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul.
If a president feels their life is threatened they need to reveal it to the people. Maybe Bill Clinton can confess via YouTube on his death about this and the JFK assisination–he can put it in his will or something–in a message to the American people.
You get my drift. Some things can be done to fight this tyranny.
All I see is complete acquiescence and excuses.
Best single book is Jim Douglass’ “JFK and the Unspeakable: Why He Was Killed and Why it Matters”. I’m sick or I’d say more.
Look how close Kucinich and Paul got to being elected too. Just missed it by a hair.
I call the kind people who scream out this crap the worse than Bleacher bums at the ball park. Bleacher bums for the post part show their fast, carry a wallet. Have an id.
Blogger Bleacher Bums hide behind anonymous names. Make nutty assertions and expect people to take them seriously.
You should start the National Association of Blogger Bleacher Bums.(NNBBB) No real names are needed. No physical meetings occur. No dues are paid. No fear. It’s a new kind of activism. The brave in your face activist armed with unassailable facts and logic is so 1960s.
We picked Obama. Either live with the person you elected to office or wait for his GOP replacement when you abandon support. I’m sure they will be happy to listen to you as a new branch of Gitmo is opened for Americans only.
Lets see,
Ok so go find someone who isn’t scared . Give me a list of names. Scared. JHC. His agents are probably more scared than he is. You wouldn’t last a few seconds in that pressure cooker.
Anyone who says they aren’t scared is lying through their teeth. The fact that he presses on and shows us he does not let his fears get in the way of prioritizing his job is not trivial.
The fact that people who call him scared do so behind an anonymous name pretty much says it all.
Move too fast – hell if Obama (or more apporopiately Obomba) were to move any slower he’d be moving IN REVERSE !!!!.
I might add that you Obama worshippers were blabbering on that it wasn’t realistic for Chimpy to blame clinton for 9/11 given that he’d already been President for 9 months…..Well on that basis the mess in the US is ALL Obama’s problem….not that you admit that seeing as you STILL blame everything on the chimp – so the question is when is Obomba going to take responsibnility for the $2.3 TRILLION he gave to his campaign contributors on Wall Street ?
Progressives can be as immature as conservatives?
Some people are more comfortable in permanent opposition than in constructive engagement?
Others think democracy is about them and only them?
There are times when a counter-culture can be counter-productive?
Extreme left and right have more in common with each other than with an evolving and moving centre?
Egotism trumps reason?
Shouting beats organisation and hard work?
It’s always up to the other guy to do the hard work?
Now where have I heard all this before…
“If you berate them for not closing Guantanamo fast enough, not ending Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell fast enough, not evacuating Iraq fast enough, not passing a health care bill fast enough, and so on…do you not expect one their number to at some point push back and point out that making these kind of changes takes time and is a bit difficult?”
Since we’re “letting it fly” here—for what reason, exactly, I don’t know since you don’t even bother to link or reference more than vaguely the source-comments from some White House staffer which set this little teapot tempest off—here are my thoughts:
As rants go, yours is pathetic whining that I think resembles standard liberal “Mama! He HIT me!!! Wahhhhhh!” “It’s difficult” to extend the most basic legal rights, supposedly guaranteed in U.S law, to people now held more than seven years without charge? Without trial? Without full due process and access to a lawyer’s representation? That’s “difficult”? You don’t say why it’s so fucking difficult to do this. And I don’t understand why it is. If these people are real criminals, they ought to have been charged legally and prosecuted long ago. Otherwise, they ought to be released. Period. Where should they go? Since “WE” fucking kidnapped them and illegally imprisoned them, “WE” ought to release them ANYWHERE they ask, and we ought to pay them generous reparations and not expect them to refrain from trying to sue “US” for the gross harms inflicted on them—those that “WE” haven’t murdered already, that is.
“I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much.”
Here’s a NEWS FLASH: “I’ve” expected “pretty much next-to-nothing” from Obama from the time in his campaign that he, with breath-taking irresponsibility, raised the nation’s expectations to levels far beyond what he could honestly claim possible to fulfill. And I’ve found that he’s delivered what I expected: damn fucking little. As others have pointed out, that Obama is better than McCain doesn’t relieve him from deserved criticism on the many points where, despite his not being John McCain, he’s still simply not much on delivery. So, in answer to the “I think the White House is willing to listen to criticism from their allies. From you? Not so much“, I’ve never entertained the foolish illusion that the Obama White House was ever going to “listen” or even give enough of a fucking damn to consistently and fairly TELL THE GODDAMN FUCKING TRUTH to the public which, more than anything else, needs to hear that from its government officials after eight years of Bush and Cheney.
By the way, nothing lasting or deserving the name “Peace” (or, by the way, “Peace-maker”) can come without a courageous practice of justice; the criminals who misled the nation for the past two terms of national government administration are clearly still in no danger of being brought to justice. Without that, EVERYTHING else in Obama’s agenda is going nowhere fast because his tenure leaves untouched the keystone political problem of our times: flagrant failure of political legitimacy.
Oh, say, I wonder, may I, too, “vent”?
I’m with proximity1 on this rant.
Unlike most people, I guess, I didn’t have very high expectations for Obama. Whenever I saw him interviewed on TV before he began his run for the presidency, he always appeared wishy-washy, trying to be in the middle of any issue rather than choosing the correct side. During the primaries, I supported him over Clinton, whose tactics I didn’t care for and whose record during the Bush years was mixed.
So, to repeat, I didn’t expect much more from Obama than to be better than Bush – and others have pointed out that that’s a very low bar indeed – and I haven’t been disappointed. What the country really needs is an FDR or an arm-twisting LBJ (without the Vietnam war) – but I don’t know of any liberals (or conservatives, for that matter) that fit into those shoes.
I am also, sadly, with proximityand obsess5 on quite a few of these.
“closing guantanamo but sending everyone to a different legal black hole at bagram” doesn’t count as closing guantanamo. Not to me anyway. Neither does the embrace and expansion of bush’s state secrets “doctrine”: I’m going to defer to greenwald on this one, since he seems to know what he’s talking about. same with the wiretapping and FISA. Not impressed. (not impressed with a lot fo democrats either for that matter)
although in the past, i’ve made some “not gonna happen” comments about health care, I’ve tried to hold off in recent months because i don’t know what’s going to be produced. However, I have to admit i was not impressed with “the US isn’t ready for single payer”.
on the bailout, you know how i feel and I’m not going to open up THAT can of worms again other than to say “maybe it was necessary, but it sure looks like a lot of wall street made out and main street did not, and there should have been some strings attached.” I realize you disagree with that, but I’m going to defer to people like elizabeth warren, paul krugman, duncan black, and others. they have a background in economics, and seem to know what they’re talking about.
I’ll give props on dialogue with iran. and I’ll give props on bringing the US back into the community of sanity (on some issues). I’ll give props on giving the GOP and their supporters enough rope to hang themselves. Sotomayor? Who knows, I’m witholding judgement until i see what she does. I liked her comments about corporations a few weeks ago.
As for the gay rights stuff, i think he could be doing better. i can understand why gay people are upset about a lot of this: no one likes to be compared to a pedophile.
as you’ll recall, i didn’t like either of the final primary candidates, neither clinton nor obama; nor am i a big fan of the democrats even though i continue to be registered as one.
I think one of the reasons you keep hearing the chess metaphor (11-dimensional or just plain old chess) is because that’s his style of politics. When a group of people start feeling like pawns, it’s understandable when they get angry. If there’s a big payoff where our side wins, perhaps that anger is soothed. but if there’s no payoff…
so I think some of the criticism is valid, some of it is not valid, and i remain disappointed in US politics as a whole.
I’ll second that
Sure , now you can.By telling anyone who will listen that the current President is not undoing 30 years fast enough and calling him every name in the book because he is not endowed with super human strength to leap law, congress, and the military establishment (that had one of the greatest war generals stymied enough to warn America about it 48 years ago) with a single effortless leap that you know for a fact could be done if he just wanted too.
Then I’m sure as soon as you help get a Palin or Huk in office they will be happy to listen to you. See how that worked out the last time?
Human nature is strange, When people shout with no command of the facts and then call people vile names, The object of their scorn and derision have a strange reaction. They ignore you if they are democrat and arrest and rendition your ass if they are in the GOP you so desperately want back in office.
All of that over this:
No wonder, then, that in America today a mere six-year-old boy can find himself ordered to serve 45 days in “reform school” for having brought his Cub Scout camping knife-fork-spoon tool to school.
the wh adviser didn’t mention moving out of our parents’ basement, so seems a less harsh criticism than it could be.
Very much appreciate this post, Booman. especially the part about investigating torture – the whole strategy behind appointing Eric Holder seems to elude the whiners. On the other hand, not sure it hurts Obama to be sniped at from the left especially on economic issues. imo he’s treading a fine line and may help him with some circles (“if he’s attacked by progressives he can’t be that bad…”)
The revolution must be going well; the left blogosphere is having pie fights again.
Actually, I don’t throw pies — I throw poop (makes more of a statement)…
Then, the revolution must be going very well.
Right on, brother.
Maybe it would help to listen to our theme song one more time:
It’s hard to be rational when you take everything personal, and by the way – I AM dressed.
“…I AM dressed.”
Yeah — probably in your undies, and I bet you’re munching on a bag of Cheetos, too!
Yes, I supported Obama during the primaries. Once he was elected he decided to switch parties and become a Republican. So I bitch about it. BTW, to the long list of Bushies still running the government, let me add the Postmaster General, a Bush appointee still dedicated to breaking the postal unions and privatizing the postal service.
So Republicans would have appointed Sotomayor, stopped mountain removal, started pulling out of iraq, increased protections for wilderness, signed the ledbetter act, removed the gag rule, …?
Who knew?
I keep repeating. Republicans DID appoint Sotomayor. In 1991. GEORGE H W BUSH appointed Sotomayor to the federal bench.
Have the goalposts moved so far that former President and former head of the CIA George Bush is now a Democrat?
Considering that she hasn’t voted on anything yet, I might not bet all my chips on her being a radical on the left quite yet.
Please note Obama’s EPA did not “stop mountain removal.”
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2009/2009-06-15-091.asp
Yeah and :
Ooops they wouldn’t have done – and surprise surprise neither has Mr Obomba
That was a very satisfying thing to read.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/10/13/792526/-progressive-bloggers-self-esteem-issues-with-Ob
ama
Frankly, I think there are two categories of irrational critics–those who just write to be argumentative (and will never be satisfied) and those who (through inexperience) don’t understand how legislative “sausage” is made and think the President can work miracles.
Criticism is fine, but to say that Obama has an automatic 60 votes and should be able to do anything is just not intelligent.
Are sixty votes required to enforce the Consitution? Or perhaps there’s a ten-year waiting period?
You are part of the problem.
You are an example exactly what Booman is talking about. Michael Moore also stated in his blog, that progressives at the first sign of wavering, want to pack up and their toys and go home.
But go ahead and keep lobbing fire bombs and eggs at the President, instead of Congress if that makes you feel better.
Am I lobbing bombs to ask for the Constitution to be enforced? How rude of me. And here I thought that the President was the Commander-In_Chief and the Department of Justice and the Department of Defense were UNDER his jurisdiction. It’s under Congress’ control. For shame.
Now, if DaBomb wants to admit that in fact the President doesn’t have control of the the DOD or the CIA or even the Justice Department then I’m willing to listen. Because it sure seems like he doesn’t.
But please, I was marching against the VIETNAM WAR. I spent a life as a union rep fighting for workers’ rights. Taking my toys and going home? Please. But thanks for immediately reverting to ad hominems. It helps to measure the strength of your argument.
How is the President not enforcing the Constitution?
Please enlighten me.
I don’t care about you marching against Vietnam or working with unions. What does that have to do with Obama not enforcing the Constituion as you say?
Last time I checked we wanted a President who wasn’t like Bush. So that means, if we are to utilize tenets of the Constitution, that means treating Congress as a co-equal branch of government. Isn’t that what Obama is trying to accomplish, restoring goverment to its rightly utilization?
The President is not above reproach. But the criticism hasn’t been constructive either.
WRONG – it’s the likes of you and your fellow lick spittle Obama worshippers who ARE the problem. In essence you Obama worshippers are no difference from those loony tune teabagging chimpy worshippers…….not surprising given that like those teabaggers you and your beloved lord God Obama:
Americablog’s John Aravosis, one of Obama’s harshest progressive blogosphere critics, worked as a Congressional staffer in the 1990s. He does understand the sausage factory. He’s still very critical of Obama.
Wiki, for context.
yeah and Ray La Hood Transportation Sec under Obama was a REPUBLICAN Congressman; John Brennan – torture defender in chief under Bush – is a senior adviser to Obama.
So how does it work – Republicans are only acceptable if they promise to love, worship, adore and be 100% uncritical of Obama ???
And he is constantly proven wrong in his anaylsis of Obama.
But that doesn’t stop people from taking him seriously.
This post just about sums up my feelings. I really can’t believe some of the antics of my own side as it relates to the Obama administration.
It’s really bizarre. I’ve been very pleased with the administration so far and see daily progress in bringing the nation towards the more progressive society I’d love it to be, yet to read some progressive blogs you’d think satan was in the White House.
Seriously?
Obama popular vote 2008 primaries:
17,869,542
Obama popular vote 2008 general election:
69,456,897
Where the hell do you think those votes came from? Millions of “Clinton shills” or did all of you “since Iowa” diehards vote like 4 times?
Not sure of your point. Are you saying that if I voted for Obama during the general election I cannot express discontent over his administration’s failures?
No, the opposite, I am responding to this:
Obama primary voters were about 1/4th of his total popular vote. Clinton voters, Independents, Dems not interested in primaries, etc, some Republicans, make up the bulk of his GE victory. “Clinton shills” (among others) put him into office. I think that makes them and others an “ally” no?
True.
Thanks for the rant Booman. I’ve been saying this for weeks, but just not as good. I don’t understand why we still have to be put into the Clinton or Obama camps at this point. Obviously the two groups came together or we’d be looking at President Palin by now. And that’s the key – if we don’t stop the divisiveness now, we are looking at a Republican majority in at least one of the two houses and a possible Republican in the White House in 2012. There are surely better means to achieve what we want instead of backbiting and criticism of one another. He does deserve criticism, that’s why we are a democracy. I don’t agree with everything he’s done (or not done) but it’s been 10 months with two wars, a failing economy, health care reform, and an obstinate opposition party. I can give him more time but the Republicans are already starting to circle. They are smelling blood. And if they are successful, you can kiss what reform we have gotten goodbye. Their goal is to undo everything this administration has done.
What’s strange is how different dividing lines are drawn.
Is criticism of Obama necessarily from the Clinton camp? Or from Republicans?
I thought the criticism of which Booman speaks is farther to the left. Who either wear or don’t wear pajamas.
There are people still in prison who are being held without charges, without trial. If these people were Wall Street financiers and held incommunicado in torture cells do you think that they’d be there in prison for six or seven years? Call me naive, but I believe in the Bill of Rights. For everyone.
We’re senior citizens and were full adults at the time the USofA escalated, fought and lost in Vietnam. We are joined by marriage to a Vietnamese family, many of whom fled in fear of their lives. Some did not survive. You can bet your life that even their family members who were infants or yet-to-be born know all about the Peace Prize, Kissinger and Le Duc Tho. They are not part of the celebration right now, nor are we. We are concerned and nervous.
It is extremely jarring, with all the above in mind, for Obama to receive the Peace Prize at the very moment he is considering escalation in Afghanistan. His position on Afghanistan was one of several sour notes during his campaign, but even so, we joined others in the hope for major change and still support him and hope most of that change will come. But i suggest everyone read the article in Salon.com titled “Norman Mailer for secretary of defense” using the link below. For those of us who lived through the 60’s and 70’s it is really, really chilling. Please do not dismiss or demean those of of good will who are fearful and concerned and see the award as problematic. Obama appears to as well, if we take him at his word. What is disgusting is the right wing noise machine.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/10/13/mailer/index.html
The media and some in the military are considering escalation in Afghanistan. Obama is reconsidering the strategy that he put in place in March.
I’m not yet ready to pre-judge what he might decide.
I fully understand the fear that is out there. I have seen 40 years of folly too. Disastrous and corrupt folly. But we need to deal with our fear that we will be betrayed again by folks we worked very hard to elect. It is just possible that this time we might not be. Especially if we start working on the Democrats in Congress ourselves instead of demanding that Obama whip them into line; fact is, no president can or ever has despite appearances. The Republicans in Congress made George W. Bush and his policies, not vice versa.
Tarheel, really, why are we in Afghanistan? Admit it, it’s the oil pipeline, right?
Thank you Boo. I have had arguments with some people on the radio who consider themselves very progressive. I have tried to convince them that they need to examine if they are being critical out of habit. It would seem that way.
I also think that many critics could say the same words and be a lot more constructive if they would just let go of the venom in their tone.
There is a big difference between pushing and tearing down and it seems that some would like to tear down and then say ‘look, I told you he couldn’t do it’. They seem to think that Pres. Obama should have magical powers. I wish it could work that way.
Criticism, in many cases, is good, just as long as the tone does not come across as hateful, as it seems to be by so many.
The importance of the Dems not losing the House, the Senate, and/or the Presidency in 2012 is critical for the long term viability of this country. That is my true belief.
Ohhh, the sanity! Thank you so much for representing me.
I’ve been a big Obama fan since, well, since way before the primaries. I was excited when he showed up at my university (3-ish years ago) for a speech when the presidential race was just beginning to heat up. So…I’m not a Clinton blogger (as much as I love Clinton), and on the whole, I defend Obama far more than I criticize him.
But when I do have criticism, I hope that other liberal bloggers don’t confuse critique with High Treason to Obama or to the Obama base. I have long had criticisms for Obama’s position on gay rights, on Israel, on Afghanistan, and on a variety of other topics where I disagree with his positions, and where those differences are highlighted in current policy or speeches, I plan to make my opinions known and to push for more urgency on those topics. Crazy, I know, that I would care more about the things that are important to me than the things that are important to the president. I don’t expect (or even have any expectations at all) of being heard by the administration, but I would hope at least fellow bloggers would respect the fact that I have criticisms and that I am entitled to make them known…even when those bloggers do not agree.
My irritation with the White House staffers/aids/whoever making the negative comments about bloggers is that, for one, some of the bloggers they are ragging on are people who did a significant amount of leg work in terms of fundraising for the Obama campaign and in terms of spreading the good word about Obama. I’m not talking about Clinton bloggers. These people had at least some part in getting Obama elected, and I see the comments coming from Obama’s staffers as biting the hand that feeds them, so to speak.
The other issue is simply a matter of civility. I don’t expect or want ass-kissing, but if you’re using the same lines that McCain’s thuggish campaign blogger Michael Goldfarb was pulling out in 2008, TOWARD YOUR OWN BASE, maybe you should stop and rethink whether there’s not at the very least a better way to say what you’re trying to say.
I think the picture of the Donkeys playing b-ball with Obama is appropriate for this post.
I happy with Obama at least he is closing T.Don Hutto..
But great rant..it is hard to clean-up eight years of W’s crap in 10 months.
You sure can! And you may.
Thank you.
Well said, Booman.
for giving voice to what so many are thinking.
Wow. As a pro-Obama blogger before and after the election, if not exactly prolific, this “does not necessarily apply to me” but I’m having trouble figuring out which strawblogger it applies to. If the Clinton shills were busy telling you your guy was all talk and no show, you (and I) were busy telling the Clinton shills that he was, too, “one of us.” Us, in this case, being a progressive.
So if an anonymous White House staffer tells progressive bloggers to fuck off, should there be some unrest about that? Hell yes, there should, and it should be commensurate with the sin. And it has been. THIS rant, on the other hand, like so many “Your fringe torture/gay rights/anti-war/human rights issue is just not achievable in this political climate” rants before it, is completely over the top – far too harsh on the progressive bloggers that I assume you’re referring to (since, let’s face it, you didn’t mention a single one) that are simply trying to, as Obama himself put it, hold his feet to the fire.
You know, part of the problem is that you have a bunch of people who are trying to define what a progressive is in a very narrow way.
During the primaries I wrote a few pieces about this where I distinguished between academic progressives and urban progressives. The blogosphere is made up heavily of white people who have good income and graduate degrees. Nothing wrong with that. But that is only piece of the progressive universe, and it’s not even the bigger half of it.
The urban progressives have different values, and a lifetime of learning to be patient and accept imperfect outcomes.
We’re at our best when we work together, but that isn’t always possible.
That staffer didn’t tell me to fuck off, or Markos, or Oliver Willis, or Jack & Jill, or Josh Marshall, or any number of other progressive bloggers. They told the people who are throwing non-stop bombs at them to fuck off.
And I’m not even agreeing that it was a good idea for this guy (or gal) to spout off. I just don’t understand where these people would be offended.
But meanwhile, you’re trying to define “who you were talking to” in a narrower and narrower way. And I can admit that there is a very small set of bloggers for whom your criticism is fair. They’d have to fit four criteria, in my mind:
Because if any of those four criteria are not met, then I maintain that the blogger has the right to be annoyed at the staffer and therefore moves away from your vent’s clarified target.
To which I ask…WHO? Because I can’t think of anybody; at least no one I’ve considered it worth my time to read.
Have a little perspective.
If you are a blogger who preferred Clinton and bashed Obama or who remained ‘officially neutral’ but bashed Obama, and you’ve accused him of the following:
Then you really aren’t in the best position to expect the every single WH staffer in the building to be respectful and deferential to you. You shouldn’t expect them to see you as their ally.
You ought to expect them to defend themselves. And, if they take a shot at you, you ought to recognize that you’ve been doing nothing but taking shots at them. Don’t take it personally.
Right so those people you refer to can’t expect Obama to be respectful to them becaue they had the temerity to be neutral in the 08 elections; yet Obama FAWNS over the likes of Boehner, Mcconnell etc who have defended idiots like Rush the Oxycontin viagra boy who referred to him as a Nazi, an affirmative action President etc.
Yeah we sort of get the message – Obama’s only deferential and respectful to his beltway buddies hence his love and adoration for his “friend” Joe Lieberman who rather than just being neutral in 2008 actually SUPPORTED McCain !!!!
This business of Obama and his team defending themselves against what are referred to as their liberal critics is interesting. RobRoy14’s points here are similar in their basis to mine:
all this “push-back”, and so on, makes me wonder:
When, where and how do Obama and his team “push back” against his Republican opponents rather than seeking to mollify them? It seems to me that Obama’s efforts to defend himself are directed more than anywhere else at the critics within his own “camp”. Meanwhile, what remains of progressives have (don’t they?), a common opponent: the arch-conservatives who’ve played havoc with the nation’s political institutions and, foremost, with the Constitution, which they wasted no time in setting aside.
That may be a direct result of watching a bunch of spoiled nameless people scream insults because Obama made out a different set of priorities. He did promise to set a new tone in Washington. He did promise Helath care. He did promise to undo gitmo and to stop torture. He is working on Helathcare and tone at the same time becuase, like me, I’m much more concerned about 45,000 getting tortured and murdered each year by the Health Insurance companies. See, I don’t share your priorities.
Unlike many progressives,he is not giving a feeble effort and jumping up and down pointing fingers because it didn’t work the first time or fast enough. He will most likely move faster when he has satisfied the country that the GOP cannot be reasoned with even though those 1/10 of 1% who follow politics like a dog sniffing another dog’s ass believe he should have been done with all this 90 days ago so that they next 20 things they want him to do could be the subject of their scorn and spittle when they too take longer than their stop watches indicate.
Whoosh. 30 Years of toxic economic policy vanquished.
Whoosh, 200 years of the Military Industrail complex crumbles like a bad cracker.
Whoosh 60 Years of trying toget helath care for all is accomplished within days so 45,000 americans don’t go screaming to their deaths each year .
Whoosh, 8 Years of Bush undone.
Whoosh Wars come to an end.
Whoosh The constitution is completely restored.
And in the 7th day he rested waiting for the next easy assignment from the temper tantrum throwing hordes of nameless , faceless “progressives” who believe he just isn’t strong enough to get the next set done and someone else needs to be “picked”.
Snort.
.
Voicing a comment here at the pond.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."Wow, I’m late to the party here, but just had to say I agree with EVERYTHING you say here.
As someone who supported Obama in the primaries, I’m amazed at what he HAS been able to do, seeing as he’s only the President in our triumvirate system where the legislative and jurisprudence branches also wield significant control.
I applauded his first Supreme Court nominee, not just because she was a woman and a minority, but because she was well qualified. I was hoping she might prove more liberal over time than she has been to date, but at least she’s not a rabid right-winger, and that’s progress.
I applaud all his goals. Whether or not he can achieve them is important, but it’s early yet, and there is so much damage to undo. He can’t just wave a magic wand.
I’ve been frustrated with the ignorance and egoism of my fellow progressives as well. That’s why this is the only blog I frequent any more – I really can’t stomach the others. BooMan, thank you for calling them on the carpet, and rightly so. It’s time for the rest to grow the heck up and live in the real world, where decisions aren’t black and white, legislation takes time, and compromises are a necessary fact of life. It may be grey here, but at least it’s real.
Well done, BooMan.
This is the best discussion I have read of frantic lefty flailing. Surely it is obvious that achievements take time, and that politics requires broken field running on almost every play?
I hope people continue to speak their minds, offer their opinions, and cease to promulgate panicky rumors.