-
Website
http://www.americablog.com/ -
Original page
http://www.americablog.com/2008/12/david-corn-thinks-progressive-should-be.html -
Subscribe
All Comments -
Community
-
-
Top Commenters
-
Popular Threads
All Comments
That said, this is a time for people who can focus on the job that needs to be done. And if they can pull off a miracle, then they can claim the right to lead the country in a new direction.
Or, much shorter:
Stay on the broken course.
If the broken course suddenly starts working,
Then change the course.
How is it that none of you are able to see the contradiction here?
If he can pull off a miracle (get the country back on track)
then, and only then
can Barak lead the country in a new direction.
That's what was posted.
Until that point, he cannot, according to what was written, lead the country in a new direction,
at the very least, he has no right to (again, what was actually posted).
Which leaves what exactly?
The old direction.
Maybe all of you supposed "reading comprehension" geniuses (winks at grandpajohn) are able to read the mind of the original poster whom I was responding to, and therefor can discount what is actually stated?
Mia maxima culpa... meh.
The Republicans, as they are now, are a Rump party (of basically extremist Reactionaries). I think he's trying to make it even more of Rump party. Call it a Rump of a Rump. By thinning their numbers ever more, he makes it difficult for them to mount a credible challenge
Furthermore, I think Obama is doing his best to avoid giving them any language, or actions, that function as a rallying call for the opposition to organize around.
The combined effect is that the opposition can't get any traction and isn't capable of mounting effective or vigerous opposition - and increasingly they sound like barking-mad shrills.
To shrink the Rump he's bringing in moderates and centrist into his administration. That keeps the Rump small and from growing.
Finally, despite the fact that there are Centrist and Center Right people in his administration, the option to "go right" is just not available. Those policies have been taken to great extremes and have failed. To solve the problems we have now, the only solutions are to the left. There really is no choice. The alternative is to not want to solve the problem now - that's the position of the Neo-Hooverites barking on the right now.
The old saying is 'revenge is a dish best served cold'. Those center-left, progressive, and leftist policies are going to be served up to congress and the American public by people who were once viewed as right and center-right and that's going to mute the opposition.
The opposition, what remains of it, will eventually curdle. Eventually every one, wakes up one day and the concensus has been moved far to the left. As Nixon said - "we are all New Dealers now".
Now, Obama may not succeed at this, or at saving American civilization - but in my mind he's a genius.
In my mind, America, once again has gotten extremely, extremely lucky, getting the right man, in the right place, at the right time. Our history of doing this is mind boggling: Washington & the entire founding generation, Lincoln, Roosevelt and now Obama. And bless him, he happens to be African American.
Let's not forget that everything we witness right now is History, with a capital H. And so far, it appears to be a virtuoso performance by Obama.
He's done his homework. He's analyzed what has worked well in the past and what hasn't. We couldn't be in a much worse situation now, but we couldn't ask for more from a leader to get us through it.
However I am also sure that in this case Gods will did not coincide with what they thought Gods will should be. for fundamentalist they often seem to confuse their will with what Gods will is supposed to be
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/equal_immigrat...
The top rated ideas will be presented to the Obama administration on Inauguration Day.
The idea that Obama was a far-left political figure was spread by the right-wing for political purposes. Barack Obama never pretended to be anything other than center-left and bipartisan.
Naw! Not true. At the Denver Democratic convention all the speakers except Obama were throwing around the world liberal as if they just invented the term and were so proud of themselves. For a couple decades or more, I've seen Democrats run like mad from that term, but, for a change, they embraced it. But I also noticed that Obama never used the term. The closest he came was his motto, "Change we can believe in," and he was even hesitant to mention that.
Barack Obama never pretended to be anything other than center-left and bipartisan.
Considering that McCain and Palin accused him of being a Muslim, not being a citizen, being a terrorist, an Uppity N-----, enemy of the state and would invite bin Laden to co-president with him, a Fascist-Nazi-Commie <g>, the Manchurian Candidate and a lot of other hate rhetoric you would have thought their intention was to shove him as irresistably far left as possible. Unfortunately, as we've seen Obama is remarkably hard to move, obstinate, even boneheaded is more like it. Reminds me of another bonehead, the guy who usurped the Oval Office in 2001.
You know what? I think Obama really is the Manchurian Candidate. But he is the military-industrial complexe's Manchurian Candidate. We are going to continue the forever war in Iraq, while expanding the war in Afghanistan, bomb Syria and open another front with Iran. Beginning to fear he is going to invite not bin Laden, but Cheney to be co-president with him, maybe Bush too, so he can form the famous old Triumvirate.
I pray and pray, hope and hope, I'm wrong. We won't really know for at least a year whether Obama is all we wished he was or if he was the perfect military-industrial (-Congressional) Manchurian Candidate.
Looks like certain liberals are just as divisive and dishonest as those on the right.
(see what I did there?)
There is a heap of difference between ideological purity and effective governing.
Methinks that witnessing the tragic and catastrophic last 8 years taught Obama that lesson.
It is revisionist (and incorrect) to assert that all Nader voters in 2000 were sending a message. There were not a small number of us who thought he was making a hell of a lot of sense and that Gore wasn't doing a damn thing to earn our vote. If Nader hadn't been running, there were plenty of other names on the CA ballot to pick from in 2000.
"Purity" doesn't come into it, except to people bent on blaming Nader for Gore's abysmal campaign.
It is time to do whatever is best for our country, whatever that will take. It is time for parties to come together and work for the survival of our country, regardless of political affiliation. No more postering, finger pointing and bias. We must unite if we want to regain our once great country,
Alas.
Because the right/media loves to divide. Why are we playing into it, again, and again?
The same is true in the environmental movement. Old school libbys are now coordinating with the new Christian fundamentalists like Richard Cizik to move the clean earth agenda forward. Cizik may not agree with me on gay rights but if we can solve the one problem we are both concerned about together then we move toward while I go out and find a different coalition partner to work on securing my civil rights, some of whom are libertarians who are further to the right than Cizik. At that point, I don't care how these people are labeled as long as we get the work done. And while we're at it, I can work with the libertarians, liberals, and fiscal conservatives on ending the War on Drugs.
This is how I see and hope to see the Obama administration move forward: By deconstructing left / right / center groupthink in favor of a new paradigm of political action. The reason why this is relevant to the topic of the post (Corn's silly article) is that I see traditional media as the villain because of its addiction to defining our current political climate using outmoded bipolar antagonism. Changing that will be the real challenge.
Ah, 45 days until the dood is sworn in and already the bitching starts.(actually david is a little behind the curve as 'progressives' have been bitching since election day +1)
David is part of the LW propoganda/outrage/muckraking industry, so his job for the next 4-8 years will be to constantly bitch that obama isn't progressive enough. The fact that he hasn't even taken the oath doesn't matter, because he's still gotta fill columns until Obama *does* take the oath, and what's there to bitch about except cabinet picks?
If Obama gets 48 million people health care, they above will bitch it isn't single payer. If he decriminalizes pot, they'll bitch the hemp isn't free. If he can get the economy on track, they'll bitch over some aspect of his program. Bitch, bitch, bitch.
It's a job, I guess.
Yes, but David et al get paid for the columns. Mission accomplished!
I'm beginning to really understand Obama's brilliance in getting us over just the first hump after the disasters of the last 8 years.
He has a huge amount of work to do--instead of offering up criticism after criticism (and I've done my share), how about liberals and progressives recommending solutions instead? We're going to have to crawl now before we can walk fully upright after The. Worst. President. In. History.
ZMOG, TALK ME DOWN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
we voted for Obama because he's smart. Let's remain cautiously optimistic, despite the buzz kill from his recent appointments.
I would like to save these Corn-fed criticisms until AFTER Obama is actually the president. Right now, Obama is just a private citizen with a massive Secret Service detail. I admire Obama's respect for the US Constitution. We only have one president at a time.....
Imagine if Bush in 2000 publicly usurped Clinton's presidency after that disputed election? Let's not set a dangerous precedent that will only backfire and benefit the GOP once they figure out a way to steal the presidency again.
By saying I wanted a progressive, I wanted someone who would end the war in Iraq, close Guantanamo, stop torturing our detainees and holding them without warrants of any kind, stop rendition, not try to destroy Social Security, give us real universal health care, fund and rebuild our schools, stop the racist persecutions in this country of minorities, protect our national assets like our parks, end the illegal warrentless wiretapping, stop treating activists groups as terrorists, etc., etc., etc.
No doubt, Obama will throw us a bone or two, like giving us a 55 cent raise in the minimum wage and again requiring employers to pay overtime instead of compesatory time. But, will Obama end the union busting, ICE raids, rebuild New Orleans, etc. I don’t see it. Is he going to actually fund a bailout for the auto companies which are UNIONIZED blue collar industries. Will he prosecute white collar criminals, not only the Wall Street CEOs but those in the current administration? Dream on!!! Sweet, sweet dreams!!!
Obama has an enormous task (s) ahead of him and he's going to need all the help he can get. I see him, like JFK, brining in bright, talented people for advice. . One of my favorite books from my Polly Sci classes was "The American Presidency" by Clinton Rossiter that seemed to say that the quality of a president can be measured in whom he surrounds himself with.
To think that someone can come to office with progressive ideas an no background is frankly about the same thing as the 8 years of cowboy-style administration. .and we all know how that has turned out. . .
If Obama filled his Cabinet and other posts with true liberals, then if/when things really go to Hell because it's completely unavoidable, then that would make it easy for the media to delegitimize Liberalism once and for all. If his posts are filled with Establishment/Clinton-era people, then he can say, "Hey, we tried it your way, now let's try it my way, okay?" And then he could bring in real liberals to put forward their ideas.
That is, it's better to start in the Center and push Left as long as you can than to start at some arbitrary location to the Left and then be forced to the Center... and then the Right.
Nope, everything that Bush/Cheney and their masters was done deliberately to enrich their core constituencies, Big Oil, "Defense", "Security", and Wall Street corporate crooks.
It wasn't incompetence, it was PLANNED, and it was executed quite well, and more than a few Dems were complicit.
The US and the world is facing the likely prospect of a SEVERE recession, if not a depression. If Obama can do something to grapple that problem, that's about all I'm expecting out of him. He's a centrist and always has been so. I think he'll pay more attention to the progressives, but he's put in place people who know how the game of politics is played, and to get legislation through Congress.
And almost EVERY politician runs on a platform of change, unless they're an incumbent and things have been running just fine.
Trouble is it was right wing, retrogressive and conservative ideology that screwed over the country and the world. Hell, maybe liberal theory will fail just as badly. However, I'd like to give it a try before I go back to more of Bush "Same ol', same ol'." Just because he ain't Bush won't be enough to fix the problems, save the country if you will. Obama is going to have to be an activist, and that activist is going to have to grapple with each and every one of the messes Bush created. Yes, Bush deliberately created a mess as witnesses by the latest this morning, the permitting of loaded firearms in our national parks. Those problems won't fix themselves. Obama is going to have to be a liberal and overturn each and every single dirty, destructive, malicious, hateful, deliberate Bush policy.
I believe that the president-elect is a practical idealist. That is, I believe he works with and within the established reality of our current political power structure to bring about progressive change that he values, and I think his values and ideals are in the right place. In the long run his progressive ideas will be more efficiently accomplished not by overthrowing everything that already exists (although that is awfully tempting :-) but by starting with what is already in place and using the combined resources and energy of those already very familiar with the Washington scene and from as wide a band of the political and ideological spectrum as possible to achieve his goals.
No one who is not extreme can ever please the extremes, and each extreme will most highly displease the other. Things always move too slowly for the most liberal and always too fast for the most conservative. :-)
Change is usually the last resort.
That said, Progressives (and beyond) are who helped get him into office, pinning some hopes on his intelligence and fair-mindedness (A President with intelligence! A President with a sense of fairness!) and we have as much right to scrutinize his policies and the outcomes of his policies as anyone. When he's in office and if he needs to be taken to task on a more progressive agenda, then we not only have the duty but the right to hold his feet to the fire.
Until January 21, I'm willing to trust his judgment--and then watch, closely, how it plays out.
So it will require a fair amount of force just to get that machinery moving in the right (left) direction and make the first few baby steps. Just a few words to add to the discussion. :-)
Obama is pretty much doing what he promised as far as appointments to Cabinet slots go so we can't really say we are being betrayed. The left needs to not be whiny but instead make demands and argue for them in the public square. I really think Obama is going to follow through on health care and the economy. I'm a little more nervous on the nat'l security stuff because I think Obama nor the Dems want an attack on their watch and they may be overcautious in undoing the Bush protocol.
i refuse to be dissapointed, i knew who would win those races, i knew how he would govern when he won
if he doesn't close gitmo, bagram, and abu ghraib on day one (and start charging people w/treason, war crimes, war profiteering, etc), i will not support him for anything else
I don't really know if Mr. Obama will be the 21st century's equivalent to Mr. Roosevelt, but I do know that: 1) Mr. Obama isn't even President yet, and 2) actions DO speak louder than words (or cabinet appointments), so I'm going to wait until there are some actions to actually base an opinion on before I start crying about how progressives are being slighted.
"It is a poor plan that cannot be changed".
Furthermore, why in the WORLD does anyone think they know yet exactly what he is going to do. Just wait. And I've had my fill of ideologues that won't do what is necessary regardless of the facts. Didn't the last 8 years, and Republicanism, teach us ANYTHING?
I had a conversation with a more liberal than me (tough to do) friend after the 2000 election which we repeated after the 2004 election. We were dismayed but I told him, don't worry . . . these people will try and push us too conservative way too fast. They did and now look at them
If the conservatives had done in 30-50 years what they tried to do in 8 or less, they'd be in power until the end of the century. Obama is WAY to smart to make the same mistake.
A paragraph from Corn's article (not quoted above) is telling, I think. "For some progressives, Obama's opening moves may not feel like the change they anticipated. But there's no rebellion yet at hand. Many are probably holding their breath and waiting to see whether Obama can hijack the establishment for progressive ends." Hijacking the establishment is what the Bush administration did, and what was done by the Nixon administration and the Reagan administration. If "hijacking the establishment" is what Corn and his ilk have at the top of their wish list for the next four years, they are going to sorely disappointed. They will, of course, have plenty of copy for their columns and blogging, but they will be providing their reading public with evidence that they have completely misunderstood Obama's vision, which has been clearly laid out for more than a year for anyone paying attention.
So can we all stop whining now? The man isn't even president yet.
He is also appointing people he thinks can help him sell his programs to the American people and to reasonable Republicans.
Will Obama disappoint progressives like me? I'm sure. Hello, he pissed me off already with the FISA vote.
BUT here is where we come in. We have every opportunity to pressure him and ensure our voices are heard and implemented. And Obama I'm sure we want to be reelected. To do that he will have to ensure he listen and acts on our interests, too. We progressives have and will continue to pressure him and not give him a free ride. That's how will make sure we get the CHANGE we need.