Watching President Obama address the White House Press Corps apres le deluge is a dispiriting affair. His attitude and approach threatens to dispirit further not just his base but all Americans. The result could make demagogues on the right more attractive and not only doom efforts to win back the House in 2012, but lose the whole business to a "courageous" right. And that could literally mean the end of our democracy, an outcome already helped along enough by Big Money and abundant hate.
First, he talks too much. Do the American people really want to hear about how depreciation works and how it provides a middle ground with the Republicans? Where's the empathy for the out of work stiffs, the immigrants who deserve an honest chance to contribute legally, the people who thought we were going to get real health care and instead got the industry's version?
(And what type of orator constantly precedes each statement with "I think," when he ought to be stating facts forthrightly and confidently?)
Second, the President gives away too much. Too many compromises were promised this morning already to occupy the President's legislative agenda through 2012. Without speaking a word about the oversized military budget, he is already promising cuts in programs, code words for snipping the social safety net.
Third, the President is unwilling to make the obvious case that the reason the Republicans are behind cutting federal spending is because they want their corporate buddies to do all the investing so that they can make profits. Government spending to create jobs is no less legitimate than doing it the private way, and can be a whole lot less expensive and (as other nations like China and the EU have demontrated) more effective. Plus the investments can be directed to meet public purposes.
Fourth, the President talks about transparency, but as he bows his head in submission before rightist members of the press who bring up the election results, he says nothing about the elections themselves and how bizarrely distorted they were by secret corporate spending enabled by a radically partisan Supreme Court.
Fifth, and lastly, he still doesn't get it. He doesn't get that the reason Democrats lost wasn't because Republicans, spurred on by the Tea Party, won. They didn't, especially if you subtract the effect of so much money (see above). It was because Democrats stayed at home in droves, totally disappointed in Obama's mismanaged first two years, beginning with his appointment of a demonstrably incompetent White House team that he was warned against by progressives and politicians alike. When will he take responsibility and stop blaming circumstances, when will he adhere to Democratic principles instead of crawling rightward?
If the President believes he is going to get the Republicans' cooperation, which he repeatedly credits - even though it doesn't exist - he is in for a very rough ride. They are going to sloganeer all over him. They are coming in fighting. He should have his dukes up and his strategy ready, and he should be able to rebut as well as to agree. It seems a weakness to be so accommodating, all the time. Okay, we know Plan R. What's Plan D?
As for the press corps, what a bunch of slaves. Instead of dealing with election as a political phenomenon worth tearing apart to see what's wrong with our democracy, in service to their conservative media masters, they are set upon forcing the President into a box that constrains him to compromise, to make nice with business, to fail to acknowledge his base's concerns. He could resist, of course, but it's not in his makeup. And they know it. They love to make strategy in this way. Reporters always crave this type of leading-question power that they otherwise sadly lack.
Democrats and their allies on the left should spend the next two years planning their own strategy. We can't rely on the President to do what's right. He just does. We have to be right. The nation depends on our autonomy, determination, and just plain smarts.
Follow Bob Jacobson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Robert_Jacobson
He takes responsibility. He took responsibility, whether one thinks he should have or shouldn't have, for the Dems election losses.
But he's not crawling rightward. He's leading rightward. but not fast enough for the Plutocrats. He agreed long ago to give them more, but his dismay and confusion is in realizing they want it ALL. And the only compromises acceptable are the compromises he needs to get the people in the country and the Congress to make to ensure they get it ALL. That's the only compromise that's acceptable in their monopolistic minds. He's caught in a power struggle among elites and at the same time is attempting to lead anyone leaning to what is considered left further and further to the right.
This is a flat out lie.
A savings of 15% or more can be achieved through a government-administered plan like Medicare - for everyone. (And by the way, a CBS/New York Times poll June 2009 showed that 72% of Americans favored this approach.)
The quickest and easiest and sane way to save is move to a single payer system. Advocates for such a system were blocked from speaking by Senator Max Baucus last year; but the facts are the facts.
When the President of the United States allows his White House Director of Management and Budget lies about such a fundamental reality, it reflects very poorly on the President and his leadership.
President Obama does not need people working for him who lie to the American people. Whether it’s “Heck of a Job Timmy” or Orszag, people are tired of being lied to.
If President Obama does not have the courage to stop his own staff from lying to the American people, he is no leader.
"President is showing the republicans up for what they really are OBSTRUCTIONIST" ;true, but here where the President fails time and time again, he know and believe that American people by in large are intelligent people and that they know when the Republicans are being obstructionist; so when he speaks to issues he feel he doesn't need to say certain thing or speak too or address the obvious , unfortunately this is part of personality ; he assumes because we all know the republicans are obstructionist so what's the point .
Here is an example, yesterday at the press conference he was ask about the health care being repealed, he talked about possible corrections to some parts of it but he never said no it would not be because I would Veto any attempt by the republican to do so; he needed to say this specifically because the general public needs to know this, it's fine that the reporters and the people on capital hill know this but he must let the public know that it can't be done simply because the republicans say so; this would have put the whole thing to rest in the mind of the American people and press will stop asking him about it . I was taught a long time ago never assume all people know what you are talking about. Nov 2 elections are examples what can happened when you assume people know what you are talking about.
On issues from a larger stimulus, to the public option, to offshore oil drilling, to civil liberties, and open government, the President would have been better off listening to the progressives. Yet every time push came to shove, he dismissed us, and ignored his progressive base. (Are we even his base anymore?)
So we have just seen what happens when you let Blanche Lincoln and Ben Nelson set the agenda for the Democratic party. The compromise to before fighting, take what whatever the Republicans and the Blue Dogs will give you approach to governing has been a disaster for the Democrats. But, I will join the chorus in saying.... I don't think the President gets that. Still.
Copy and paste if clicking the link does not work.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-1103-ganz-obama20101103,0,486277.story
I hadn't heard anyone calling Obama the "affirmative action president." Can you share any links for that?
Everyone who has a critique of Obama is not a right winger. I encourage you to read the following article from the LA Times which was written by the person who was instrumental in developing Obama's grassroots strategy during the campaign (a Harvard professor).
Copy and paste the link. For some reason HuffPo is not catching the entire link for clicking.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-1103-ganz-obama20101103,0,486277.story
Here's an article from the LA Times written by someone who was part of the decision-making in Obama's campaign
it's Time to Primary Barack Obama.
Obama has Damaged the Progressive Brand. The Average MisInformed Voter thinks the Obama Administration represents the Left. Obama is Center Right at Best. We need to take the mantle of Progressivism away from Obama before he can do more Damage.
Also, Bye-bye BlueDogs. And take your Corporate Puppy Bowls with you. ( I wonder how long it will be before the Rest of the BlueDogs switch party allegiance to Repubs.)
I am with you. I want an unashamed Democrat who is willing to be partisan and fight for progressive values. President Obama isn't it. If he moves further to the right because of what happened on Tuesday, it will be time for a reset in the Democratic party. We need a progressive primary challenger in 2012.
Obama should remember rule #1, never ever back stab your base !
This election was a great success for the Democrats, they got rid of half of the Blue Dogs. I just hope the DNC got the message and will act consequently.
That means that legal immigrants are IN, and illegal aliens are NOT. Perfectly fair and in accordance with our system of laws.
Semper fi
Is it so ingrained? Or is it his handlers, do you think?
A leader doesn't issue ultimatums or draw lines in the sand? A leader shies away from confrontation? Read a book on FDR's presidency and you'll recognize a real leader.
Maybe next time I will call it "collective masochism" so that you'll appreciate the magnitude of my disappointment, even outrage.
Life's short. We haven't time for prevarication, least of all the man we elected for real "Change."
***
somebody didn't listen to Jon Stewart.