In recent blogs I criticized President Obama for not exercising forceful presidential leadership in the face of Republican Party efforts to impose their more conservative solutions to those urgent domestic social, economic and political problems confronting our nation. I was especially critical of his abandonment of his repeated campaign pledge to end the Bush tax cuts disproportionally favoring the most wealthy individuals and families in our country. I believed Obama's tax-cut compromise was so antithetical to the substance and spirit of his election campaign, that I even suggested that progressives who supported him should consider mounting a primary challenge to his reelection as the Democratic Party's nominee for president.
My criticism of what I perceived to have been a failure of presidential leadership was explained and analyzed on the basis of "context"; and, whether the tax-cut "compromise" had been, in effect, a "sell out" of his core values.
The foundation of my political analyses and commentaries has always and continues to be the precept that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, especially in politics, but not to their own set of facts. This precept, taken together with my commitment to always try to dispassionately evaluate and analyze a problem or issue within its relevant factual and/or historical context compels me, now, to publicly admit that my earlier criticism of Obama's leadership may have been premature, shortsighted and distorted by MY improper use of "my own set of facts."
Accordingly, on a closer and more careful review and evaluation of legislative accomplishments resulting from Obama's presidential leadership, my abiding commitment to political integrity and constructive self-criticism requires me to recite, objectively, those set of facts, that persuasively indicate that Obama has been more successful than I originally characterized in recent posts.
Admittedly, the legislative achievements during this past week's "lame-duck" session of Congress, has provided a more meaningful context within which to evaluate Obama's presidency.
For the record, during his first two years in office his achievements include:
So, I congratulate you, Mr. President; and, especially salute and applaud the leadership of House Speaker, Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi.
I am mindful that all of the accomplishments recited above do not make a material difference toward ending our continued involvement in Afghanistan or Iraq; and, may not make a material difference in halting the continuation of nationwide home foreclosures or reducing our national unemployment. Nevertheless, I believe, that such accomplishments should, at least, earn President Obama, going forward, a resumption of the trust by those who elected him; subject to "verification," however.
* 13-month extension of unemployment insurance - a bandage measure that does nothing for long-term economic health
* Rescue of the auto industry - begun under the Bush administration (good, but not an Obama accomplishment)
* Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform& Protection Act - largely symbolic legislation so watered-down that it fails to forestall a repetition of the behavior that precipitated the current mess
* Health-care reform - a patchwork of half-measures deservedly characterized as "no insurer left behind," which resulted from the health care reform plan which formed the centerpiece of Obama's presidential campaign for nearly two years never having existed, so we got a plan by committee
* Extension of insurance for a million children under SCHIP - Obama's contribution was merely to refrain from the Bush vetoes of expansion of this Clinton administration program
* Repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" - finally, just last week, halfway through his term
* Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention Act - a minor expansion of a 1969 law, whose namesakes' murderers were prosecuted and convicted under previously existing law
* Ratification of the New START Nuclear Treaty - again, just last week, nearly a year after it was signed
* Funding of the First Responders Act ("9/11" Word Trade Center) - which should have been a slam dunk months ago, with any real leadership
No, Mr. Jones, you were right the first time.
But it's always easier to just sit back and smugly complain.
The path of least resistance.....
Apparently they are the only powerful organizatiÂon who is not pandering to Wall St , that the common people can turn to. Certainly Obama has no intention of backing anyone but Blue Dogs , the GOP and Lieberman .
I would love to see the the unions run a third party candidate and put some fear into the financial elites. - if they want class warfare as they seem to , we'll meet them on the field.
Let Obama and his band of Goldmen meet us there
THAT is one thing that should be non-negotiable to a Democrat. No way, no how. NO!
I rest my case.
On that basis, unpacking your title indicates that in spite of the words' suggestion, the actual combination means, "I would like to trust him but am not there yet although I am open to it because I am comfortable with what I have been seeing according to the things important to me". Just sayind. Hmmm.
.
Like many of you, I too have been disappointed with several of President Obama's decisions and his continuation of the some of the most reprehensible policies of Pres Bush.
We cannot make the perfect the enemy of the good or what is politically possible.
Many of you have criticized me for my last blog, even suggesting that someone "got to me" to revise some of the substance of my initial criticism of President Obama.
I try to be clinically objective and politically principled, taking into account realistic alternatives. I don't want to participate directly or indirectly in the destruction of Obama. or his efforts to implement the best that he can achieve under existing Congressional circumstances.
Do progressives want to enable or destroy Obama?
I have concluded to keep my eye on the "North Star" and try to hold President Obama as accountable . I see no other realistic alternative for Presidential leadership by someone else who could significantly make a material and better difference than Obama.
Political leaders at best are only "agents" to implement the change we seek.
Cynicism, criticism and challenging one's political integrity( who "got to him") is a luxury that the urgency of the issues confronting our country cannot afford.
Happy holidays and thank you for your constructive comments and criticism.
Clarence B. Jones.
Huffpost user Stephen Stafford stated "for as important as that issue is to you, it does not make the world go round."
For the tens of thousands who have died in these two wars since Obama took office, (after having pledged to stop the wars), their world no longer goes round.
To support Obama is to support more war and more killing in the name of the United States - something I cannot and will not do!
I grieve for lives I have cost by my actions in Vietnam. I grieve for the lives of our soldiers now giving their last full measure in Iraq and AfghanistaÂn. I grieve for the fallen innocent Iraqis and Afghans caught in the utter chaos and insanity of war. I grieve for mankind, who in thousands of years of war, has learned nothing – save how to make war more brutal and savage.
I do not support continuing wars of choice, and therefore, Cannot and will not support Obama.
Secondly, candidate Obama said repeatedly that he would expand the war in Afghanistan. He said he would expand the use to drone strikes in Pakistan. Why is it so surprising that he is following through as President, exactly what he said he would do as candidate? If you did not agree with the Afghan war, then you should not have voted for Obama.
In a good faith measure, the Russian assembly has taken up this measure.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/eu_russia_us_nuclear
And are sitting on it!
What Progressive ideas were damaged? How is that movement harmed?
Would you have preferred that Wall Street, banks and investment houses fail, taking with them a huge portion of the economy? What would you have done in the face of the financial calamity the nation faced? How would we have been better off with the chain reaction of businesses failing, even more people out of work, even more foreclosures, shrinking the federal and local tax bases even further.
Would you prefer no healthcare action to the enacted health reform? Would you have liked a continuation of the status quo prior to the enacted health reform?
Clearly, President Obama did not do as you would have liked. Is that betrayal? Is there no progress or success for you to celebrate?
As a liberal, I thought I was tough to satisfy. I could never be a Progressive. They seem to never be satisfied.
We are at war!
People are being killed and people are dying in the name of the United States of America!
Obama said he would stop the war in Iraq. He has not. And, he has escalated our involvement in Afghanistan.
We think nothing of dropping a bomb and blowing up a bridge in Iraq - then spending $1 billion to rebuild that bridge while watching our own bridges crumble around us for lack of investment required to maintain them.
The public is not involved because they have been asked to sacrifice nothing! They are detached - the public is busy complaininÂÂg about how they've been "Taxed Enough Already". Give me a break!
Want to have a war? PAY FOR IT! Raise EVERYONE'S taxes. Have all Americans shoulder the burden! Pass a law that ALL wars must be financed by increased taxes, specificalÂÂly called a WAR TAX! Include full benefits for returning veterans in all financing! Then, see how quickly we give up fighting unnecessarÂÂy wars of choice!
The remaining troops are scheduled to leave Iraq next year. You repeatedly fail to mention that.
As to Iraq - we still have over 50,000 troops there. We have been there for 8 years, soldiers are still being killed and wounded. If you believe all troops will be out next year - good for you. I'll believe it when it happens - just like the closing of Guantanamo!
I hope after his well-earned Hawaiian vacation, he'll show us more of what he can do in spite of a GOP-controlled Congress that hopefully can listen and vote governed by what makes sense for the country and not about their goofy partisan stalling and obstructions.
Insitutionalization of Trickle Up Poverty and Infringemnet on Everyone's Freedom
It is ashame that so many Americans and the elite journalists who believe taxing anyone's incopme is a solution to providing the resources for our economic and social woes....Since its inception the income tax on the rich or the middle class is the modern version of slavery-making people think is that al they need to do is to work harder to overcome the ever growing demand of income tax increases....instead of demanding that our lawmakers explore a new way to raise the revenue to operate our government....
Clarence the income tax law is outdated and we should begin to find other alternatives such as a national sales tax or a flat tax for everyone the very least....maybe the we could unchain the slaves of our ecnomic engine and unleash the true power of their labor and earning power....
Warm regards,
Michael Winters
If it were not for Nancy Pelosi and the democrats in the house fighting everyday as was their job nothing would have gotten down. I still wish they had held their ground on several key pieces of legislation against the Senate and the White House but they did the best they could after all they were fighting the Republicans and their own Party for the American people.
Indeed, as you know so much more than the President, why don't you run against him? Primary challenges this go round I predict to be a fool's errand. Stop your search at your own front door.
The Progressives are PBOs conscience.....we got him where he is with our shoe-leather and vote and we keep him on his toes.
He should expect this much as any man would to get the best out of him.
I am not even a complete progressive....more of a middle of the road moderate.
If you like or accept Obama's policies, so be it.
But please do not insult my intelligence by telling me I have to accept them or I am a whiner.
Someday we may be in OPPOSITE positions where I support a president and you don't.
Good lookin' out.
However, I am not pleased about most of his policy decisions.
AND I have been watching him and following his decisions for two years and I am NOT impressed.
Maybe in 2012 or 2016, I will LIKE the prez and YOU will not.
"Insane criticisms" are in the eye of the beholder. And some of us do NOT like to be patronized.
Dignity and graciousness will NOT save social security if its funding is cut (payroll tax cuts for SS funding).
I gave Obama nearly two years....and I did NOT like what I saw.
And I will again bring to your attention that many people change their minds, often with good reason.
I do NOT trust Obama. Period.
This next year, let's make our lives easier. If you can't get with him or recognize his grit, determination and accomplishment for the American people, we will refer you to some wonderful others to back. Of course, they will be Republicans, for no Democrat in her/his right mind stands a chance against him. So, you have Palin, Romney, Gingrich, Pawlenty, Barbour, Jeb the Bush, and that crew. Also, "the rent's too damn high" NY gubernatorial candidate announced he is running as a Republican against Obama. Good luck. Get your equality and habeas corpus from that crew.
Merry Christmas!
In case you are curious, there are a number of policies I do suggest we have to help improve inequality 1) a much more progressive tax code with a lot of new/higher tax brackets (pppffffttt...ha! not likely to see that under Obama) 2) an employee pay ratio cap - no employee (agent of any form) of any company or government agency can be paid more than 50 times (or even 100 times but certainly not 500 times as is often the case today) what another employee is paid, 3) mandatory employee presence on boards (European countries have this in a couple of different forms 1) mandatory 1/3rd of board members are selected by employees 2) two boards - a shareholder board and an employee board - each with equal power.