More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Mike Lux

Mike Lux

Posted: December 9, 2010 01:36 PM

It Is Our Job

What's Your Reaction:

Rather than writing just another blog post today, I am feeling the need to write an open letter to the President.

***

Dear Mr. President,

I think I speak for a lot of folks in writing this letter, although I readily admit that some of my progressive friends have given up on you and are talking about a primary challenge, and others still support you strongly no matter what. But there are a lot of us who find ourselves genuinely conflicted about your Presidency and your relationship with the progressive community.

Like millions of other Democrats, I went all out for you in the campaign, giving money, knocking on doors, making phone calls, being involved in groups who were helping you, helping out in every other way I could think of to help. Like hundreds of thousands of other progressive activists, I have spent many hours and given much money over the last two years working on behalf of your stimulus package, your health care reform bill, and your financial reform bill. Having lived through the Jimmy Carter years, when Carter governed as a moderate and was challenged in many different ways by progressives yet was still successfully labeled a liberal by Republicans, I have written time and time and again that progressives' fate is inextricably linked to your fate whether either of us wants it to be, and that progressives should do whatever we can to make you a successful President. And I still believe that. No one wants you to succeed more than I do.

So here I am, along with so many others, out here fighting -- really fighting -- for everything you say you believe in. On health care, you said you were for a public option, for negotiating drug prices on Medicare, against taxing workers' health care benefits, and that is what I and so many others who are your supporters fought for. On taxes, you said you were against the wealthiest of Americans having their Bush tax cuts extended, and that is what your supporters fought against. On these and so many other issues, we have fought by your side for what you said you were for.

Let me switch from "we" to "I" for a minute, because I am an old Washington insider who knows that compromise on some issues is inevitable, and that even the best of Presidents have to make deals. FDR made compromises, so did his cousin Teddy, so did Lincoln on slavery and LBJ on civil rights and Medicare. I supported your stimulus plan even though I thought it was way too small. I supported health care reform even though it didn't have a public option. I supported financial reform even though it didn't break up the Too Big To Fail banks. But I was disappointed about all the compromises that had to made and I did fight against them -- because that is the job of the progressive movement. As an old community organizer, I am saddened that you don't seem to understand that basic notion. Frederick Douglass and Charles Sumner supported the emancipation proclamation, but still demanded that slaves be freed in every state, not just the Confederate states. John L Lewis supported Social Security but immediately began fighting for it to be extended. Martin Luther King, Jr supported the 1964 Civil Rights Act, but complained bitterly that it didn't include voting rights and kept fighting for that to happen. It is our job as progressives to fight for more, and our job to complain when we didn't get it. That doesn't make us -- or King or Lewis or Douglass -- sanctimonious. They, and we, are just doing what we are supposed to do. And Mr. President, you of all people should understand that.

I will say again: no one wants you to succeed more than I. But I fear that you are on the verge of destroying your Presidency by not showing your supporters that you are fighting just as hard as they are for your principles, and in fact attacking us when we do. Washington establishment wisdom says that you can blow off your supporters, because where are they going to go after all? And this much is true: people like me will support you in the general election against Sarah Palin or whatever far right extremist the Republicans put up against you. But it is no accident that the last 4 Presidents to not get re-elected to a second term (George HW Bush, Jimmy Carter, Jerry Ford, LBJ) all had a bad relationship with their party's base. Because it is your base activists who fight your battles. It is your activists who defend you when the other side attacks. It is your activists who fight for your legislative agenda. It is your activists who fuel your field operation and grassroots enthusiasm. It is your activists who register voters and drag marginal voters to the polls so you win the close states.

Mr. President, there are plenty of us out here who understand the need to compromise sometimes. What we don't understand is this sense that you have thrown in the towel before the battle has begun. And we don't understand being attacked by you when what we are fighting for is your agenda. If you are dismissive of the need to rally your own troops, if you are disdainful of the very people who have fought the hardest on your behalf, you will destroy your Presidency. For your sake, for your party's sake, for your country's sake, we can't afford for that to happen. Mr. President, those of us who have been on your side need to know that you are on our side, too.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 29
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marthamothra
10:05 AM on 12/10/2010
exactly how I feel. I keep trying to influence the president by phoning my comments, and writing letters. Don't his advisors tell him what the people, especially his supporters, are saying? I'm confused and depressed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Watt
Not ready for 2012
06:35 PM on 12/09/2010
Mike, over the last 2 years you have remained diligently optimistic about Obama's actions and intentions and that is commendable. Your letter is great but I fear it will fall on deaf ears.

At this point there is no denying the utter betrayal by Obama of not just progressives but moderate Dems and Independents as well. The man we all worked so hard for was just an act that Obama used to get elected. Now that he has dropped all pretense of cover, we can see he is a corporatist Republican with nothing but disdain for average Americans.
jhNY
Mercy.
06:32 PM on 12/09/2010
Sadly, Mike, Obama's just not that into you, or anybody progressive, except insofar as you can be a target of his impatience. And like me, you'll most likely vote for him again in 2012, as at least in his party, folks with views like yours are still considered to be Americans.... If the other guys win, especially if Palin and her handlers get over, I expect to be rounded up.
Hookedonfashion
You can't judge a book by its cover, or its name.
07:21 PM on 12/09/2010
I am one progressive who will not vote for the president again, and many Independents won't either. As far as I can tell their won't be any difference having a Republican in the White House.

BTW, Sarah Palin will not be nominated in 2012 because she doesn't have the support of Independents and many Repubs. The RNC will not allow that to happen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bg66astoria
Research Helps
06:19 PM on 12/09/2010
Do we need to send a copy of "Schoolhouse Rock" to the WH? Their segments on how Congress works seems like a good gift for everyone in DC now.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bg66astoria
Research Helps
06:18 PM on 12/09/2010
Thanks Mr. Lux.

Cutting off his supporters from the policy work left him fighting alone instead mobilizing those who were already mobilized to stay mobilized & keep pressure on him & the Hill to get as many of his goals moving as fast as possible.

Now we're almost 2 years in & we've had no consistent, persistent stimulus available to consumers' use. Without consumer demand, there's no need for companies to hire.

And without lots of support from Outside DC, good legislation does not get passed in DC.
06:01 PM on 12/09/2010
Dear Mike as you may have guessed i was looking for gems like "men with whips..."
there're still some semiprecious stones to be found -"people like me will support you in the general election against Sarah Palin or whatever far right extremist the Republicans put up against you." that's right the worse one can do if Obama abandons his own stated political goal and his own base is VOTE FOR HIM. you also seem to equate stimulus deal, health care and financial regulation bills which were variations of actual improvements to maintaining status quo to Obama's tax cut deal which virtually ensures the demise of social security and income disparity of such magnitude that a democratic society becomes impossible.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
marthamothra
10:18 AM on 12/10/2010
I am particularly concerned about the 30% payroll tax cut, because it sets a terrible precedent for the future, a slippery slope. The American people need to be invested in their future. "Reducing a person's responsibility to contribute to Social Security deprives the program of the political and moral capital that has kept the program intact." (from Ryan Grim) Once we do this, which has never been done before, it is easier for the other side to speak to do it again. And after the year, it will be touted as a tax increase by the Repubs. These ideas were pointed out in Ryan Grim's "Tax Cut Deal A Hidden Threat To Social Security." All should read it and CALL YOUR REPS to lobby against this part of the tax cut deal, because though the tax cuts for all may go through, we cannot allow them to tamper with our Social Security. They've tried for years to undo it, and this is the first step.
05:58 PM on 12/09/2010
Beautifully said. Reflects my views as well.

One reason I supported President Obama in the primary was because -- unlike Hillary Clinton whom I expected to govern in a defensive, tactical mode as Bill did -- I thought he could be a transformative president. He had the vision, he had a strategic approach and long-term view, and he had the communication skills to end the 28-year era of right-wing hegemony. In retrospect, I was probably guilty of projecting my own desires onto someone who is basically a centrist and a compromiser, and who has turned out to be surprisingly passive in engaging the debate and driving the narrative. So maybe I only have myself to blame for that. My disappointment is that he has governed largely the way I expected Hillary to govern.

I still support him and his presidency. His achievements, especially in health care reform and financial reform, are historic. I want him to be re-elected and I don't want to see a primary challenge. But I still want a president who tries to change the game rather than play by the other side's rules. I still want a president who tries to drive the narrative and reshape the way America thinks about the issues affecting their lives. Barack Obama surely has the exceptional talent and sharp mind to do that. I just wish he'd gain the willpower. But if not, WE have to provide it.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Doug Watt
Not ready for 2012
06:39 PM on 12/09/2010
"In retrospect­, I was probably guilty of projecting my own desires onto someone who is basically a centrist and a compromise­r"

No, he ran as the person you and the rest of us saw. It was all a fake, a con in my opinion, but he played the role well. No honest person who said the things he said during the campaign could govern as he has the last two years. It was all an act.
08:02 PM on 12/09/2010
I don't know... in fairness, he's always talked about bipartisanship, going back to his 2004 Convention address and perhaps even before. I just assumed that once he saw that the Republicans were only out to lie about him and destroy his presidency, he'd wisen up. Obviously, I was wrong. I used to wonder why Paul Krugman was so negative about him during the campaign, calling him dangerously naive. Turns out, Krugman was right.

I do think the soaring oratory, visionary rhetoric and brilliant speech-making masked the fact that behind the persona was a centrist technocrat -- a Michael Dukakis with charisma, if you will. But was it intentional deception? I'm more inclined to think that as a newcomer on the national political scene, he was a blank slate and many of his supporters saw in him what they wanted to. I also think that programmatically -- with health care reform, financial reform, getting combat troops out of Iraq, for example -- he's stuck closer to his campaign promises than most presidents. Though obviously he hasn't done everything he said he would.
05:31 PM on 12/09/2010
Face the facts, the sooner the better.

Obama is not on your side.

Once you face them, then you move to the next step which is opposition to him and anybody like him.
05:27 PM on 12/09/2010
Well said.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
outsidethemainstream
05:02 PM on 12/09/2010
x2
04:53 PM on 12/09/2010
With that said, the fact that the tax rate proposal is fundamentally flawed, it doesn't mean that a political strategy or "win" is out of the question. If the strategy involves creating a sense of disarray to muddy the talking points (which is sometimes necessary with the GOP echo chamber), the President has most certainly succeeded in achieving that goal. If the strategy is to give the Congress a swift kick in the rear to stop talking and get something done without White House intervention, it seems to be working. But in all of these "strategic victories", there is no evidence of the end result he seeks to achieve. At least, none that I can decipher quite yet and there are plenty of articles suggesting different "guesses" (from rope-a-dope to pragmatism to flat out betrayal). But to your point, Mike, it's hard to figure where the sanctimonious criticism fits in any strategy. It was obviously an integral part of his intended "message" at the press conference, it wasn't off-the-cuff by any indication. Just yesterday I found myself getting fed up with all of the criticism from the left and expressed that rather bluntly in some forums. In a way, I felt emboldened to do so by the President's remarks. But I've since reeled that back in and reading your article reinforces that decision. I'm not fed up with the criticism, it's healthy and it's progressive and most assuredly, it's warranted.
04:39 PM on 12/09/2010
This is exactly right. Mr. President, we are just fighting for the things that you said you would fight for during the election. Remember, we're not the problem. The other side is.
04:36 PM on 12/09/2010
It's over Mike. The base has shrunk too low and most swing-voters aren't coming back is my guess. The GOP, realizing their fortune, will nominate a "moderate" like Romney who will even be more "reasonable" on the campaign trail especialy when contrasted against a Palin or Gingrich.

In light then, I favor a primary challenge.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Cal3b G
04:24 PM on 12/09/2010
Remember when Senator Obama said that he wanted his voters to "hold him accountable" for to the promises he made on the campaign trail. Two years later... That's all whining now.
04:07 PM on 12/09/2010
Well done!