Does Obama Really Plan To Govern from the Center-Right?

Should progressives beware? Has Barack Obama suckered them into supporting a President who will really govern from the "center-right"? The short answer is no.

Since November 4th there has been growing protestation from right wing intellectuals that America is really a "center-right" nation and that Obama's victory does not indicate that the electorate has rejected the "center-right" value frame that has defined American politics for the last thirty years.

This line of argument has now extended to the contention that while Obama may have won the nomination and election with the strong support from the left of the Democratic Party, he really intends to govern from the "center-right." Even the New York Times ran a front page analysis last Saturday concluding that Obama's recent cabinet choices, "suggest that Mr. Obama is planning to govern from the center-right of his party, surrounding himself with pragmatists rather than ideologues."

Both of these arguments are complete baloney.

* Right wing pundits can comfort themselves with the fantasy that America is a "center-right" nation but it just ain't so. In fact, all of the polls show that the November election represented a complete repudiation of right wing Bush-Cheney top-down economics and their Neo-Con foreign policy. Over 80% of voters indicated they wanted fundamental change. The polling shows massive majorities in favor of policies that would guarantee health care for all. It shows overwhelming support for policies that give tax relief to middle income Americans and increase taxes on the wealthy. Polls show complete rejection of Neo-Con notions about "preemptive" war and unilateralism. And Americans strongly favor bold government action to stimulate the economy - not the failed laissez faire economics that have lead to the current economic meltdown.

* The fact is that normal people have supported policies like health care for all and bottom up economics for decades. They've known for years that economic policies that have lowered their incomes and siphoned off all of our growth to the top 2% were not in their interest. Now the market collapse, potential bankruptcy of the country's biggest firms, and obvious failure of Neo-Con foreign policy have finally forced even the country's punditry and intellectual opinion leadership to wake up and smell the coffee.

* Not only have "center-right" policies proven themselves a complete failure, their intellectual and moral basis has collapsed. How many more bail outs does someone need before he stops believing that the unfettered "free market" will always lead the "private sector" (meaning those who control giant corporations and Wall Street Bankers) to act in the public interest. How many times can corporate CEO's emerge from their private jets with tin cups in Washington before people begin to question the "center-right's" claim that the private sector is inherently more efficient that the public sector. Let's face it, it's getting pretty tough to justify why Wall Street's "masters of the universe" deserve to be paid hundreds of millions of dollars while middle class incomes tank; or why a CEO should make more money before lunch on the first day of the year than his minimum wage worker makes all year long.

* Obama ran a campaign that clearly and unequivocally described priorities that will turn American in a fundamentally progressive direction. His cabinet picks indicate that he will surround himself with people who have experience and can competently manage the government. They also indicate his absolute commitment to unifying the country to make change. But they do not in any way diminish the fact that America is demanding -- and Obama intends to enact -- a sweeping progressive program the likes of which we have not seen since the New Deal.

* Political consultant, activist and author Mike Lux will publish a book early next year that surveys the history of progressive change in American history. He concludes that progressive changes happen in big batches. Change doesn't happen incrementally. I think of it as the "Drain-O" theory of history. At key points in history the pressure for democratizing, progressive change overwhelms the forces of the status quo. Then, as the pipes are suddenly cleaned out, massive numbers of progressive changes can finally flow. America is about to experience one of those periods. How much we can accomplish, and how long this period lasts will depend on many factors that we don't yet know -- and one that we do. It will depend heavily on our success in continuing to mobilize the millions of Americans who elected Barack Obama into a movement to enact his program.

* Finally, writers and pundits who focus on Obama's Cabinet picks to show he will govern from the "center right" need to have a look at history. Like Obama, Franklin Roosevelt, John Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln all installed people in their cabinets who they believed to be effective managers who could deliver. They all had their share of outsiders and progressives, but many were old Washington hands. Yet all of these Presidents faced historic challenges that demanded and enabled them to make fundamental change. And all of them were guided by progressive values that were sharply different from those of Bush, Cheney, and Delay. Obama shares and articulates those values more than any political leader since Robert Kennedy died forty years ago.

Barack Obama will not govern from the "center right", but he will govern from the "center". That's not because he is "moving to the center". It's because the center of American politics has changed. It has moved where the American people are. It once again resides in the traditional progressive center that has defined America's promise since Thomas Jefferson penned its founding document over 200 years ago.

Robert Creamer is a long time political organizer and strategist and author of the recent book: Stand Up Straight: How Progressives Can Win, available on Amazon.com.

Comments

[LeftOvers]

Was it not these same rightwingnut pundits, that where screaming at the top of their lungs - "Obama is the MOST liberal senator...EVER!" "More LEFT then Ted Kennedy!" They went on and on till he won . And now they say he as well the rest of us are really center right? YAH RIGHT!

[mikemcnary]

Senators who vioted agains the war= 33
Congressman who voted against the war=133
Number of these in the Obama cabinet=0

Yet Obama has picked Clinton, Biden, Emmanual,Gates and Gen. Jim Jones (who does not believe in setting a date for withdraw and sits on the board of Chevron and Boeing).for top positions although they all supported the war.

Change you can believe in=NO

[Rast262]

So in your mind the only thing that matters when considering someone for a position is if they voted for Iraq?

[mikemcnary]

For VP, Defense,State and head of the NSC? Yes, I think their approval for an illegal war is pretty darn important. Maybe one or two positions to those folks if they've apologized for their poor choice with others going to those who early on had right judgement--but all of the major positions to the hawks and none to those who knew better?--that is very disappointing and definitely not a change that I can believe in.

Not to mention that Eric Holder the AG pick thinks that international law doesn't prohibit corporations from setting up death squads. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/11/23/173631/72?new=true

[C65]

MIKEMCNARY,
How much education have you and others like you, had that your understanding of
[CHANGE] would mean a new group of inexperienced people like George Bush and
Company?
Were you people listening?,All along the campaign trail,Presd.-Elect Obama has said
CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN-DOING THINGS DIFFERENT IN WASHINGTON,getting
rid of the MORONS and getting people in office that can THINK beyond a 12yr.old and
do the job the voters employed them to do-make Government work for all the people.
If you do not know that is CHANGE,I'M SO GLAD YOU weren't hired to clean the
toilets.

[benndissed]

right-leaning democrats and moderate repubs always shaft the left ,once they get our votes. that's why no matter which party is in power, nothing ever really changes. if we ever want a planet of peace and prosperity, i'm afraid we'll have move to a new one.

[rshrink]

Mike and Ben, Try not to worry so much, but rather, try to prepare yourself to demand the change that you want. It is not enough to just vote, but that was a great start. The difference between Bush and Obama is profoundly huge, but nevertheless, our leaders, no matter who they are, need to hear from us and need to be persuaded oftentimes to do what is right. I, like many, underestimated Obama, so I am going to watch and see what takes place. He is not in office yet. Even if you don't like his choices, that does not mean he won't get these people to fulfill his vision. This is going to be a different makeup of congress. It may take them awhile to let this sink in. We finally got a democratic governor in Kansas and she was going along with corporations. We raised hell with her and she changed her position. She has since been a strong leader. These things don't just happen. It takes participation, so keep on truckin dudes.

[mikemcnary]

A great admonition rshrink--I'm still glad Obama won and I have some hope that he will be different but we have to keep the pressure on these folks as you have suggested. Because politicians are a bit deaf unless it is election time--I'm boycotting the senate run off election here in Georgia unless these trends begin to change.

[bswell]

Where is Howard Dean in all this, the man who launched the 50-state strategy? Where is Barbara Boxer, and where are the other prominent figures on the left who made this election happen? Not to be cynical, but we did not work for, fund, or vote for Clinton Redux.

[canucklivinginUSA]

How about you actually let him finish announcing his Cabinet first before you wonder who he has left out?

[GTRZAN]

Great article!!Denial can be a dangerous thing.Me thinks the "Center Right"& the "Far Right Concervatives"are in serious cases of denial as we speak.This goes for that "upper 2% bunch of bankers,wall streeters & ceo's who have relied too long on the rest of us real Americans being either ignorant or apathetic.Sadly we have shown alot of this behavior in the last 2 1/2--3 decades. Nov. 4th speaks loudly to all who care to listen: WE'VE HAD IT!! See y'all in 2010 & 2012.

[bayside]

Obama Center right, Think FISA..My thoughts are Obama gets cooked books and paper from the most corrupt adminstration we ever had, places neo cons, and blue dogs, Hillary and MCCain people in, the same ones that did this mess to us, and dont want change in, and perfect setup for placing the collaspe of america on Obama and ensureng a republican presidentcy for years to come. We voted for JFK change and we are getting Hillary, and MCCain change, not good enough..I hope we have not been conned again for if he loses us the progressives and doesnt give us a voice in his adminstration, he will have no one left..

[hippynanainblingland]

You know, I read somewhere, a while back, that the problem of rape in the military was considerably diminished in those units that had leadership that emphazised that rape was unacceptable, and that led me to thinking that leadership can, and does, matter a lot in how underlings manifest their disfunctions (or not), more often than not, growing in the process.

If we apply this snipet of knowledge to the current trepidations that the people being appointed are more likely than not going to act as underminers and saboteurs, willingly or not, we can gain perspective and hope that these effects will be ameliorated, BECAUSE of the quality of leadership we voted into power.

We need to let hope be our guide, and we need to believe that (most) anyone can grow into a better person, ruing their past mistakes, but not so much that they will be paralized into believing that they cannot grow... and we need to learn to believe that there is value in such growth, and that we need to allow past wrong-doers to redeem themselves.

What we call flip-flopping is not necessarily a bad thing: it can be an indicator of growth.

[mikemcnary]

Yes, you are right on. Obama's picks so far are a nightmare. With good reason are neocon hawks all aglow about his choices.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/26/mccain-blogger-gobsmacked_n_146754.html

In Georgia, Progressives have started a boycott of the 12/2 Senate runoff election in protest of Obama's rightward tilt. I'm not going to vote for another Democrat until I start seeing some change that I can believe in.

There is some very insightful interviews about these picks on the Democracy Now web site.
God Bless Amy Goodman!!
.http://www.democracynow.org/shows/2008/11

[canucklivinginUSA]

Yeah, he has no one left but the moderates, independents and the new voters he recruited. YEP, you are soo right

[jsgaetano]

Nobody who voted for Barrak voted for a "center-right" president.

America is fed up with right wingers. Personally, I want someone as far to the left as possible... the farther the better.

[VikingQuest]

Depends on what issue buddy.

[canucklivinginUSA]

SO, you basically want to say a big F U C K you to the 46 millions who voted against the Democrats and will vote Obama out in 2012. WOW, I have never seen so much idiocy in my life

[HallStyle]

The Fact is we are a CENTER LEFT country. We have always been a center left country. Think about it. How did Reagan get elected? He had all the Republicans, he managed to pull So Called Regan Democrats. George Bush Senoir lost those democrats to Clinton. John McCain lost those democrats to President Elect Obama. The fight was never really over independents the sheer number of Independents wasn't really that significant. The Democratic BASE is MUCH BIGGER. Plus we KEPT the Reagan Democrats in the Democratic Party! The Republican Party is SHRINKING! If they don't get there act together they want exist in their current form.

http://www.hallstyle.blogspot.ocm

[VikingQuest]

Reagan won because he won 40 states out of 50.

[Rast262]

That was 1980, this is 2008.

[HallStyle]

Yeah and look at all the STATES THAT BARACK OBAMA WON THAT DEMOCRATS HAVEN'T WON IN DECADES! YOU JUST MADE MY POINT. Reagan took states that for decades were Democratic strongholds and turned them RED (Mainly in the south) Social Conservatism was the TOOL they used. Republican have been USING EVANGELICALS and lower case whites (Trailer Parks) FOR THE PURPOSE OF WINNING ELECTIONS. They don't really share their views and opinions. They need a base that is the demographic they chose to go after that demographic is strinking. This year it didn't work!

[Lionsden]

If Obama does govern from the center right, it would be because he is smart enough to know that it is the best thing to do.

And, I think you could be proud of him.

Democrat rank and file, in my opinion, are just as much misled by THEIR leaders as republican rank and file are. But, it seems to me, that the democrat rank and file are less aware of their leaders' manipulations.

[nomobull]

bs

[HallStyle]

BS times 10

[Lionsden]

LOL...that's all you've got in your quiver?

[HallStyle]

The problem with your argument is The Republican Base (Poor Whites) always vote against their own interest!

The Democratic Base (Minorities, Poor, Middle Class) vote according to their interest and Ideology!

The Republican Base don't even really know what their ideology is! LOL!

http://www.hallstyle.blogspot.com

[Lionsden]

HallStyle

I would never vote for anyone because they promised me other peoples' money. This is because I have morals.

And I've been poor--once living below the poverty line. But, money that I did not earn or have no claim over is not my money. No matter how many immoral laws are written to forcibly take money from others and give it to third parties, in my mind, it is still theft.

The reason I don't vote for people who promise me other peoples' money is because I'm not a greedy person and I cherish virtue.

Republicans are in turmoil, mostly because it's leadership was seized by neoconservatives, many of whom (like Bill Bennett, Michael Medved) were once democrats.

Once republicans realize that Ron Paul is the light in the tunnel they need to travel towards, democrats will be shaking in their boots.

Truth will win out.

[canucklivinginUSA]

You are the one being misled, not us.

[Cobber4now]

I for one would like to see the man REST.
Why is a man who campaigned exhaustively for two years NOT resting?
I prefer my leader of the Free World to have had some sleep before he takes over the hardest job in the country with the most power and importance to us all.
Will potential cabinet post appointee's go away? (Do we know anything about the Clinton's?)
Will the economy 100% collapse?(oh yeah already happened -forgot)
Is this more of the same--people of color are expected to do twice the job and be twice the producer-as any white person selected always?
The job already seems too much for one man--how about we allow him a little time to regroup before we ask him to solve all our problems, rescue our economy and re-build our country?
My President -Step Back.-PLEASE.

[canucklivinginUSA]

Like he has any choices right now. BOOSH has checked out, someone has to step in. Who would you prefer, Cheney or Obama?

[Ksisay]

I've been feeling the same thing Cobber4now -- I really wish he would take a break! Despite the colossal incompetence of the the Bush administration, the world won't cease to exist if the President Elect takes a week off to get rest and perspective.

[benndissed]

it's the wars that are not being addressed. his nat. sec. team of hawks,and their known ties/support to the iraq war, are not in line with, what was his biggest differences with the other democratic contender. that was the iraq war and diplomacy. hillary has neither the experience , the diplomatic skills, or the 'will' to stand up to gates and jones, to ensure prompt withdrawal from iraq and a willingness to hold serious talks with iran. the longer the wars go on, the more they will infect every aspect of the change policies he ran on, both domestically and abroad. and now to be wavering on repealing the bush tax-cuts for the wealthy, with at least 2 more years of war to go,is even more troublesome. there may be no second chances or time to fix mistakes. this why many of us are worried ,already.

[Quitcherbichin]

I hope y'all stay worried. Despite what the far left is espousing this country is not, and will never be as liberal as they hope. As the electorate ages their political and social values change. People become more conservative. That is why the appeasers on the far left will continue to be on the outside looking in.

And as far as holding serious talks with Iran is concerned, I certainly would be in favor of that. I am enough of a realist, however; to know that talking with radical Islamists who view their mission in life is to kill Americans will never succeed. I suppose you, and people who think as you, would rather see Iran develop nuclear weapons than take that capability away from them with a preemptive strike. If we allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons it will be too late. As sure as God made little green apples they will use them against Israel. They will also either attempt to use them against us, or sell them to terrorists to use against us. You can have serious talks until you turn blue and it will not deter the radical extremists.

[canucklivinginUSA]

Realism IN, idealism OUT

[stell]

"Political consultant, activist and author Mike Lux will publish a book early next year that surveys the history of progressive change in American history. He concludes that progressive changes happen in big batches. Change doesn't happen incrementally. I think of it as the "Drain-O" theory of history. At key points in history the pressure for democratizing, progressive change overwhelms the forces of the status quo. Then, as the pipes are suddenly cleaned out, massive numbers of progressive changes can finally flow. America is about to experience one of those periods. How much we can accomplish, and how long this period lasts will depend on many factors that we don't yet know -- and one that we do. It will depend heavily on our success in continuing to mobilize the millions of Americans who elected Barack Obama into a movement to enact his program."

This runs contrary to what the candidate himself has said, which is that American political tradition is reformist, not revolutionary. We don't have time for increments. You really sound like you're reaching sir. It is what it is. There is the potential for all the enthusiasm that was generated drying up. The hope, the prospect of change, the novelty, was what fueled the campaign, the fundraising and the get-out-the vote effort. When he said change has come on election night, he was talking about the fact that he will be the nation's first black President.

[Calamagrostis]

The comments advising us to wait and give Obama a chance to prove himself are terribly naive. Do you think that the corporations are sitting back and chilling out? Are the war hawks who want more military spending and permanent bases in Iraq just going to wait and see? They are right now putting intense pressure on Obama to continue with the more of the same. If we want real change we need to write letters, get organized and build a progressive movement to take our democracy back.

[benndissed]

we're dog-tired, boss. we been workin so hard for this chance. almost tapped out already.

[TomTheAlmostUgly]

You weren't paying attention during the past year, my friend. Both Hillary and Johnny McCain tried to push Barack around--and they learned to their sorrow, Barack just sidesteps and the pusher falls on his face.

After the time that Hillary finally quit the race, and before Barack named his VP pick, some big Democrat donors insisted that Barack pick HRC as his running mate, and if she wasn't picked, these fatcats wouldn't donate any more money to the DNC this year. The fatcats, once they made their threat, assumed that the DNC would cave in, and the DNC in turn would make Barack cave in and pick Hillary. Well, you know how that story ended.

The CEOs of the big corporations can't bully President-Elect Obama too much when they're also asking for handouts. The war hawks are thoroughly discredited. And in any case, a man whose first job after law school was helping Chicago's poor blacks knows malarkey when he hears it.

[canucklivinginUSA]

Again, what is with you dumbasses thinking that Obama is some kind of wuss? Hasn't he proved again and again that he is no punk? You guys have short term memory, its amazing

[designingwoman]

Jackwaddington is right that we must push Obama to move to the left to solve the problems our nation faces. It is the neocon agenda that put us in this sorry situation, and only strongly progressive policies will move us forward.

[harriscrl3]

Well lets review: Massive goverment spending to jump start the economy sounds new deal FDR
No bialout for automakers until they start making fuel efficient and green cars-- the enviromentalist
Investment in green economy to create jobs- enviromentalist
Investment in high speed rail to create jobs- New deal
Invesment in infrastructure to create jobs. New deal

Sounds liek someone who is at least left to center when it comes to the economy. As bad as this economic crisis is. You have to admire Obama for taking advantage of it and moving us into a 21st century green economy. Thats where the pragmatic Obama comes in he uses lemon and makes lemondade.

Carol