The Left is Not Abandoning Barack Obama

I would like to stop our jail society, save our dysfunctional schools, get a 1-10 ratio between lowest and highest incomes, create eco-sufficient human settlements, rein in the Pentagon and turn the "war on terror" into a police action. Am I on the "left"?

If so, the folk at MSNBC and CNN think I am ready to strangle Barack.

The plain fact is that we do not cross the finish line if we do not have a solid majority. David Wilhelm understood this the minute he backed Barack. Susan Eisenhower understood it when she abandoned her party for Barack. Most of the name progressives in the Obama camp understood it.

The term "left" is a blanket that covers a ton of diverse individuals who have radically differing views if you drill down and actually talked about things. But on certain issues, like Prop 8 or FISA, there is unanimity. I include FISA because that was an earlier instance of leftist rage at Barack, blown up by mindless MSM folk into an Armageddon.

Contrary to the current MSNBC-CNN wailing wall approach, the following is a more accurate picture of reality.

Many on political left giving Obama a pass SOURCE

By PETER BAKER, New York Times

... But they are mainly muting their protest so far, clinging to the belief that Obama meant what he said on the campaign trail and remaining wary of undermining what they see as the most liberal president in a generation. They are quietly lobbying for more liberals in the next round of appointments. And they are banking on the idea that no matter whom he installs, Obama will be the driving force for the change they seek.

"It's a great question -- one that many of us have been trying to avoid," said Rep. Raul Grijalva, D-Ariz., the incoming co-chairman of the Congressional Progressive Caucus, when asked how liberals viewed Obama's team. "The euphoria of the election is still there -- and still there for me. It's not a question of benefit of the doubt. It's a question of trust, and I trust that we're going to be moving in the right direction."

Comments

[DAE]

The only elements on the "left" who are critical of Obama are the ones that never supported him to begin with, such as the Naderites at "Democracy Now" and the neo-Trotskyists over at Counterpunch.

[hardybear]

Well elucidated ... balanced ... lacking hyperbole ...

hey, how did This get here?! ;-) many thanks.

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Well, er, um. I have always been brazen about access.

Here's a followup for anyone who thinks the Obama movement is asleep.

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com/2008/12/10/you-thought-the-obama-movement-was-sleeping/

There is more good stuff here:

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com

[hardybear]

lol, The brazen pursuit of access is a laudable tradition, no? From celtic bards to blog boomers.

Appreciate the links, it was a wonderfully productive detour on
this rainy New England morning.

[ElBruce]

I'd love for Obama to go after all of my pet priorities in order too, and I fully intend to shout them from the rooftops throughout his administration. Does that mean I'm going to get everything I want from him? Of course not. Other people, who want him to prioritize different things won't get everything they want either, and they're going to shout for their view as well. But just because we're all shouting at him, it doesn' t mean that we don't respect him as President, or even that we oppose the main thrust of his politics. It's just Democracy in action.

I do have a problem with people getting mad at him for cabinet picks. The President should determine policy, as he clearly intends to do, and the cabinet appointees implement it. So whatever their policy decisions may have been in the past are irrelevant, as they'll be restricted to filling in details within the framework he gives them.

[JonPincus]

Well said. I thought Baker's article was quite good, although the NY Times headline "Liberals Wonder When Obama’s Team Will Reflect Them " is a more accurate summary.

I do think that FISA -- and surveillance in general -- could well be a place where these tensions come to a head. Like most (although not all) of the Obama supporters protesting his position, I continued to support him despite my disappointment in his role here. Still, the issue hasn't gone away ... it'll be interesting to see what happens as we re-engage on this in 2009.

And agreed with ouroboruous on the middle ground. Unfortunately so many people continue to think in those dualistic terms ...

[Stephen C. Rose - Huffpost Blogger]

Thanks...I think Barack will make up for the FISA vote.

Here is a companion piece on the income question I mentioned. Cheers, S

http://stephencrose.wordpress.com/2008/12/09/am-i-worth-290000-a-year/

[1murillo]

His FISA vote has been mal-reported. If we follow his stance and the development of the legislation we can see that he didn't do a 180 d. turn.

He accepted an imperfect piece of legislation. Usually in the past, Democrat Presidents allow their terms to be derailed by a particular piece. (WJC - don't ask...; Carter - water in west US; LBJ - wrongheaded allegiance to war; JFK - need of proof to show his toughness ... Bay of Pigs, others; etc.)

(I agree with others) This is a complex and fast-moving world, he's by far the best and most qualified President-elect in decades.

[ouroborous]

Nicely balanced piece.

The fact that progressives are not willing to give Obama a carte blanche, no-questions-asked free pass to do whatever he wants is NOT the same as the "left abandoning Obama." Just because we view Obama as a means to an end (progressive ideals like the rule of law and social justice advancing) rather than as the automatic embodiment of all that is Good and Worthwhile, does not mean that we are spitting on effigies of him.

The MSM really likes to play up any schism, and all this does is fan the flames. I'm glad that you brought up FISA; many Democrats like to pretend that that abject failure on the part of Team Obama never happened, when his pledge -- and subsequent utter capitulation in the opposite direction -- are clear and on record.

What many people seem to fail to understand is that there's a middle ground between unquestioningly following someone and equally mindlessly opposing them. There's actual "issues" that matter to some people, and being angry when those issues are overlooked or when we're lied to about them is NOT the same as being some kind of mindless "concern troll" who will oppose Obama no matter what.

Again: nice piece, well balanced.