A Message to Obama's Progressive Critics

Five short weeks ago, Barack Obama won a decisive victory against John McCain - winning 365 electoral votes to McCain's 173 and winning the popular vote by 9 million - the largest popular vote margin ever for a non-incumbent.

After a strategy of expanding the electoral map, nine states that George Bush won in 2004, went to Obama - some by significant margins. The Obama victory changed the course of politics - from a candidate who bucked the system saying no to PAC and lobbyist money, to a disciplined campaign, tht beat expectations at every turn, building an unprecedented grassroots movement and raising record sums of money that dwarfed his Republican opponent. Campaigns in this country will never be the same.

Now comes the hard part - assuming the presidency at a time when there are more major problems facing our country and the world than at the beginning of any administration. Our economy is in shambles, affecting people at every income level. Nearly 500,000 jobs were lost during November alone. Retirement and investment accounts were shattered as the Stock Market dropped by historic proportions. Record numbers of families are being forced from their homes. Banks are hardly making loans to anyone right now. Auto manufactures and auto dealers have seen their sales drop between 30 and 40 percent.

We have a war with Iraq that needs an exit strategy and attention by our new president and his foreign policy team. There is unrest with Iran, Pakistan, North Korea and a host of other countries. We desperately need to repair our Nation's reputation around the world. And we need to do all we can to protect our soldiers overseas and our people here at home.

Nearly fifty million Americans have no health insurance, left vulnerable and one catastrophe away from bankruptcy or worse yet, death. This number will increase if we see unemployment continue to grow.

Every day that goes by, where the U.S. and other countries fail to stop the irreparable damage of global warming, is a day closer to changes in climate that we may never gain back.

I could go on and on. The point I'm making here is that our new president, the Congress and all Americans must come together to solve these problems. This is not a time for the left wing of our Party to draw conclusions about the Cabinet and White House appointments that President-Elect Obama is making. Some believe the appointments generally aren't progressive enough. Having worked with former Senator Obama for the last two years, I can tell you, that isn't the way he thinks and it's not likely the way he will lead. The problems I mentioned above and the many I didn't, suggest that our president surround himself with the most qualified people to address these challenges. After all, he was elected to be the president of all the people - not just those on the left.

As a liberal member of our Party, I hope and expect our new president to address those issues that will benefit the vast majority of Americans first and foremost. That's his job. Over time, there will be many, many issues that come before him. But first let's get our economy moving, bring our troops home safely, fix health care, end climate change and restore our place in the world. What a great president Barack Obama will be if he can work with Congress and the American people to make great strides in these very difficult times.

Comments

[SailFree]

Progressive is to progress as lightning bug is to lightning.
--Paraphrase of Mark Twain

[cliffhammond]

Mark Twain was speaking about the "Progressive Era" at a time when racism was corrupting the very movement that promised progress. The working class movement of the early 20th century about which he spoke turned out to be closer akin to populism, which is not the same. Populism is what Reagan depended upon via the "Republican Southern Strategy."

[MaynardGK]

I didnt need much more than a quick scan to affirm this article is the usual "rally behind the flag" type, a plea to shut up and be led by the nose through an other eight-year series of events orchestrated, as it were, by those of the same lineage , from Nixon to Clinton to Bush, bringing us to this point of an over-extended empire at the brink of economic bust.

To me Obama was the best choice between the two plausible contenders, the competent HRC being the other. Despite B.O. being to me little more than a "blank slate", espousing safe, go-along to get-along policies little different the HRC, he was my choice precisely because of his thin history along with his intelligence and emotional bearing ("Mr. Cool").

"This is not a time for the left wing ..."
What do you mean by Left wing? are you trying to marginalize any ideas more progressive than your own by categorizing the people who espouse them.

What is implied by the "BUT" of

"But firstlet's getour economymoving, ..., change and restore our place in the world."

You think "those lefties" have a seperate set of priorities, and they should just shut up and be grateful McCain didnt get in?

Now that Obama is elected he will live in "the bubble" of his own design, and to many it may be disconcerting that the gatekeepers of this bubble are so entrenched in the old mindsets.

[cliffhammond]

I'm glad you caught that buried sound bite, "This is not a time for the left wing..." It exposes the "New Democrats" like Obama, Bill & Hillary Clinton and Joe Lieberman for what they are: conservatives wearing "moderate" lipstick. I have to admit, Obama surprised me after the primaries when he moved to the right of Hillary; although, in the general election, I held my nose and voted for him anyway while being honest with myself that I'd been bamboozled.

[bswell]

I suggest that everyone read Frank Rich's column in last Sunday's NY Times for a reasoned analysis of why these appointments, especially those in the economic sphere, are extremely questionable. He hasn't worked for anyone but The Times for the last two years.

There are still a few key appointments left--how about some decent folks appointed to labor, agriculture and education--for those of us who care about those positions.

Where are Robert Reich, Barbara Boxer, Howard Dean, and other progressives?

It appears to some of us that our presidential choice is better at running a campaign than a government.

[SolarPowerGuy]

I've had all of those names on my "where the heck are they" list as well.

As for Howard Dean, when he stepped down as Chairman of the Democratic Party, I figured he was getting ready to accept the job of Secretary of Health and Human Services. Apparently not.

[cliffhammond]

Clinton's people really didn't like Howard Dean at all. Dean is not a "New Democrat" and you didn't say his name around Carville that he didn't get nauseous.

[cliffhammond]

Robert Gates, who played a central role in the Iran-Contra Affair, is another red flag. I'm not so certain that Obama is NOT being manipulated. He's not all that up on foreign policy and the shadowed history of our covert activities around the world. It will be interesting to see whether he can GET educated quickly enough to turn around the damage that Reagan and the Bush family have done in Latin America.

[FearlessFreep]

If there's one thing lamer than BO retaining Gates, it's people insisting LIBERALS should be happy with this!

[ToTink]

Oh ya, I recommend Paul Grignon's 47-minute animated presentation of "Money as Debt" which tells in very simple and effective graphic terms what money is and how it is being created. It is an entertaining way to get the message out. The Cowichan Citizens Coalition and its "Duncan Initiative" received high praise from those who previewed it. I recommend it as a painless but hard-hitting educational tool and encourage the widest distribution and use by all groups concerned with the present unsustainable monetary system in Canada and the United States.

[ToTink]

I've decided to draw a line in the cement and I suggest everyone else do it too. Pick your passion; agriculture, economics, anti-war, civil liberties, etc. Decide now what will push you over the edge, then when and if Obama cross over that threshold - vow to join the revolution for Liberty and Justice for All.

The only battle we have to win is against Tyranny.

[SolarPowerGuy]

I am a critic of Obama's staffing choices, but even so, I'm way more flexible than that.

I just want to see the momentum toward the right wing STOPPED -- that means not giving them anything don't already have. And, I want to see ONE major progressive policy achievement.

During the Clinton Adminstration, progressive victories numbered ZERO -- and the country continued to cave in to the right. Feel free to argue otherwise. We moved rightward more slowly, perhaps, than we would have under Presidents Bush and Dole. But we did indeed move rightward, and it is time to stop.

Give me a renewable-energy economy, OR a public health care trust, OR political reform which allows the equal participation of third parties, OR an America that dependably reaches for diplomacy instead of its guns in international affairs.

If some of those goals are intertwined, fine. If more than one of those goals can be accomplished, GREAT! But do something.

I see Obama choosing advisors (for that is a primary function of Cabinet officers) who are even more right-wing than Clinton's own picks. That's NOT a recipe for progressive victory, and that's why I'm concerned.

[Bonobo]

Be flexible, but start your bargaining position with more than you'll settle for.

[uvymopkq]

"Five short weeks ago, Barack Obama won a decisive victory against John McCain - " and now Obama and Blagojevich is bring us chage that we expected. (Send me the money)

[cliffhammond]

If there was ever a pea under the mattress of a princess, Blagojevich has got to be it.

[lisa12345]

Ok, this is a good article.

I read many of the posts, all good points. We have a right to stay on top of Obama from the start because we cannot let this kind of a system continue. But did you ever notice Progressives don't congratulate themselves too much? We need to sit back for a moment and appreciate what we have done. Granted, it took getting to the brink of disaster, but we finally pulled our government center-left for the first time ever. It is probable that the country is center-left as well, and I say this because many issues that were once "left" are now center. The center wants out of Iraq, the center wants to ween us off oil, the center wants universal health care, the center wants a living wage. Unions are coming back, people are ready to stand up to Wall Street, corporations.
The spirit of those old left movements are in this, and that is really remarkable. Yes, we have tons of work ahead and we should stay concerned but please realize what we have done, you deserve it. Stay focused on making the changes, but realize you have already accomplished something. It is not just a matter of getting the changes in place, in a sense they are already there because you have changed the priorities of mainstream USA by helping them see this country and world from a different perspective.

[FearlessFreep]

The lack of progressive self-congratulation is something to be admired, not regretted.

[Bonobo]

"The point I'm making here is that our new president, the Congress and all Americans must come together to solve these problems."

Why? Unity is highly overrated. Here in California we have a consensus system where a one-third minority has frozen our government and is forcing the state into bankruptcy. The founders of the Union went with a majority plus one system because they wanted a functional government, not a utopian fantasy.

[SolarPowerGuy]

Agreed. I'm a Californian, too. A two-thirds supermajority is simply too large of a hurdle for certain items (like tax increases).

Remember though, Bonobo, that not every type of vote in the Federal Constitution is majority +1. We have the Senate filibuster rule, for example. The ratification of amendments to the Constitution is also difficult by design.

[Bonobo]

I have no quarrel with a high barrier for Constitutional amendments (wish we had that here), just not normal operations. That stupid filibuster custom certainly needs to go. It's not even law, much less constitutional. It's also too dam easy now that they don't actually have to speak continuously. I was so disappointed when they didn't "go nuclear" a few years ago.

[neesy08]

I wish these people would just shut up! Obama knows what he is doing, they do not. if they are complaining now, I hate to see how much they whine once he has been sworn in. I think Obama has made a wise decision and has made excellent choices.

[DrDemon]

Ok so let me get this straight-

You can state what YOU wish/think ("I wish these people would just shut up! ") but WE cannot?

You need to get over yourself, Slick!

[AlP]

neesyo8's comments are satire.

If Obama doesn't do what he was voted in for, say goodbye. He won't be in past 4 years. Democrats are not going to put with this nonsense. Either you rule left of center, or you're gone. End of discussion.

"Shut Up"? You're a Republican.

What do you base Obama "knows what he's doing" on?

[eastutican]

Way too many posters here sound like Gov Ron Blagojevich. Obama spent two years campaigning and now he gets to govern.

I can not remember a Democrat headed for the White House who was at all "progressive". Not Kennedy, not LBJ, not Carter, not Clinton.

FDR was before my time but what I read tells me that he out-fiscal conservatived Hoover in 1932 and helped cause the second phase of the Depression in 1937 because he really didnt understand Keynsian economics. FDR famously left out national health care when he could have included it in the Social Security Act of 1935. Ever hear about giving a guy a break ?? Lay off Obama for at least a few months AFTER he has been inaugurated. Stop the pouting. Makes you look like George W.

[AlP]

Tell us to shut up, IS George W Bush.

Next.

[vontrapp]

Progressives worked their asses off to get him the nomination (which he would of not won without progressive support), and then the Presidency, and now we're supposed to meekly fall into line? Keep our mouths shut as he puts many of the very people responsible for our current crises into positions of power? As he rewards the failures of Republicans and "centrist" Dems who supported conservative policies?

Naw I don't think so.

We're going to keep fighting for a liberal/progressive agenda. And guess what? If a liberal/progressive agenda had been followed the past 20 years, instead of a conservative one (enabled by "centrist" Dems) we wouldn't be in the messes we're in.

[PoliticalAmazon]

" From the start these appointments look more like the right wing is being rewarded for crashing our country than the left is being rewarded for having successfully elected a new president. Obama won because we supported him enthusiastically based on his progressive promises..­.."

--------

Did you work to elect Obama because you thought he'd be a great leader, or because he would do the bidding of the left?

He isn't a wind-up doll you put on layaway, to be purchased by electing him. He's a great leader, and he has made no secret ever that he would lead ALL Americans, and not just those who voted for him.

His first job is to unite people behind him. Without that, he won't get jack done, I don't care how many liberals are praising him.

Also, you might want to think about this: Obama and McCain have one big character trait in common: they do not like to be ordered around by those who have no right to do the ordering. When the Clintons and McCain tried to do it, Obama didn't even respond to them...he simply ignored them, and went on about his plans.

Either you think Obama is a great leader or you don't, either you think he knows how to implement his vision or you don't.. I think Obama has done a danged fine job to date, and I think it is a bad strategy to try to micromanage him at this stage of the game.

[Bonobo]

Actually, Obama's behavior seems to indicate that the more you oppose him, the more he'll bend over backward to accommodate you. Therefore, if we want a progressive agenda, we must beat him about the head and shoulders until he gives us some seats at the table.

[tpfahler]

Obama would be a fool to move to the left. None of us need another divisive political figure that sticks to their ideology. We need a leader that thinks about what's best for the country NOT THEIR PARTY. Do we liberals really want to give Hannity and Limbaugh ammunition to undermine the monumental undertakings Obama is faced with?

I was disappointed by the FISA issue too but it isn't that important in the scheme of things. Didn't we learn our lesson after Clinton made gays in the military a big issue?

I want our leader to lead based on the way things are, not the way they should be.

[SolarPowerGuy]

The Republicans keep dragging "the way things are" rightward. And obedient Democratic "pragmatists" follow along.

It IS time to take a few steps to the left, if we ever want to get back to a historically-normal consensus.

[fishingriver]

Any agenda unfit to be used by Hannity and Limbaugh as ammunition­... isn't worth pursuing.

[AlphabetSoup03824]

I hear what you are saying John 789 and I respect it. But bad things don't change to good overnight. It will take time to correct what was wrong not just during Bush's reign, but well beforehand at that. You also can't forget that the US does in fact face threats from armed foreign entities so taking military options completely off the table might not be prudent. Yes, use diplomacy by all means, but be pragmatic about it as well. Same thing with raising taxes during difficult times. Don't get me wrong. I am in fact progressive, or at least I consider myself to be so, but I am well aware that progress does not occur overnight. I'm also aware that often times dealing with the devil that you know can be a lot more practical than bringing in new, unknown devils. Plus, who's to say that this old guard can't be made to see the error of their ways and change for the better?

[franski34]

"the most qualified people to address these challenges­"...
How can Larry Summers be included in this statement? He helped cause the financial problems we are now facing while someone like Joseph Stiglitz is not even given an advisory position (scuttlebutt has it that Summers cannot stand him, partially because of his desire to regulate way back when)

Most importantly though, I don't like the tone of this article and the fact that it comes from one of Obama's close advisors troubles me. It reminds me of the relationship between Bush and the media over the last eight years--after 9/11--it wasn't patriotic to question our leaders, during the Iraq war--it wasn't appropriate to question Bush's decisions.

Our country is in crisis but that doesn't mean there shouldn't be criticism or oversight of the new administration. We on the left will not roll over like those on the right, just happy that someone from "our team" is in power...