Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
White House Unloads Anger Over Criticism from 'Professional Left’
The White House is simmering with anger at criticism from liberals who say President Obama is more concerned with deal-making than ideological purity.
White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs speaks to reporters in the briefing room at the White House.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque During an interview with The Hill in his West Wing office, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs blasted liberal naysayers, whom he said would never regard anything the president did as good enough.
"I hear these people saying he's like George Bush. Those people ought to be drug tested," Gibbs said. "I mean, it's crazy."
The press secretary dismissed the "professional left" in terms very similar to those used by their opponents on the ideological right, saying, "They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we've eliminated the Pentagon. That's not reality."
Of those who complain that Obama caved to centrists on issues such as healthcare reform, Gibbs said: "They wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president."
The White House, constantly under fire from expected enemies on the right, has been frustrated by nightly attacks on cable news shows catering to the left, where Obama and top lieutenants like Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel have been excoriated for abandoning the public option in healthcare reform; for not moving faster to close the prison at Guantánamo Bay; and for failing, so far, to end the ban on gays serving openly in the military.
Liberals have criticized Obama and his staff for moving to the middle and bargaining on healthcare reform, as well as the financial regulatory overhaul and even the $787 billion economic stimulus package, which some liberals said should have been larger.
Just last week, MSNBC host Rachel Maddow described Obama political adviser David Axelrod as a "human pretzel" for his explanation of the administration's position on gay marriage. Axelrod had explained that Obama opposes same-sex marriage but favors equal benefits for partners in gay relationships.
Attacks from liberal political groups like the Progressive Change Campaign Committee (PCCC), which raises money for liberal candidates and causes, are also frustrating to the White House.
Adam Green, one of PCCC's founders, repeatedly blasted Obama for a "loser mentality" during the healthcare debate, criticizing the president and Emanuel for not trying harder to include the public option in the final healthcare legislation. The group even ran ads accusing Obama of ignoring the will of the millions who voted for him by courting the support of Republican Maine Sen. Olympia Snowe.
PCCC is now pressing Obama to nominate Elizabeth Warren, a hero to the left, as the first head of the new consumer protection office created by the Wall Street reform bill.
While visibly frustrated, Gibbs did not specifically name any of the White Houses's liberal detractors by name.
Green said in an e-mailed statement Monday afternoon, "When Republicans opposed the stimulus and when Joe Lieberman opposed the overwhelmingly popular public option, the president could have barnstormed across their states and demanded they support policies that their constituents wanted - but instead he caved without a fight," Green said.
Gibbs's tough comments reflect frustration and some bafflement from the White House, which believes it has done a lot for the left.
In just over 18 months in office, Obama has passed healthcare reform, financial regulatory reform and fair-pay legislation for women, among other bills near and dear to liberals.
Obama is also overseeing the end of the Iraq war, with the U.S. on schedule to end its combat operations by the end of this month.
He's also added diversity to the Supreme Court by nominating two female justices, including the court's first Hispanic. Yet some liberal groups have criticized his nominees for not being liberal enough.
"There's 101 things we've done," said Gibbs, who then mentioned both Iraq and healthcare.
Gibbs said the professional left is not representative of the progressives who organized, campaigned, raised money and ultimately voted for Obama.
Progressives, Gibbs said, are the liberals outside of Washington "in America," and they are grateful for what Obama has accomplished in a shattered economy with uniform Republican opposition and a short amount of time.
Obama reached out to the left - including through a private lunch with Maddow and other liberal commentators - earlier this summer.
In late July, Obama made a surprise video appearance, with an assist from Maddow, at the NetRoots Nation convention in Las Vegas, where the professional left had gathered to grouse about its disappointment in the president.
"I hope you take a moment to consider all we've accomplished so far," Obama said, telling the impatient audience, "We're not done."
The lack of appreciation or recognition for what Obama has accomplished has left Gibbs and others in furious disbelief.
Larry Berman, an expert on the presidency and a political science professor at the University of California-Davis, said he has been surprised that liberals aren't more cognizant of the pragmatism Obama has had to employ to pass landmark reforms.
"The irony, of course, is that Gibbs's frustration reflects the fact that the conservative opposition has been so effective at undermining the president's popular approval," Berman said.
"And from Gibbs's perspective, and the White House perspective, they ought to be able to catch a break from people who, in their view, should be grateful and appreciative."



339 Comments so far
Show AllGibbs is a jerkoff. That is all that needs to be said about him.
The "professional left" label is just one more deceitful tactic the Obama Regime is attempting.
While "professional" means getting paid for your services, most of those who are constructively critical of Obama are simply free thinkers who are not in denial the way many Obamabots are.
Hi raydelcamino,
I think you ought to know by now I am not an Obamabot, and never have been. I just did not want to repeat what other free thinkers said. Granted it is a vulgar term I am using, but I simply have no respect for the war criminals that occupy political office nor those who front for them including the Press Secretary.
Who the hell is Sam Youngman and why is there no mention of his background and employer? A quick search has him as a "reporter" for the inside the beltway establishment paper the "Hill" in which this article first appeared. I found this quote on the internet search: "The Hill’s Sam Youngman working the K Street red carpet, which had just booted a guy for wearing sneakers. The horror!" It showed a youthful SY on the red carpet of some swanky DC hotel where wine, woman, money and power flow so freely as to totally corrupt our democratic system.
These people our so out of touch with reality that all they think they need to do is call a press conference to bootle up the physical, social and moral hemoraging that has our country (and much of the world) on life support. A little character assasination here a little Abbott and Costello "bad cop good cop" routine and all is healed as the almighty OZ has spoken. Not working, won't work and can't work because it is a moral impossibility to fool enough of the people all the time to stay in power in these troubled times.
"it is a moral impossibility to fool enough of the people all the time to stay in power in these troubled times."
Ah, would that this were so ....
As Greenwald noted, when the Republican base raises a clamor of loony claims and demands, they immediatedy jump to support their positions. I've witnessed this happen real-time in a phone-town-hall meeting with my formerly "moderate" republican congressamn.
BUT, when the Democrat's own base raises a compelling and manifestly far more rational clamor - they throw vile insults and slander at them - at their own base. I reepeat THEIR OWN BASE - the people that that are supposed to be representing!Does ANYONE need any more evidence of the absolute corruption and rot in the Democratic Party, and the Democratic White House in particular???
Anyone here want to be made for a chump by the corporate ass-kissing Democrats again? If not, those of you in Pennsylvania shoud consider these candidates:
Mel Packer for US Senate in Pennsylvania
http://melpacker.com/
Ed Borts for US Congress - Pa 14th - Pittsburgh
http://www.edbortzforcongress.org/
When the base of Obama's election finally stands up and screams "Red Card", resign now....it will be too late:
1 Obama did not choose advisers like Geithner, Summers etc, they were chosen by
The Council on Foreign Relations, Trilateral Commission, both led
by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Henry Kissinger.
2 Obama knows that he is merely playing with words when he changes
the mission in Iraq and intends a permanent mission.
3 Obama has expanded the Afghan War into a murderous use of
drones to kill unarmed civilians
4 Obama has expanded his campaign of murder to Pakistan
5 After testimony by Colin Powell's Aide, "Over half the prisoners
in Guantanamo did nothing because Afghans were bribed $3,000 to
turn in their enemies," you would have thought Obama would have
shut the prison then!
6 Obama admitted to making an "Assassination List" with Americans
included in that list.
7 Obama supports the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan despite the
the LIES that were used to invade those countries.
8 Obama believes, like most Americans, that a guy in a cave was able
to convince NORAD to have 5 practice exercises on 9/11/2001 so that
4 hijacked planes could not be intercepted.
9 Never mind Obama supporting the destruction of the United States Economy
by "The Power Elite" led by Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski.
Yes, Obama will attack Iran because that is "The Power Elite's" next target.
So, why would a Democrat be upset with Progressive Democrats who elected him?
He is not upset, he knows that he is a "Corporate Capitalist" working for "The Power Elite"! Keep the base divided and the country divided and polarized, you can then do anything you want including attacking Iran!
Exactly! Keep them divided. That's what this is all about .... Obama, that is. He's a divider and that's exactly what the empire desired and designed.
They are way ahead of us.
Also Tom Woodruff, Green, NM 1st
It's high time for the Democratic party to be dissolved. The only ones protesting would be Republicans who benefit so much from them.
"The irony, of course, is that Gibbs's frustration reflects the fact that the conservative opposition has been so effective at undermining the president's popular approval," Berman said."
What a joke! Obama and Pelosi have undermined Obama's popularity. His actions have defined him, not what anyone says about him.
Berman from UC-Davis confitrms the lack of talent there with his statement "said he has been surprised that liberals aren't more cognizant of the pragmatism Obama has had to employ to pass landmark reforms."
What pragmatism? Arrogance aided by selfishness, passing thiongs no oner wanted and no one is happy with while ignoring what people did want. What idiots we have.
Thank-you.
So, even one of our two "moderate" Democrat trolls is unhappy.
I look forward to Shawn's comments next...
Now you've done it! You hurt my feelings. Democrat...thems fighting words! :) Troll? Please.
Moderate you got right! Congratulations. Add independent, anything but an ideologue or extermist, not a radical leftist, Socialist or Communist and you are getting there.
Independent centrist Liberal would be about right.
Consider this: Obama isn't even measuring up to the expectations of an "independent centrist liberal," whatever the hell that means. One who's as terrified of the left as Obama, Gibbs and Emanuel--even he is fed up with the lies and fraudulence of Obama the supposed progressive, or whatever Gibbs wants people to think he is. And Gibbs is so dense that he can't distinguish between milquetoasty liberalism and "the left." At least mightmite knows the difference. Center-rightists from the Democratic party have to be the dumbest assholes anywhere. Even a "centrist liberal" has more sense.
Thank you! You have just made up for ole Sabo-Cats mean spiritedness!!! :)
"independent centrist liberal,"
Not a radical leftist (called Progressives today), not an idelogue that follows a party line, views extremism as the cause of most of the world's ills, economically centrist, but socially left of center. It also means that being a liberal doen't mean I have to be stupid, have to take interpretations of facts by the elite or PC police that even the most loyal would choke on if they were honest, hate my country or say I believe historicasl fact to be "as represented" when I know for fact that its a lie.
Go forth now that you have been enlightened and spread the word!
By the way the Left does not terrify anyone its the Progressives, the radicals. They should terrify everyone as they are a mirror image of the Neo-Cons and believe me friend, those folks terrified me for years and I was right.
You've just proven that you also have no idea what "the left" even vaguely means. What you advocate is endless shifting from Democrap to Repug administrations, whether you have the sense to realize it or not. Which decidedly you do not. Your insipid centrist liberalism guarantees nothing else.
Gibbs or Obama could as easily claim to be a centrist liberal as you, since there's nothing much vaguer. It can mean anything at all. You're stuck with playing hair-splitting games over what is centrist and what's center-right, liberal vs. conservative, with only ignorant contempt for the real left, because you identify it with dictatorships, the loss of independence, and the foolish identification of the left as a "mirror image" of the neo-cons. You support nothing but mushy status quo centrism from here to eternity, and you have all along, since you were Thomas More, Henry8, Prometheus and whatever other tags you've gone by. We've been subjected to to your wishy-washy opinions for years in here. And every one of them is tailor made to perpetuate status quoism, including your enervating and annoying habit of misspelling every third word, having no idea how to punctuate, and being superciliously superior in defending your proud ignorance. You're the "mirror image" of Shawn Berry.
I'm not entirely sure why but I've always pictured mightymite as an outsourced IT worker posting comments at 10 cents a comment from a cubicle farm in Taiwan. I think this is why I never respond to any of the myriad misleading things he spews.
There is nothing misleading about what I say. And you are a liar if you claim so.
I prefer intelligent comments so I do appreciate your silence.
Good policy. He's so contradictory and confused that it's usually not worth expending the energy trying to point it out. He claims to be an ex-Marine, Vietnam vet (I think), and always wants something more "liberal" from the Dems, distrusts what he calls progressives because he links them with "radical leftists", the worst possible political affiliation ever. He seems to think progressives are Stalinsts and Maoists, since that's all socialism can possibly ever be, has no understanding of any other meaning for socialism and refuses to consider there might be any. (Of course he can't even understand that nearly all progressives reject socialism as much as he does.) So he can only advocate an endless flip-flopping back and forth between Dems and Repugs, forever expecting something marvellous from the corporatist D's. Typical "independent" centrist liberalism.
That is funny . . . I think.
But, just in case you're serious, do you know how one would go about applying?
I wonder if they offer a pension program?
Beats buying the company line.
I believe you'll find I said the Radical Left, not "the left" the so called progressives are the mirror image of the Neo-Cons. If you are going to Carp, please at least get it right. Sheeesh. And yes my opinions would look wishy-washy to radicals and extremists.
Just to get some clarity:
What is radical about "progressives?" Give me the exact parallels between neo-con and progressive.
Name the radical policies that progressive websites and their readers - such as this one - proclaim to adhere to.
Just what is wrong with mightymite? He's from Texas just like I'm from Oklahoma. Where are you from, a blue state? There is nothing wishy washy about what mightybite says. No one can argue that Shawn Berry supports the status quo but mightymite? Give him a break. He comes from a state where his centrist views are attacked as too liberal. Why do I go through too much trouble trying to help Michael Goodhart, Jake Newton, and mightymite on this site and get stoned for it?
So we should all go easy on him because he's from Texas? "mightybite" deserves a break because he's surrounded by flagrant fascists. I don't know anything about your being stoned for defending the dudes you list, but maybe you should stop getting stoned and pay attention to actual reality, such as this country going straight to hell partly because far too many "centrist liberals" are either completely confused or they actively support the status quo. By expecting forever some "liberal" change coming from the Democrats, mightybite and company reveal either a shocking naivete or a conscious complicity with neverending corporatism, with Big Business and government as interchangeable mechanisms that serve to disable any efforts to truly change this corrupt, disintegrating society.
Let's get some things straight. I have paid attention to reality and I get it. I could tell a typical neighbor of mine everything you say about Obama and they would go crazy and say "uh uh, Obama's a socialist !". I assume that mightymite has similar problems in Texas. His state is not as red as OK until you come closer to the TX/OK border. I don't believe in Shawn Berry's idea of pushing the party to the left or mightymite's foolish belief that Republicans will come in and change things for better. I assumed that both of them don't support Big Business and government but I shall accept your judgment that they have everything backwards. I'm still trying to see what can be done to change our laws to reopen third party ballot and write-in access for president before the OK legislature moves into restricting other offices like that. I voted Obama in 2008 but I might not vote in 2012 if things stand the way they are or get worse.
I just remembered that I had picked up a similar pattern between Shawn Berry and mightymite. They both go against Far Left which I do not. They could fear it and they wouldn't be alone as you know. Practical I can be but I respect the criticism of Obama on this site and everyone's accurate views against the false reality that government and media are throwing at us. I can't blame you and others for being angry at this president for giving in too far to the Republicans.
I don't know whether to go easy on SB or MM but hard I don't think it helps. But if they have been here long enough as you say, then I don't know what to tell them but my apologies to you then for what I said. I don't know why they would want to continue acting like that even now but they can't be alone.
"By the way the Left does not terrify anyone its the Progressives, the radicals. They should terrify everyone as they are a mirror image of the Neo-Cons and believe me friend, those folks terrified me for years and I was right."
Sorry, mightymite, but aside from your bad punctuation and grammar, you make no sense. The radical left is for world peace, a self-sustainable economy, and individual freedom. The neocons are for world war, unsustainable perpetual growth (with all the wealth at the top of the pyramid), and "full spectrum dominance."
You think they're mirror images of one another?
Do you think this forum is an opportunity for you to play teacher? As if the Queen's English is the only way! You've gotta be kidden. You need to learn this about language: it's purpose is to communicate meaning. If someone's grammar prevents meaning, ask them to clarify. Don't insult them.
... but everything else you write here I'm in complete agreement with. oops! I ended a sentence with a preposition. gasp! i'm sorry, teacher.
You'll hear from me pretty soon. Watch for it !
Whoa.. the fascist pigs in Washington are angry... nuthin new !
Let's give dirtbag Gibbs rivers of grief! Keep on fuming, you fool!
"They will be satisfied when we have Canadian healthcare and we've eliminated the Pentagon." Yeah, I think I might just be on the road to satisfaction if they did this.
"They wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president." I think I just might be.
"...they ought to be able to catch a break from people who, in their view, should be grateful and appreciative." Ah, now here's the rub. We're just not "appreciative" enough. Boo freakin hoo. People don't appeciate being lied to.
My sentiments exactly.
Elections are coming up...
It's about the only time the WH even thinks about wooing voters.
They sound like a bunch of whining BRATS!
Looks like Common Dreams has double posts of this story (see side bar on the left). I'll reiterate what I said there:
With this rant by Gibbs, it's clear that the Obama Administration has just declared war on progressives and the left. They might take a lesson: it's bad form (and stupid politics) to piss on your base.
But maybe this will be what it takes to wake up the Obamabots that Obama is no friend of progressives and the left. In many liberals' eyes (many of my friends included), Obama can do no wrong, yet he has instituted policies that George W. Bush would never have been able to get away with. It's precisely because he's a Democrat, a supposed liberal, and an African American that he's gotten away with policies that never would have been tolerated under George W. Bush. So in my opinion, he's worse than Bush for that reason alone. Liberals have been neutered, neutralized and comatose since he took office. Maybe now they'll wake up and see the light.
Anne: I agree with the points you make in your post -- maybe, finally, liberals will wake up and realize that Obama IS wrong. Like you, I have quite a number of friends who simply will NOT look honestly at Obama's policies. For the entirety of the Obama presidency, I have been telling friends that -- if it was wrong when Bush did it, it is wrong when Obama does it. And, you are right, Republicans could never have gotten away with legislating some of the policies that are now law. In addition, the Democrat elites are NOW talking about dismantling Social Security. Bush had to go into an almost complete retreat on this issue when he set out to give the pot away to Wall Street. I remember taking note, from the beginning, that Timothy Geither was talking about the dismantling of S.S. Lately, I have been bringing up this issue, especially with friends of mine who are older. They need to be aware.
Their open contempt for the left is chilling, but NOT entirely surprising.
Kay, social security is a perfect example. Bush made noises about privatizing social security and fortunately got nowhere. But now Obama will likely succeed in cutting social security benefits, because he's a Democrat and, well, Democrats can be trusted with our social security, right? At least that's what people think.
And the other day, someone on Common Dreams posted portions of a press release from the ACLU and Center for Constitutional Rights stating that it is a crime for a lawyer to represent someone who's been targeted by the U.S. for assassination, unless the lawyer gets the government's permission to represent that person. I was flabbergasted! This is Star Chamber material. If Bush had done that, liberals would be up in arms. But when Obama does it, you can hear the crickets chirping. Like you said, that is chilling. And very dangerous. Someone -- someone whom the populace will listen to -- needs to sound the alarm before that constitutional law professor in the White House obliterates what is left of the Constitution.
Being a constitutional law professor is insidious the same way his supposedly being liberal is.
People accept whatever ripping apart of the constitution he does, because they think he knows better than to do that...and he does, but he is deliberately destroying the constitution anyways.
So true. You said it better than I - insidious is right.
anne: I completely agree -- I remember Glenn Greenwald trying to explain to someone that there are two different types of constitutional lawyers, 1) constitutional lawyers who uphold the constitution and 2) constitutional lawyers who know how to get around the constitution. We know that Obama represents #2, a constitutional lawyer who looks to get around the constitution, and takes full advantage of the loopholes.
I also recall reading an article written by Bill Quigley about having to "get permission" in order to represent people in U.S. courts. At first, I thought I had misread the article, and I read it again. But, no, I read the article as Bill Quigley had written the article. Even I can still be shocked at this administration's actions!
How much further right can the Democrats move the electorate?
I've picked up on the Social Security issue because I do have several older friends who are already feeling pain because the Senate, with 60 Democrats, voted to NOT give people receiving Social Security the cost of living raise this year. Therefore, these people, friends of mine who are all Democrats, were stunned by the decision. I wasn't surprised, but they were, which means that their ears have perked up, and their eyes are open wider. They will be paying more attention in the future. One of my friends went so far as to rant about the label, "entitlement," stating that she had contributed to Social Security for at least 50 years. "It's NOT an entitlement," she said. She was angry and I had never heard her speak in anger -- ever.
If anyone is interested, I just received an e-mail from Healthcare-Now! and Social Security turns 75 on Saturday, August 14. They are organizing rallies in communities and states across the country. I live in NYC -- here's where people can meet on Thursday, August 19, if you're interested:
New York
Aug 19 at 9:00 AM NYC-123rd ST B-day Celebration w/NYSUT Dennis Tracey – dtracey@nysara.org
Aug 19 at 1 PM NYC-Hunter College B-day Celebration w/NYSUT Dennis Tracey – dtracey@nysara.org
Aug 19 at 6 PM NYC- Roosevelt House B-day Celebration w/NYSUT
I guess a person has to e-mail Dennis Tracey for details as to the cross street on 123rd Street, etc.
For more info, go to:
www.retiredamericans.org/system/storage/24/e8/0/382/ss_events_for_web2.pdf
Jill, I think it was you who posted the press release by CCR and the ACLU? That was an eye opener! Not only does the U.S. claim the right to assassinate Americans without trial or due process of any kind; it also effectively makes it a crime for lawyers to even challenge that policy in court. Didn't we accuse Saddam Hussein of the same thing? Killing his own people (the Kurds)? The only difference is that Saddam didn't announce a policy of killing his own citizens. He just did it. We give it the cloak of "law" (sorta like Nazi Germany) and nobody seems to notice.
Actually, I think "we" accused him of using chemical weapons on his own people. The chemical weapons "we" gave him, and ordered him to use against the Kurds (think Iraq's American Indians).
"I have been telling friends that -- if it was wrong when Bush did it, it is wrong when Obama does it."
Conversely, there are Republicans who are excoriating Obama for things they fully supported when Bush did them.
Yes, the hypocrites are revealing themselves for all to see.
I would have put it differently.
Not better...just differently.
Anne, I feel your pain. But take heart. I know many on the left, myself included, who came to despise Obama and his policies after about 6 months or so into his term. I went from being perplexed to frustrated to annoyed to furious with him. It reveals to us those of us who are seriously on the left and those who, like Republicans, just line up behind their chosen party like robots. I love your term Obamabots! :-)
Billy, I can't take credit for the term Obamabots. I don't know who came up with it, but yes, it's a good one. :o)
"There's 101 things we've done"
Here are some of my top 101
1.) increased spying on Americans (and everyone else)
2.) increased war spending, while Americans do without food
3.) increased troop involvement in pointless middle eastern wars
4.) broke all promises pertaining to ending war
5.) phony financial reform that was a giveaway to finance
6.) phony insurance reform that was a giveaway to insurance, ensuring even more people go bankrupt and die trying to pay for their medical care
7.) gave actual cash for unfair junk mortgages in the trillions
8.) propped up the real estate market through Fannie and Freddie helping banks
9.) accellerated forclosures on ordinary Americans
10.) propped up the stock market so that it goes up on bad economic news
11.) funded the sending of American jobs overseas
12.) committed war crimes galore
13.) covered up war crimes galore
14.) protected Bush/Chaney from prosecution
15.) more torture than ever
16.) put the final nail in the coffin for Habeus Corpus
17.) subverted any agreement on greenhouse emissions
18.) reaching across the aisle to unreasonable Republicans, caving to every unreasonable demand
19.) huge propaganda operations directed at Americans
20.) facilitated overthrow of democratic government in Honduras, replaced it with right-wing dictatorship
21.) Hugely increased the national debt transferring the nations wealth to his rich cronies, using the fact that there is "no more money" to demand everyone else to tighten their already tight belts
22.) working hard to destroy public education and fair wages for teachers
23.) Appointing proven kleptocrats and warmongers to all key administrative posts
24. Expanded bases in Columbia
25. Is pushing Free Trade NAFTA-like agreements
26. Expanded off-shore oil drilling
What a list! Poitou, you a superb analyst.
#14 may be the most important of all. Why impeachment was taken 'off the table' is now selbstverständlich.
Cheney may, however, have the right to prosecute you for misspelling his name.
Funny.