EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama and The Progressive Movement
One day during the presidential transition, when I had been named the liaison to the progressive community, someone observed to me that "my people" didn't seem to be very happy. I responded that it was not the job of the progressive movement to be happy.
I wasn't intending to be snarky. My point was that progressives' job is to keep pushing, keep organizing, keep agitating, keep demanding better things. Martin Luther King said that people kept asking him when he would be satisfied, and he answered, we will never be satisfied "until justice rolls down like waters and righteousness like a mighty stream."
It's the nature of our movement to never stop fighting for things to get better, there are of course substantive issues where at least some progressives are going to part ways with Obama. On foreign policy, the most important areas of concern so far are leaving so many residual forces in Iraq and expanding forces in Afghanistan without a clear understanding of the overall strategy (including an exit plan). On the economy, some of us remain extremely concerned about the Geithner/Summers bank bailout strategy, which appears to be too much of a continuation of the Paulson bailout strategy while giving banking executives far too much leeway and far too little accountability. These are not small issues.
Having said all that, though, I find myself walking around in a little bit of shock that a president, at least on the central strategic approach to the big policy issues, seems to be following the path I would advocate.
In traveling all over the country promoting my new book, The Progressive Revolution: How the Best in America Came to Be, I have been saying that the lesson of history is that Obama should seize this opportunity to think very big and bold, to be transformative in pushing to fundamentally re-structure our economy, our energy system, our health system, and our very politics. And that is exactly what President Obama is doing - no credit due to me or any other advice given. He is just listening to his own remarkable political instincts.
Though the recent economic recovery bill was too small and had its flaws, it was literally the biggest single investment in progressive social capital - health care, public education, green jobs, infrastructure, universal broadband - in history. His budget might well be the most audacious and sweeping in progressive history as well - certainly one that competes with LBJ's 1965 budget and FDR's 1935 budget. Obama is fulfilling his promise to the America people in the 2008 campaign: big, bold, truly transformative change.
Frankly, I didn't expect this would happen, at least not right away. Watching him pick mostly centrists for cabinet positions, and knowing how the DC establishment can use a thousand big and small reasons to argue against transformative change, I feared that Obama would be convinced to scale back his ambitions for what I call in The Progressive Revolution a Big Change Moment, similar to ones we had in the 1860s, early 1900s, 1930s, and the 1960s. Over the last few decades, Democrats have adopted a culture of caution - they have tended to think small and go slow. I feared that Obama would succumb to that culture.
But he is rising to the challenge. And it is imperative that those of us in the progressive movement rise with him. We shouldn't hesitate to say where we disagree, especially on the big things like Iraq, Afghanistan and the banking crisis. And we shouldn't hesitate to push for the best possible policy details - to make sure that health care reform really is universal and has a public plan option for people being screwed by insurance companies, that the climate change policy really is effective and tough in reducing carbon emissions ASAP, and that the budget maximizes investment in the things that matter.
But we should be very clear: Obama has decided to cast his lot with those of us who have been fighting for big, transformative change. If he succeeds, we succeed, and if he fails, we fail - and we fail for at least another generation, because no Democrat will take big risks again for a very long time if Obama loses this gamble.
2009 is the year. This is the moment when progressives, and America, show whether we can live up to the heroes of our history. Progressives in the past have ended slavery and Jim Crow, given women and minorities and the poor the right to vote, created the National Parks System, made dramatic improvements in cleaning up our air and water, and launched transformational programs like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and Head Start. Barack Obama has boldly announced his ambition to join those historic heroes and create another Big Change Moment. This year will decide whether Democrats in Congress and the progressive movement can help him deliver on that noble ambition. Seize the day.Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

59 Comments so far
Show All'But we should be very clear: Obama has decided to cast his lot with those of us who have been fighting for big, transformative change'
Huh? Are you smoking dope?
Good news for those of us living in Kolly-fornya. Looks like they'll decriminalize weed because they realize what a source of tax revenue it could be in a state that is stony broke. Indeed, God works in mysterious ways.
Obama wants to stop the Iranian revolution through baby-killing sanctions, control Iraqi resources through occupation and repression, dictate to the Afghans and the Pakistanis using 500-pound bombs on civilians...all crimes against humanity.
Not a word against the concentration camp in Palestine, a slap in the face to the world's 1.5 BILLION Muslims.
There are more people in NY State than there are Jews in the world. Yet, as the world prepares for the UN Anti-Racism conference next month, Obama is going into hiding ("boycotting"), instead of making a righteous statement about Palestine. Now, we have Mike Lux, this zionist hyppocrite treating us to the old smoke and mirrors, trying to tell us what the important issues should be...
Dude: The Iraqis will kick us off their land...I am certain of that; the Afghans will kick us off their land...I am certain of that. The central issue is Palestine, papa! PALESTINE!!! You don't come inhere and try to brainwash us! Take your zionist behind and get out of here!
Why are we allowing this Israeli agent to post on this website? Who made the decision to let him speak?
Amir
amir@meetyourworld.com
www.meetyourworld.com
"There are more people in NY State than there are Jews in the world."
Uh, yeah, there's one pretty big reason for that you know.
Watch out Mike---you'll be labeled a democratic party shill.....
...which indeed he is.
What I find amazing is that this best effort at defending Obama would have recieved an "F" in remedial 9th grade English composition.
---USAn---
One earns labels, madcow, and this author certainly defines progressivism in a different fashion as do others. Working within an administration that proves itself less progressive almost daily may be applauded if the goals are there, but claiming the mantle of progressivism for Obama seems not at all provable.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
From wikipedia.... 'In recent years, he (Mike) co-founded the influential progressive blog OpenLeft.com, and served in a key liaison role to the progressive community upon being named to the transition team for Barack Obama.'
Who cast his lot in with who?
Is this guy living on the same planet? I mean, what "gambles," "big risks," and "big, transformative changes" is the author talking about? Obama is certainly gambling and taking big risks about continuing failed Bush, Neocon and neoliberal policies, and caving in to Ponzi Street and the MIC at We The People's expense.
Far more appropriate is to take the position that Obama became Public Enemy #1 precisely because he isn't any sort of Progressive as we've already seen and as we knew prior to the election. As the piece about Tauscher shows very clearly, Obama is at the head of a political party that cares not one whit for the common folk of the USA, which is 100% opposite of what fundamentally defines a Progressive.
This article should be entitled, "The Side My Bread Is Buttered On".
· Yr Obd't Servant
"literally the biggest single investment in progressive social capital - health care, public education, green jobs, infrastructure, universal broadband - in history."
Unfortunately, Mr. Lux is fundamentally contradicting himself. He is not truly driven by the principles he advocates. In the first paragraph he advocates the progressive principle that people have a right to self-determination, to overcome elite oppression. And in the above quote, Mr. Lux fundamentally contradicts that principle by embracing power concentration without attention to the great risk of power abuse.
He might have tempered his support for the president's initiative with a reminder of the elites' campaigns of mass deception, the Demoks' triangulation, their patronizing both the host (the people) AND the parasite (the elites). Can you, host and parasite, just "get along"? How much oppression are we expected to tolerate? We on the far left say: Zero.
It was indeed a ridiculous article.
I thought it was typographic error. I thought he meant to write: "seems to be following the path I would _not_ advocate..."
Later reading confirmed he meant what he wrote.
And Obama is sure responsive to overwhelming calls for single payer healthcare on his "Change.gov" website, isn't he?
Obama reminds me of some new bosses i've had. They also try to snow-job the employees for their first couple weeks too.
---USAn---
It looks like CD is really having to dig down into the sludge in the bottom of the barrel to meet it's comitment to balance - in the form of articles like this one defending Obama...
---USAn---
no small wonder why he's been given the title "liason". the military would call this psyop
I guess when Obama is running around with his long-time, old friend Penny Pritzer, I'm sure Lux will need to inflate extra ballons for the progressive gala. hate to have a clear view of what's right in front of you.
Lux and Sirota can MC the event.
Don't forget: if Obama fails -YOU FAIL!
o-k!
The earlier comments say what must be said about this article and Obama's "progressive" policies.
Bravo to thinking progressives!
I will only add a few references to multiply the contradictions to the idea that Obama is a progressive president.
This article by Paul Street summarizes the non-progressive steps that Obama has taken since being elected:
http://www.zcommunications.org/znet/viewArticle/20702
and Paul Street's superb book
Barack Obama and the Future of American Politics
exposes the data about Obama's non-progressive history during and prior to the election. Noam Chomsky read the manuscript and endorsed the book.
For more on Paul's superb work, go here:
http://www.zcommunications.org/zspace/paulstreet
Glenn Ford and Bruce Dixon at the Black Agenda Report have also exposed Obama as a largely non-progressive politician.
Mr. Lux should provide more balance, taking into account Paul's work and the work of other good critics who have scrutinized Obama's stated and practiced policies.
I don't fault CD editor Craig Brown for printing this sort of weak article—he has us to critique it. I suspect he agrees with us.
""Obama is fulfilling his promise to the America people in the 2008 campaign: big, bold, truly transformative change. "
Enough said. I agree. Great article. I wish people would listen...
Maybe JoeHope is Lux!
They both seem to think exhibit the same vacuous style of thinking.
---USAn---
"Maybe JoeHope is Lux! "
I certainly hope not, I met and talked with Mike Lux for a little bit at his appearance at DC Drinking Liberally in January...
To swim with sharks, he needs to keep them fed.
I don't see it.
Mr. Obama is a liar and a shill for the plutocracy.
If you don't get it, you are stupid or blind.
One may believe that the president has reneged on some promises to promote a progressive agenda and call him for it. But to call him a liar is the statement of either a fool or of a right wing ideologue who has inserted his assertions into this blog to muddy the waters of civil dialog. Who is this "hoytdouglas"?
George Bush is a liar, Dick Cheney is a liar, Donald Rumsfeld is a liar, John McCain is a liar, Alberto Gonzales and Sarah Palin are most certainly liars, and even Bill and Hillary Clinton are liars, but the president has not yet shown himself to be a liar. Is "hoytdouglas" a liar and does he know it?
Would "extraordinarily deceptive" be more to your satisfaction? (something Obama was known for before becoming president, or even senator for that matter). But then we have been told that Obama is not lying--just skillful at playing the game.
Yes...extraordinarily deceptive in renaming combat troops a residual force or by claiming the US does not torture while propping up extraordinary rendition to outsource torture. And we haven't even started with the warm and fuzzies he is whispering in Israel's ear.
Really? For starters, Obama claimed that the reason we invaded and occupied Iraq was to topple the Saddam Hussein regime. Sound like revisionist history to me. Sounds like a lie--and a big one to fly beneath the radar.
Seems to me that the blush of infatuation blinds some until after the fact. The same was true with the Clintons--they had their D defenders despite the realities clearly indicating they had thrown their lot in with the corporate Right ages ago.
Obama a LIAR? What an outrageous slander!
Oh, he may indulge in intentional ambiguity, practice self-serving deceit, occasionally offer a falsehood, engage in sporadic hypocrisy, maybe fib a little, refuse to entirely eschew mendacity, exaggerate, fabricate, and prevaricate when circumstances demand it-- but, a LIAR?
Heaven forfend!
· Yr Obd't Servant
Hilarious...!
Rich,
Nice try but President Obama is literally hated by most of the so called "progressive" commentators (The thunder thinkers) here at CD. You really must get with the so called "progressive" thinking program. For example it would be desirable for you to think and express yourself this way.... The President is a liar, a cheat, a disappointment, a con artist, a neo-con in disguise, a war monger...etc.etc... Do not ever say anything good about this president and you will receive many positive responses from your fellow commentators... Remember always, you must never express any opinions except those that show the President in a negative light. Follow my instructions and you will do well here at CD. (At least with the so called progressives) Always remain in the realm of negative thought. Would not a negative progressive thinker actually be a regressive thinker?
Hell I happen to think the President is doing just fine. (Considering the fact that he has only been in office for a little over two months) But what the hell do I know. What the hell does almost 70% of the American population know. They seem to agree with me. But once again, when compared to these CD "progressive" thunder thinkers, I (And almost 70% of the American population) know nothing.
You see Rich the extreme "Progressive" left wing and the Authoritarian right wing share a common dream and that is to see this President and his administration fail. I know this sounds strange but it is unfortunately true. The extreme right and the extreme left have more in common with each other than they do with the rest of the population. They want all or nothing. The hell with everybody else.
I cannot speak to your motives but your inferences are all horridly wrong.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
"I cannot speak to your motives but your inferences are all horridly wrong."
Rick,
My motives should be obvious to anyone reading my comment. As to my inferences being "all horridily wrong" I truly hope you are correct.... but sadly I feel you are not.
Take care Rick
Dante...
Your post was a humorous, yet off base depiction about CD Commentors...
You claim that you and 70% of Americans don't know what is really going on, and I agree with you...
It is important to understand the difference in meaning between criticisms of Obama from the far right and far left...
The Limbaughs want Obama to fail so they can be back in power... And criticize him for untruths (being a muslim, a socialist, pal of terrorists, etc)... They are the Regressives...
The Progressives are critical of Obama and other neoliberals for pursuing the same policies as the neoconservatives...
This is not hoping Obama will fail... it is pointing out how his policies have changed since the campaign trail, and most of his foreign and domestic policies are a continuation of the Reagan/Clinton/Bush years... Whether they fail or not is not the issue...
There are too many democrats and liberals who haven't figured out the difference between a liberal (Kucinich) and a neoliberal (Clinton)...
Too many liberals give the Democratic candidate a free pass once the election is over, with "give him a chance" platitudes...
Besides... It is only a handful of confrontational folks here... And they usually just argue amongst themselves & everyone else skips over...
For a breakdown on the diversity of perspectives in this forum...
We have the resident Obama male-cheerleader... JoeHope
We have the resident astrologer.... SouixRose
We have the resident comedian... Mordichai
And hundreds of anarchists, libertarians, constitutionalists, Recovering Republicans, Dem Party Apologists
Golden,
Thank you for at least finding my remarks "humorous." Although humor was not my intent I do concede that there was much tongue in cheek involved in the construction of my comment. Also, the list of characters you provided are CD commentators I am very familiar with. Is not JoeHope a woman?
As far as the rest of your comment is concerned I suggest that you and I simply agree to disagree. (Of course I might suggest that perhaps it is you (30%) who don't know what is going on but.............We will leave that for another time...)
I also detected some humor in your remarks and I must say that I enjoyed reading your comment.
Great hearing from you Golden.
Thomas Gilbert
When you post generalized attacks like the one that leads off your post above,
"Nice try but President Obama is literally hated by most of the so called "progressive" commentators (The thunder thinkers) here at CD. You really must get with the so called "progressive" thinking program. For example it would be desirable for you to think and express yourself this way.... The President is a liar, a cheat, a disappointment, a con artist, a neo-con in disguise, a war monger...etc.etc... Do not ever say anything good about this president and you will receive many positive responses from your fellow commentators.........."
do you honestly expect to get a decent dialogue under way? What utter nonsense, sorry but true. I see much criticism of the policies and directions that this administration is taking, I see some silliness as well, both on the side of those who believe President Obama is betraying the Progressive cause and on the side of loyalists as well, your post being exhibit A in fact.
If you were trying for entertainment value then so be it, if you were trying to post other than a snarky and distorted picture of left wing criticisms you failed.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
"snarky and distorted picture of left wing criticisms you failed."
Not distorted Rick. The picture I presented was that of the negative criticisms I observed. You guys don't like being called out on your "snarky" criticisms of President Obama and those who support him. You are in this case similar to the authoritarian right where you expect everyone to except your evaluation of this administration (Little over six weeks in office)while you reject the opinions of others.
"do you honestly expect to get a decent dialogue under way"
If what I observed is what you consider "decent dialogue" I am afraid that we operate on two entirely different standards. I sure what you consider "decent dialogue" is not the many expressions of hate expressed towards this president by your "choir." I don't expect any productive dialogue ("decent') from any of those commentators here on Cd you support. I find it amazing you feel that you must lecture me while at the same time you remain silent to the many unreasonable (Hateful) attacks made by your choir against the President. Your hypocrisy is breathtaking!!!
To thine own self be true. Your ridiculous distortions of valid and necessary criticisms began this exchange. It still remains blocking the road to discourse. I will gladly leave you to your lonely and curmudgeonly path....
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
"I will gladly leave you to your lonely and curmudgeonly path...."
Oh Rick!!!!!! You guys are nasty when you are called out. (Stated with humor) Remove the log from your own eye before you ever assume to remove the speck from others. (Advice for all of us)
I think you are really a nice person Rick and I will continue to read and learn from your future comments here on CD. My initial expressed criticisms were not of you Rick but rather those who claim to be progressive while at the same time employing the language of hate. One thing I do know for sure; We will never achieve anything by way of hatred and division.
Rick I said this to you once before, we share many of the same goals for a brighter future and there is very little that I disagree with regarding your many observations here at CD. I read all your comments.
I have two young adult children (Both college students) Rick and I do not what them to live the rest of their lives in a hopelessly divided world of hatred, corruption and war. But I am patient...One step at a time..... Change will require a transition period between the existing reality and the next....
You Take Care Rick
Thomas Gilbert ("curmudgeonly" could be a new CD handle...lol)
I appreciate the attempt at courtesy. I did indeed take umbrage at your generalization of all the criticisms here and the lumping of the entire left under one heading. For example,"Oh Rick!!!!!! You guys are nasty when you are called out. (Stated with humor)"...Humor that persists, I note, in lumping me with all the others here who seek to defend a progressive or leftist perspective. We are all different, we all see things differently and we all see differing solutions as well.
There are indeed, as I have already stated, those on every side of every issue who use hyperbole and emotionalism to make invalid points. Any comment that seeks, as did yours, to make the left the villain for all such tactical errors seems far too agendised and far too much over the top. Further it demeans the many really excellent opinions posted here by the few.
I get the impression, whether falsely or not, that it is any critique of our new President and his administration that drives your commentary. I would advice you to get used to such, and to attempt to really understand that criticism and its intent, hard as that may be. Criticism is necessary and an important part of the process.
I look forward, with great relish, to further dialogue with you on other topics and other threads.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
Rick,
"". For example,"Oh Rick!!!!!! You guys are nasty when you are called out. (Stated with humor)"...Humor that persists, I note, in lumping me with all the others here who seek to defend a progressive or leftist perspective. We are all different, we all see things differently and we all see differing solutions as well.'
Not until you assumed some convoluted moral imperative to lecture me while ignoring the many unreasonable criticisms leveled against supporters of the current administration. That is where you clearly aligned yourself with those I criticized.(At least temporarily.)
"I appreciate the attempt at courtesy."
Thank you Rick but it was not an attempt. I am courteous to all reasonable people. Read my posts. In my comments I tend (As I do in life) to be friendly and respectful to all who address me directly with reason and courtesy.
"I did indeed take umbrage at your generalization of all the criticisms here and the lumping of the entire left under one heading."
I assumed you were a critical reader so I also assumed that you and those you defend were intellectually capable of understanding the context in which I was writing. Obviously I was wrong. I was challenging the language employed by certain so called "progressives" in their criticisms of President Obama and those who support him. (I need not list the language employed)
"Further it demeans the many really excellent opinions posted here by the few.'
That is not true and you know it. There are many excellent critiques posted here on CD. The authors of such critiques are never challenged by this writer.
"There are indeed, as I have already stated, those on every side of every issue who use hyperbole and emotionalism to make invalid points."
Nice restructuring (Hyperbole and emotionalism) to justify the language of hate.
". Any comment that seeks, as did yours, to make the left the villain for all such tactical errors seems far too agendised and far too much over the top."
Did I call them con artists? Traitors? War mongers? Uncle Toms? Murderers?.... Over the top? Agendised? (that's a new one) You still have that log in your eye.
"I get the impression, whether falsely or not, that it is any critique of our new President and his administration that drives your commentary. I would advice you to get used to such, and to attempt to really understand that criticism and its intent, hard as that may be. Criticism is necessary and an important part of the process."
Once again your impressions are false. All reasonable criticisms of the current administration (Whether I agree or disagree) I leave unchallenged. (I don't believe in writing dissertations on a CD comment forum.) If the criticism is reasonable I accept it as the opinion of the author. I really don't need to be enlightened by you as to the the need for opposition in and to government. It is the essence of any functional democracy.
I find it amazing that you could not respond to my previous posting without feeling the need to once again lecture me in such didactic and dismissive manner. Of course that speaks more about you than it does me. I offer no apologies here Rick. I have written that which I have written.
Thomas Gilbert (my real name)
"Rich,
Nice try but President Obama is literally hated by most of the so called "progressive" commentators (The thunder thinkers) here at CD. You really must get with the so called "progressive" thinking program. For example it would be desirable for you to think and express yourself this way.... The President is a liar, a cheat, a disappointment, a con artist, a neo-con in disguise, a war monger...etc.etc... Do not ever say anything good about this president and you will receive many positive responses from your fellow commentators... Remember always, you must never express any opinions except those that show the President in a negative light. Follow my instructions and you will do well here at CD. (At least with the so called progressives) Always remain in the realm of negative thought. Would not a negative progressive thinker actually be a regressive thinker?"
Mr. Gilbert,please....this belies your recent comments about being fair minded or accurate. You dismiss all here at CD ( or most as you state above) for the posts of the few. I cannot help but draw the conclusion that you use the unfortunate opinions of the naive, the immature and the new to political discourse to tar all those on the left who criticize the new administration.
If I am wrong then time and your future efforts will show me, but your crocodile tears and protestations to the contrary are belied by the quoted effort of yours above.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
What the hell do....(not does)
Hated is too strong a word. I would say despised.
Or in my case, disappointing.
"Or in my case, disappointing."
Love ya Zmann but.......
Seriously what did you expect? Its been now what???...six weeks!!!....You will never find anyone who will not disappoint...No human being is perfect...The last guy most of agreed was perfect we crucified him...... Or so the legend goes.......
He was decent in his first week, with Gitmo, torture etc, but didn't go nearly far enough. Should we just give up on pushing him though? I don't think so.
Mr.Douglas is a bit passionate, no disgrace there, and Mr. Bronstein is more than a bit eloquent and factual. I trust you are illuminated.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
What a pathetic joke. If this is the progressive liason, no wonder Obama is tone deaf. It sure seems to me that Mr Obama extends more courtesy to the illegitimate and totally repudiated Right than he recognizes the progressive base. Apparently tossing the occasional bone and posturing is enough for some desperate apologists clinging to the excuse that he has only been president for a few months or if he actually attempted real change his life would be threatened. Speaking of MLK,Jr--how about the fierce urgency of NOW??? Article after article, issue after issue has been posted questioning Obama's policies, direction, choices BUT STILL some so-called progressives, drunk with the notion that Obama is simply not Bush, settle, and make no demands, ask no questions, and shrug off pressing realities as 'no small issues' of course, but let's not let that pettiness cloud our starry eyed infatuation of Obam's bold shift.
You do not speak for most of us and you have no idea at the level of contempt your apologies and rapturous excuses masquerading as legitimate liason, leave us believeing you are little more than a starstruck groupie. We will fail, Sir, because of whatever fairydust you are smoking is creating the illusion of some kind of bold change.
What nonsense, Dante. Even now the Obama gang are saber rattling and threatening Iran with war. That's the neocon game plan and you know it. But you rattle on your apologies about this con artist?
"But you rattle on your apologies about this con artist?"
I rest my case
Lux is a vacuous apologist, but Obama's smarter than he's getting credit for. By promulgating Orwell's endless war, he takes the heat off concerns about his domestic agenda. Don't underestimate the remnant anger over 9/11, whether or not you think the fix was in. The film "Taken" which amounts to one long kill-the-Muslims fest is surprising everyone in Hollywood with boffo box office. Going after Muslims will always "sell" in Christian America, and BO knows that he can only achieve his economic justice and secular goals here by promulgating the "war on terror" there. He understands that he won't be able to both redistribute wealth and withdraw from the "terror war." He's made his choice.
Dante, Obama is a con artist and you're just the type of guy he can con. To really get away with a con you need a mark who really wants to be taken. You, as the prototypical Democratic Party glued voter, want to be taken along for a long ride into a dead end alley by Obama. You want to believe in CHANGE, even when it simply just isn't there. That helps you not to have to do any work bringing about the CHANGE, as you can safely just vote, vote, vote, talk, talk, talk, and be a 'pragmatist' in your own mind. If I had a nickle for all these American 'pragmatists' I'd be as rich as H. Ross Perot... lol.
This may actually raise a crucial point about Democratic loyalists, so desperate for change they see it where it does not exist.
"Most people would sooner die than think, in fact they do so." Bertrand Russell
Or so-called progressives who refuse to see change when it occurs.