Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiObama The Impotent
The disappointment with Barack Obama is tangible – on climate change and financial reform Europe leads while the US lags
Much hope has been invested in Barack Obama's ability to strike a new course for the US following eight years of Bush administration unpopularity. Yet many in the US and abroad are impatient with the pace of progress under the Obama administration. The president made the rounds on five news talkshows on Sunday as he pressed his policies and vision, preparing for what is likely to be a difficult week.
Besides the ongoing battle over healthcare, this week sees two showdowns between Europe and the US that will reveal further slippage in American global leadership. The first showdown comes today at a UN special session on climate change in New York City; the second will come at the end of the week at the G20 meeting in Pittsburgh, where America and Europe will butt heads over financial system reforms designed to ensure that the AIGs of the world can never again cause an economic collapse.
Europe has been increasingly critical of America's failures to live up to its global responsibilities. The US is not only the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases but is by far the largest per capita emitter of carbon and other pollutants. China comes close to the US in terms of total carbon emissions, but it has four times more people, who each belch far less individually. Europe, while having much the same high living standard, has an "ecological footprint" that is only half of America's, since Europe has taken leadership in implementing renewable technologies and conservation practices.
On the campaign trail, Barack Obama promised to reverse the Bush administration's terrible ecological record. Yet so far the world has seen more symbolic gestures from the Obama administration than accomplishments. Its biggest achievement so far has been an example of disappointment. President Obama signed an executive order to increase US motor vehicle mileage standards – but only to a level that will push fuel efficiency by 2020 to a level that European and Japanese cars reached several years ago, and even China has already achieved.
Europe has announced donations of $2bn to $15bn a year for the next decade to help developing nations cope with climate warming, yet the Obama administration has not offered anything close to that amount. Europe also wants binding, near-term targets for developed nations, proposing a 20% reduction from 1990 levels by 2020, or 30% if everyone agrees. The Bush administration of course rejected such targets – but now it looks like the Obama administration is not willing to go any further. It has said such targets should be voluntary but verifiable.
With the US Senate is bogged down in the fight over reforming healthcare, American leaders have said that the senators might not move on climate legislation until 2010, well after the global climate change conference in Copenhagen in December. That drew a sharp response from John Bruton, head of the European Union delegation: "The United States is just one of the 190 countries coming to this conference," Bruton said, "but the United States emits 25% of all the greenhouse gases that the conference is trying to reduce. I submit that asking an international conference to sit around looking out the window for months, while one chamber of the legislature of one country deals with its other business, is simply not a realistic political position."
Even Europe's conservative politicians, such as Connie Hedegaard, Denmark's minister of climate and energy, are expressing impatience: "It's rather crucial that the US can show a credible pathway," Hedegaard said, pointing out that the US emits twice as much carbon dioxide per capita as Denmark, without gaining anything in improving its quality of life.
That's the start of President Obama's week. At the end of it, President Obama will appear at a meeting in Pittsburgh of the G20, a bloc of both developed and developing nations, representing 85% of the world's economic output and most of its population. On the table will be what reforms to help avoiding a repetition of the financial panic and global economic collapse that is perceived as having originated on Wall Street. Despite immense, taxpayer-financed rescue packages needed to overcome the crisis, the financial sector in the US is rapidly returning to business as usual. Indeed, three US banks – Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley and JP Morgan – which received some $45bn of bailout aid, each paid billions of dollars more in bonuses in 2009 than they earned in 2008.
Here again, Europe is leading, while the Obama administration is dragging its feet. Europe has proposed far-reaching reforms designed to impose new rules on executive pay and bonuses, requiring that banks link pay to long-term rather than short-term performance, and that they "claw back" any bonuses received in the face of losses. Europe wants a financial police force that has powers to slash payments where investments prove to have failed, and to force boardrooms to control levels of speculation. Europe also wants to block the exercising of stock options for set periods and expose top bank directors to penalties, following huge payouts to failed bank chiefs.
The Obama administration's approach has been much more tepid, to say the least. The US financial industry, as expected, is fighting these reforms, but what do we make of a recent quote by President Obama questioning the need for supporting Europe's proposals. "Why is it," he asked during a recent interview, "that we're going to cap executive compensation for Wall Street bankers but not Silicon Valley entrepreneurs or [American] football players?"
Besides the fact that President Obama was wrong – the National Football League does have salary restrictions for its players – Silicon Valley businesses and NFL quarterbacks don't cause an economic collapse when they screw up. It's very sobering that, if David Letterman read that quote on his TV show and asked his audience: "Who made this clueless statement, former President Bush or President Obama?" we know what the response would be. Or would have been.
In response to American foot-dragging, European leader Jean-Claude Juncker said Europe should act on the bonus issue "whether the Americans are with us or not." He said that a Europe-only charge "will take on such force over time that the Americans will not be able to sit on the sidelines."
Many leaders and supporters are beginning to wonder what is causing this growing gap between the Barack Obama that many people saw on the campaign trail, and the Obama they see in the White House? Beyond Obama's oratorical skills, which excited not only American voters but people all over the world, he is mostly untested as a politician. His previous experience was only a few years in the US Senate and a few years more as a state senator. A sinking feeling is arising among many that President Obama may not be up to the task, that he may not possess the artful skills needed to accomplish even his own goals.
But it must be recognised that it's not just Obama's shortcomings that are causing the problem. The very structure of the American political system is at the heart of these failures. For example, thwarting Obama on a regular basis is an unrepresentative senate where "minority rule" prevails and undermines what a majority of the country may want. With two senators elected per state, regardless of population, California with more than 35 million people has the same number of senators as Wyoming with just half a million residents. This constitutional arrangement greatly favours low population states, many of which tend to be conservative, producing what one political analyst has called "a weighted vote for small-town whites in pickup trucks with gun racks."
In addition, the senate's use of that arcane rule known as the "filibuster" means you need 60 out of 100 votes to stop unlimited debate on a bill and move to a vote. A mere 41 senators, representing as little as 20% of the nation's population, can stymie the other 80%. Given a vastly unrepresentative senate wielding its anti-majoritarian filibuster, it is hardly surprising that minority rule in the senate consistently undermines majority rule, whether on healthcare, financial industry reform, environmental legislation and many other policies.
Pile on to that an uncompetitive, winner-take-all electoral system, marinated in money and special interest influence, and the sclerotic US political scene is deeply troubling. None of these anti-democratic structural features are going away any time soon. Unless Barack Obama is able to demonstrate a better level of political skill than he has shown so far, everyone needs to fasten their seatbelts. The world is about to enter a challenging phase where the US – the undisputed leader of the free world for the past 60 years – is going to rapidly cede its place at the head of the line.
It appears that the wheels may be coming off the world's post-war leader, and not even Barack Obama can stop it happening.
103 Comments so far
Show AllI certainly concur on the disappointing performance of our president. He doesn't really show an interest in putting America back together. Just another corporate errand boy.
I do take issue on your statement regarding the US Senate and health care reform. They are not bogged down on crafting reform, they are bogged down in blocking reform.
I find most of these posts depressing and defeatist - I believe President Obama IS the candidate we elected, IS the most able to define a new direction for America. Let us not fall prey to the notions of disappointment but understand the daunting task he has undertaken and the extraordinary forces mobilized eo ensure hi failure. I do not see another leader on the horizon with his capabilities and the desire to bring change to America.
Imagine if the financial system had collapsed the hundreds of millions of people in total distress, the societal disorder.
And the check's in the mail...
wow, over and out.
I find your post indicative of its authors' depression, defeatism and naivete. Getting caught in the left-right ruse IS defeat. Getting fooled by the cood cop - bad cop silliness is a sign of depression and naivete. We have a sock puppet president, we have sock puppet parties, we have sock puppet environmental organizations, all bought and paid for with ill gotten corrupt money, all serving the interests of said money.
The winning strategy is to throw all that in the trash can. Elect a third party - anyone who supports recall of elected officials on a short notice. Then learn to be critical and active in political matters. Then follow the actions of said elected officials and express your opinion twice a year on election day. This is a winning and optimistic strategy if there is one. Yours is what brought us to this mess to begin with.
Dream away, for sure the right will come back more extreme and confident in their run away capitalism than ever and in effect the finale of the America we cherish.
A third party will never emerge on the American political spectrum, the only hope for America and these are not light words, is for constituencies to mold a Democratic party that prioritizes the well being of its citizens, a true counterbalance to corporate interests that will always be more represented by the right.
In effect we are still living in the shadow of McCarthy, the lack of a well entrenched left let alone the societal values of socialism is half the nations backbone unable to sustain its politic
It is a perspective I understand as I have been living in Europe for half of my life, we have a lot to learn without tearing apart our societal fabric any further.
Finally, in contrario to what I have been accused of, such righteous positions are mirror reflections of America's political right, not a pragmatic approach to change - it not the way to go, too late in history.
Perceptions are cultivated to view all things as "us vs them", furthering the view that there is contrast and conflict between the Republicans and the Democrats. The manipulated fools on the Right opposing Obama based on trumped-up charges of "socialism" actually serve to suppress legitimate criticism based on what is really happening. You do yourself and us a great disservice by falling into traps defending Obama against the Right without acknowledging his ongoing betrayal and hoping against hope that if we only give him more time he will surely reverse course. People claim he has so much to contend with. I ask you then, why is he either continuing it or making it worse. Base your judgements on what is--not on what you wish it would be.
Vern, please consider my response to Anney below
Until we terminate corporate 'personhood' America shall continue to be an international pariah.
I beg to differ
President Obama is a pragmatist, he knows that change will only occur progressively, he knows that you cannot implement fundamental change without establishing new foundations in support. He also knows that however ambitious the executive branch may be change is subject to the legislation, therein lies the real challenge, building corners of consensus in a political culture that has become deviationist from its founding principles.
We are not in 1776, nor 1789 even less, god forbid in 1917. We re not in a blue sky perspective nor can we consider scorched earth strategies as under he principle of e pluribus unum we must effect change for the many in a least destructive mode.
As liberals, progressives but more generally a majority wishing to see our societal model evolve towards the well being of the many versus the few, we need to emphasize America' need to enter the societal fold of advanced nations, a politic that regulates the imperialistic drives of capitalism, ensures that political process is not the proxy of special interests and prioritizes the well being of its citizens. This is not simply a policy change, it is hundreds of minute and major tweaks of our system, our established ways, our cultural mold.
If we can find these tweaks and compromises we should find our Pax Americana, yet I fear another mutation emerges as an end to a certain American era may be further impacted by an internal economic implosion. Supply side is gone, mass consumerism will dwindle by necessity, the ever growing “Bush go shopping” locomotive of economic growth is running out of steam as Americans attempt to rebuild through savings a decade of lost wealth. More than ever we need to look towards Europe’ economic models to understand how we are to cope with high unemployment, lower growth and growing societal needs.
We have the President capable of understanding these complex issues and leading us through an uncharted minefield - he needs our support, we need to believe in him.
He may be be capable but look at all his "state secrets" contentions, allowing Tar Sands Oil importation, Mountaintop Removal, Esculating another demonic war or two,Emmanuel Rahm son of Irgun, Goldman Sachs economic Czar, Continuing Israeli Settlements, No action on climate change( oh auto's in USA will be as efficient in 2020 as they are now in the rest of the indutrial world), $6 billion for Renewal R&R compared to China's $600 Billion, Tepid support for Zalaya, Militarizing Columbia, Fisa Immunity, Patriot Act Renewal, Pathetic healthcare reform, No War Criminal Prosecutions.
All things that are actively endorsed or barely oppossed by Obama.
President Obama is a pragmatist, he knows that change will only occur progressively...
=====
Well, many of us know something different. Even LBJ knew better than that -- the Civil Rights Act of 1964 did not occur "progressively" but was quickly made law soon after LBJ's inauguration to the accompaniment of screams of outrage from the Southern states. He didn't wait for them to "come around" in bipartisan "consensus".
You are indulging in wishful thinking. Most of us "believe" what we see, not what we wish. Obama, for whom I voted, will quite likely be judged by history as being a weak ineffective president, sad to say, when we urgently needed strength and boldness and integrity to undo the Bush years and the Bush agenda, America's Constitutional crisis.
I no longer have ANY hope that Obama will keep his campaign promises or undo the Bush policies. We are trapped by his presidency, just as we were trapped by GW Bush's presidency.
The Civil Rights Act took years in the making, its foundation laid be the Kennedy senior brothers. The fabric of health care reform is still being woven, finding the appropriate compromises to avoid the Clinton pitfall with TWO major opponents to not use another word, political and the corporate oligarchy is not something he is planing to fail.
Our runaway health care problem resembles our "greed is good" wall street problem; today we are willing to let an ever increasing number of our citizens fall through the cracks of egocentricity and indifference.
President Obama needs to know that he has unwavering support from the majority of Americans to accomplish what no other President has been able to do, his opponents will go to any extreme to stop him.
To use your LBJ analogy, there was but one opposing constituency... the remnants of which we see emerging prodded by malice today.
Yes there are many other campaign commitments not yet addressed, but please take into account we have just escaped what could have been an economic disaster that could have been second to none.
Finally, to the reply claiming I am doing a disservice to our cause I again beg to differ, the stronger we stand behind Obama the stronger the next Congress will be in his support for therein lies the bottleneck to implementation of is campaign promises. Only with a legislature attuned and aware that the voters will no longer take rubber stamps will we make progress. Then I can only hope that in his second mandate he cures the cancer of our democratic process, campaign finance.
seanseamour
The Civil Rights movement had existed for decades, but the Civil Rights Act was not long in the making. It was drafted during JFK's presidency, January 20, 1961 – November 22, 1963, and was passed with some amendments pretty quickly under LBJ, after sex discrimination was added to it at the last minute as a joke.
=====
....the stronger we stand behind Obama the stronger the next Congress will be in his support for therein lies the bottleneck to implementation of is campaign promises.
=====
Sorry, but I'll believe this when I see it. It is difficult to unravel the skein of who's responsible for the state America is in -- many people point to corporatism that has entered politics and basically owns politicians' careers. Others point to individual politicians like Obama who are in the pockets of corporations or else don't have the cajones to oppose them. It is the governed who are kicked out into the cold and told to make it on their own without government limits on the corporations that take their money, their health, and their lives. The corporations are instead protected by the government, by our legislators, and by our president.
=====
Only with a legislature attuned and aware that the voters will no longer take rubber stamps will we make progress.
=====
And how do you suppose this will be accomplished? We don't have a lot of choice about "taking rubber stamps" other than our votes, and campaigning politicians are notorious liars, no matter how attractive they may seem during the campaigns. Vote and you live with the choice. Vote for the other candidate and the same choice is put into motion. Don't vote and you still live with the same damned choice.
=====
I can only hope that in his second mandate he cures the cancer of our democratic process, campaign finance.
=====
Keep on dreaming. Obama could have done that from the beginning by not taking campaign contributions from corporations as he claimed in the beginning of his campaign.
Until all the factors are taken into account and the skein is unraveled, we're trapped with Obama's enfolding of corporatism just as we were trapped with GW Bush.
Yours is a wise voice.
Hard to take this position in the cacophony of Obama bashing, some sincere but much of it opportunistic Republican PR writers hoping to push progressives to vote third party. As Karl Rove understands, it only takes a few votes in each precinct to change election results.
Until the American public realizes that both Democrats and Republicans represent moneyed interests, change won't come. In today's world of sophisticated corporate propaganda via corporate media, it's easy to understand why Americans are so confused. But to get people to educate themselves through alternative sources, while turning off their radios and TV’s, will be next to impossible.
The saddest part of this whole affair is the long term consequences of Obama being another corporate shill. Americans unfortunately will buy into the corporate misinformation come the next election, and in return will install corporate America's favoured party, the Republicans. This in turn will solidify American serfdom for decades to come. Unlike previous generations, the abundance of food (its poor quality is besides the point), entertainment (football, computer games, etc.) and an option for marginal individuals to join the army and fight corporate wars, means that a serious revolution is unlikely to occur. More likely a unified global resistance to America (similar to that of nazi Germany 70 years ago) is the best-case scenario for bringing about global justice. Brace yourself people, it’s going to be a rough ride.
To those who say that criticizing Obama helps the Republicans:
It is our mission, should we choose to accept it, to make the critique of the Obama administration a class critique, a left critique and to organize in that direction including for elections. We should stick to issues and not personalities. Suppressing the critique would lead to sheer passivity and stagnation.
In order to prevent the reflexive response of switching parties between the Republicans and Democrats to express discontent, we should always help people remember how it was under George Bush, how the wars were started, how the economic collapse took place during his administration as an immediate consequence of his administration's policies.
We do have some choices already - Greens, Working Families, individual independents and a few good Democrats in office. We should find more and work to make them stronger and better.
Joe
By the way - here's the good part. If we hadn't elected Obama, many people would still be pining for an Obama. We got it out of our systems and it has clarified that it was not just that George Bush was an idiot, but that our country is ruled by a permanent government of banks, corporations and war profiteers.
Joe
America is an Oligarchy folks and there is no going back. It doesn't much matter anymore who is in the WH. The BIG CORPS. own DC.
The Democratic joke -- the real joke that is the Democratic Party is that Bush can get in with a minority popular vote, wield unitary power, etc. but we're to believe Obama is on the progressive side, his party controls Congress, and he's got a stronger popular mandate -- but he's just facing obstacles from a minority party? Obstacles that ostensibly presented no issues at all for Bush?
Give us a break, apologists. He's not weak, he's as powerful or moreso than Bush -- and largely onboard with Bush policies, both foreign and domestic.
Nonsensical premise in this article. BO has all the power that Bush-era structural changes resulted in producing a unitary executive. His party also controls Congress. He's got as much, or more, power than Bush, still a popular mandate as well.
But then those of us who supported Nader, the Greens and other third parties/independents tried telling you so, until places like Common Dreams banned us before the election. The Democratic Party is where progressive ideas go to die. In fact, if it weren't for the Dems trying to put fingers in the dike, bail out the worst capitalists we've seen a half century or more, then something might finally snap and we'd have real change instead of people whose main job seems to be street sweeper after the Republican elephants paraded through.
So quit denying it. Look at the articles here on CD lately. Very, very few of them deal with BO's shortcomings. We're still in Iraq/Afghanistan, still hiring Blackwater, will have no single-payer, Gitmo is still around, apparently we've still got warrantless wiretapping, no meaningful campaign finance/electoral reform. So far as I can tell, virtually nothing has changed under BO and the Democrats. It's not because he had no power, it's because multi-national corporations run both corporate political parties. We should be so lucky if we had a 2-party system at this point.
The question is whether America's place at the head of the line can be taken over by the rest of the world fast enough to prevent the impending doom posed by perpetual war + global warming + economic collapse. If it does, maybe, just maybe, survival has an outside chance. Not as good a chance, however, as a reconstituted America dedicated to a just, peaceful and sustainable world. Brought about how? We rise up en masse in support of single payer, troops out now and reversing global warming, that's how. Empowered then by our vicrories over the powers that be, it'll be up to us, the what sort of world.
Yeah, the filibuster is an arcane Senate rule, but so what? First the Dems told us they needed a majority. Then they got one. They they told us they needed a Dem president. They got one. Now they say the need a "filibuster-proof majority" of 60 votes or they can't get anything done.
What is a filibuster these days anyway? In case the Dems haven't noticed, nobody in the Republican party stands up in the Senate Building and talks for 82 hours anymore. They just threaten to do it and the dems shrivel up like limp dicks and flop over. why not just call their bluff? Why not let the Repubs read the phone book for a day or two, while the Dems all camp out in an anteroom with their cell phones. When the Repubs finally give out, as they inevitably will, the majority leaders can call in their troops, call for a vote, beat the bastards on a simple majority and have done with it! Why not?
Why not? Because then the jig would be up. Because then the Dems would have to cast popular votes that oppose the wishes of their pay masters.
Well said jareilly. We, the people, have given the Democratic Party everything they said the needed: the executive branch and majorities in both houses. And we have gotten virtually nothing in return.
No peace, but rather calls for more war.
No health care, but a bill to enrich the insurance companies.
No restoration of constitutional rights.
No regulation of banks nor restoration of Glass-Steagall.
No accounting of money given to banks.
No jobs, green or otherwise but firing of a popular advocate.
No card signing bill for organizing a union.
No relief for people holding troubled mortgages.
No plans on CO2 emissions and public transit.
Cuts in almost every state in public education, support for the disabled, etc.
It was within the Democrats' power to deliver on these things. What we got was a lot of fine words, flimsy excuses and fancy dancing. The filibuster thing is just an excuse to do nothing, since they really don't want things to change. Starting with Clinton, they have helped to create and have gone along with the transfer of wealth and power from the poor and middle class to the war profiteers and the rich.
If the Democrats in Congress had any backbone, they would do just what jareilly recommended. Let the Republicans filibuster, while the Democrats get on their cell phones and call their constituents and tell them what's happening. Maybe organize some busses to come to Washington.
The only way Senators and Congresspeople might do something is if there are serious threats to throw them out of office next time around.
People in Europe and around the world thought Obama was the second coming; they were ecstatic when he was elected. I believe the halo is becoming tarnished.
Joe
Sioux Rose
JCLIENTELLE: Excellent post.
Excellent comment. Back in the day when there were two separate parties, there were real filibusters. We have had only a single party, the DemoRepub Corporatists, for many, many years.
BO lives up to his initials. The way he shamelessly defends bankers, wall street banditos, and polluters STINKS!!! Dems are pathetic...
Obama is one man. We are 307,517,140 as of right now. If two heads are better than one, think of how much better 300 thousand plus would be. All he needs to do is include all of us via the referendum. Health care? War? Wall Street? Torture? Let the people decide! We the People are ahead of the politicians on every issue.
The Swiss people decided to have no wars over 150 years ago. They decided to have one of the highest per capita incomes in the world and no boom and bust economy as well as free healthcare and education for all, a healthy environment, no WOD and no drug problem, few immigration problems, etc. More here: http://www.vote.org/fossedal
That's a fairly superficial rundown of Swiss history. You better read up Switzerland a little more thoroughly. "Free health insurance" it wrong, for starters.
Gee, I wonder why the Swiss haven't been attacked for their freedoms!
ezeflyer - You are beginning to reach to root of the problem.......
"We the People" have the power but we don't use it.
Unfortunately just like the Obama and the Democrats with their current majority, we the Majority of the people refuse to act on that majority and simply tell the minority "tough luck you lost the election" and move forward with our policies on the economy, the environment and health care.
For all of the anti-European rhetoric we are cowards compared to our cousins across the big pond. Just witness the action recently taken by EU dairy farmers in response to rule changes that favor monopolistic big corporate dairy businesses. They have dumped millions of gallons of milk in public venues. When was the last time millions of Americans have gone of strike to demand things like fair health care policies.
Most of us are content to sit on the couch and bitch at the news on FOX and CNN but when was the last time we took a day off work and joined a rally in our city? Never... that's what I thought. Instead we allow a bunch of 912 wing nuts to dominate the public debate even though they realistically only represent a small minority of public opinion.
We also refuse to take responsibility for our excessive consumption. We complain when Walmart forces American companies to eliminate American jobs and move their production to China but we keep on buying their products. We complain about how Walmart, the nations largest private employer, destroys any attempts by their employees to unionize but don't support our fellow Americans by boycotting Walmart.
Similarly we don't demand that the government dismantle the energy corporations monopoly on electricity by passing national net metering and neighborhood association policies that would allow all Americans to benefit from roof top solar panels or small scale wind turbines for their homes. Nor do we support updated building codes that would require the latest energy efficient technologies for new construction. All of these initiatives would create millions of new green energy jobs and move our country towards energy self sufficiency and the environmental benefits of reducing coal and petroleum based energy, not to mention the national security benefits of eliminating foreign oil imports.
So we can blame the Senate or Obama or the corporate monopolies but until we the majority of comfortable, middle class, rational, educated American citizenry get off our collective fat asses and act we will remain the sheeple not the "WE THE PEOPLE" in our Declaration of Independence.
To all of the critics who will poo poo this small attempt at national self reflection above, I purposely used "we" to include myself.
I pledge to and ask you to pledge to - Get involved, get informed, join an advocacy group, help plan a rally in your town, tell your friends, relatives and neighbors to turn up,(and don't send them a Christmas card if they don't show)because if we don't start to act on our needs we will have to accept the crumbs of freedom we are given.
Steven Hill is one of the few progressive writers who connects the dots between non-majority, and non-progressive policies on one hand and constitutional flaws on the other. A disproportionate Senate is one of several major, obvious, undemocratic flaws in our system of government. So is the filibuster. So is private money (bribes) influencing policy-makers. Other advanced, democratic nations don't allow any of these undemocratic mechanisms for rule by the rich.
If we are to keep connecting the dots, as Steven does a bit here, we need to work to change the Constitution to become more democratic. There are several very good books on this. (See Dan Lazare, Steven Hill, Larry Sabato, Sanford Levinson, and Robert Dahl.)
This is a situation where progressives need to get smart and sophisticated about our system and propose solutions for electoral and constitutional reform. Otherwise, we'll be fighting symptoms and failing to deal with causes.
Could not agree more. This is a constitutional problem. The original drafters could not have imagined how much control monied interests could seize. They thought the second amendment protecting the right to bear arms was the citizen's guarantee against tyranny, but the corporate stranglehold on the US economy and on the lives of every citizen is all but invincible. This is no longer a democratic republic as understood by the drafters, and that's just the way the corporate controllers want it.
So, all we need is the tactical genius who can figure a constitutional battle plan.
Thanks for your comments NoMoreForCorps. I agree completely.
The tactical genius will be a grand coalition of progressive parties, activists and independent leaders, operating together, for no other person or group would have the grassroots cred to plan or implement anything.
Fortunately, Hill and his electoral scholar colleagues whom I mentioned above have analyzed our Constitution and gone a long way to point to solutions.
As for this being "no longer a democratic republic" that is right. We could call it a totalitarian plutocracy, or a fake democracy with rule by the rich, or something else. But it IS totalitarian. It is not governed by the will of the people, as declared in the Preamble of our current Constitution. But that could be fixed with a few "democracy" amendments, which would be consistent with the Preamble, and Amendments 9 and 10.
Our greatest limit right now is the ignorance of progressives on connecting the dots between our totalitarian fake democracy and our partially flawed Constitution.
The remedy is simple, read these:
Steven Hill: 10 Steps to Repair the American Democracy and his longer book, Fixing Elections
Robert Dahl: How Democratic is the American Constitution?
Dan Lazare: Frozen Republic
Sanford Levinson: Our Undemocratic Constitution
Larry Sabato: A More Perfect Union
Doug Amy: Proportional Representation
John Dinan: The American State Constitutional Tradition (Documents over 200 State Constitutional Conventions)
Rob Richie at www.fairvote.org
And see www.idea.int for key ideas used by advanced democracies like Germany, New Zealand, Scotland, Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and more. For example, New Zealand went from a two-party system to a German-type MMP system in 1993.
Read them and get enlightened about electoral problems and electoral reform. Remain ignorant at your own peril and that of our progressive citizenry's agenda.
They are enjoyable to read, and created great hope in me that there are solutions to our problems.
Perhaps the failure of a health bill because of a conservative, non-representative Senate will get more progressive citizens to connect the dots.
College Republicans are having a great time posting on CD and laughing at the gullible old socialist hippies.
You are, huh? That sounds about right. Trolling is something that loses its interest for most people once they get to be age 15 or so, but for those whose ethics are still those of the 2yo ("No! Mine! MINE! *waaaaaaaa*"), trolling would still be an exciting adventure at any physical age.
"College Republicans are having a great time posting on CD and laughing at the gullible old socialist hippies."
I don't, in all seriousness, doubt it. I'm sure there are people posting here from all sides of the divide. So what are we to do? Use our telepathy to smoke out the evil ones amongst us? No, at some point you have to deal with what is written on the page.
Criticizing Obama is racist, so don't do it. Jimmy Carter, Michael Eric Dyson, Janeane Garofalo, and Bill Maher say so.
The U.S. needs to be boycotted by the rest of the world. We also should be forced to dismantle our nuclear weapons and have our standing military disbanded. We should not be allowed to have a military at all given how much death and destruction we've heaped on the rest of the world.
Glenn Ford, I reckon "Limmos with Bimbos" would be a good band name.
Worst Democrat Ever™.
I knew we were screwed during the primaries, when the favorite tactic of the Obama supporters was to call their fellow Democrats racists.
""The world is about to enter a challenging phase where the US – the undisputed leader of the free world for the past 60 years – is going to rapidly cede its place at the head of the line.""
************************************************************
Yeah, the 'undisputed leadership of the free world for the last 60' has come to an end already because there are a class of people here that don't want others to have the freedoms they enjoy and it just keeps getting more repressive and anything that was public before is being 'scared' away with the fear of a 'socialist' country no matter how much it would help those who are losing everything they had which blatantly puts america in the old class of the worst of the worse dictatorial countries to have ever existed.
I've had my say enough on Obama and yes, he's impotent but not for the corporate/military interests. We also have Congress and then our electorate that is conditioned to voting for fluff and puff personality trash over the issues. Voting like that is like judging a book solely by its book cover. On the other hand, judging candidates on various issues with a non-political feeling is like judging a book by its content. That is how I ended up voting for Nader besides admiring all that he has done for the past 40 years. Until people vote in a manner that's similar to judging a book by its content and not its cover alone, America will continue to end up with mediocre leadership and lag behind Europe in the forseeable future.
Jennifer, Kay Johnson (et alia), your very similar posts urging disappointed progressives to vote third party are quite convincing. A PR expert would be proud to write copy that was so sincerely grassroots-like, especially with the local touch of identifying which state each of these similar authors hails from. Cynics might worry that the constant drumbeat for third party would serve Republican interests.
Gosh, now I get it! Disappointed progressives should just keep voting for the Democrats, no matter how completely they sell us out each time we help elect them! Otherwise, we might serve Republican interests!!!!!!
Guess what? I don't care if we serve Republican interests, because after years of donating to, campaigning for, and voting for Democrats, I finally get it: they are serving the same masters the Republicans serve. Obama is successfully serving Bush's third term; the "change we can believe in" is nothing but the same old crap.
Here's an easy way to understand where many of us are now: after so many years, we have finally realized that we have been in an abusive relationship with the Dems. We have made excuses for them, we have enabled their violence against all of our hopes and dreams, and now, finally, we're done. No more money, no more votes, no more excuses. We're looking for a better relationship. And we know we DESERVE a better relationship. Third party? Absolutely!!!!!
Well what do you expect when the Democrat Party moves farther to the right and even persecutes true progressive/liberal sweethearts remaining in the party such as Kucinich, Gravel, Barbara Lee, etc ... ? All we ask is that people judge and vote by the issues and not the mere party label. Your last sentence on those cynics gives me a wicked laugh. :)
I wouldn't have replied to your previous post if I realized an even riper one would follow.
Your oh-so-clever insinuation that the commenters you mentioned, "et alia" are Republican moles or astroturfers was done to death by perplexed and irate moderate Democrat-supporters during the 2008 election.
Maybe you were here in a previous incarnation: the Obama-enthralled LOTEsters scolded, accused, hectored, lectured, and excoriated those of us who were not duped by Obama, and were not about to suspend critical thinking for the sake of "not letting the perfect be the enemy of the good", etc.
This delusion of mistaking opponents to the malignant ruling duopoly as Republican "plants" is merely an artifact of a narrow, superficial, and utterly unimaginative analysis.
So you can save your breath, and stop hissing "wolf"-- and BTW, what big teeth you have, Grandma!
· Yr Obd't Servant
wow. you guys are good.
NoMoreForCorps, No, you may have a point there. Clearly advocating for the two parties that have been in power since before we were born is the only legitimate position to take ;)
Great post. Those who continue to buy into the duopoly are not interested in systemic change. They are the petty bourgeois who would sell us down the river for a handful of fascist policies. These clowns belong in the same snake pit with the "teabaggers."
But what are LOTEsters? :-/
Lesser of Two Evils (fraud)sters, of course-- not to be confused with lodestars. ;)
· Yr Obd't Servant
@"R.L. Love"
I did not blame all environmentalists. I blamed the current leaders and pundits. The rest of them dupes are just that. The movement has been subverted long ago - right after it had showed some political viability. At the present day, all environmental organizations I'm aware of are STUFFED ANIMALS. The old glory days are long gone. Don't hide behind dead skins on frames.
Address the issues - reparations, exclusions for China, India, etc, CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEMS WITHOUT solving anything:
1) Business moves to these countries and kills the US economy
2) There they can pollute MORE than here!!!
No environmental organization addresses the problems of finding viable solutions and funding them. Face it, you can't have it all. Lots of energy is necessary or lots of of people shall perish. One can't have it both ways. The best approach is to use fast-breeders until fusion is developed - check Prof Robert W. Bussard's Polywell... None of the selfish, power hungry, restriction-worshiping environmentalists even mentions any of this.
Arktig, thanks but there was no need to reaffirm my point.
Obama the Impotent regarding Israel/Palestine:
Obama (AP Report): "To Palestinians, he said they must build on progress on halting terrorism and "do more to stop incitement. As for Israelis, he praised their moves to increase Palestinians' freedom of movement and their discussions about restraining Jewish settlement-building in Palestinian territories — both top priorities of Palestinians."
Obama praises Israels discussions? Are you kidding? No mention of the nightly raids on Palestinians in the West Banks, the attacking of peaceful demonstrators, the arrests, the embargo on Gaza, the regular shooting of Gazan fishermen and farmers, the attacks by the settlers on West Bank Palestinians, and the acceleration of the settlement building while on Obama's watch. What about this incitement by Israel? Obama appears to either have no end-game or is satisfied with the US's support of Israel's slow ethnic cleansing with the result that the Palestinians are going to effectively live in concentration camps.
Hmmm. Did someone put lipstick on the pig in the poke? As I've said before, my confidence in Obama began to fade with his Cabinet and White House appointments. I find I can no longer counter the anti-Obama arguments with reminders of who baked this trillion dollar souffle - Reagan, Poppy Bush, Clinton, and Shrub. Some people want "their" country back; I just want to be able to keep my house. Third, fourth, or fifth parties would be great; electoral reforms would be better. Sadly, none of this will happen in the foreseeable future.
Cheer up... It's gonna get worse!
Yup, that's what I say. Just be patient. We have a little more ways to go, and then it will all be over. God bless, everyone.
Here again, Europe is leading, while the Obama administration is dragging its feet.
The Obama administration is not dragging its feet. It has no feet. It is a slug, a basket case, lying in it s cradle, totally at the mercy of corporations to feed it or die.
maybe europe , china, the rest of asia, and other regions should hasten development of technology and science - gigantic ones - that will create a HUGE BUBBLE -- to protect the REST of the planet FROM the united states...create it in such a way - that leaves the USA "outside" -- but in reality - through common and much wider practice - place the USA
"within" its own SPECIAL bubble as befitting its sense of "exceptionalism".......
and let america BELCH FORTH and BREATHE BACK IN its own effluence...and NOT be allowed to LEAK out any of it back into the atmosphere and have america figure out how to clean up its own act without harming the rest of the world.
china alone, despite being SECOND polluter in the world due to its hastening of its development to catch up with the developed nations , playing THEIR game which THEY imposed on the globe -mind you,
is aware and responsible ENOUGH that it is the point of focus for criticism - and tehrefore has been HUGELY accelerating the process of EVENTUALLY weaning away from highly polluting usages:
going into becoming the world's main and biggest producer of solar energy....and the USA is STILL dragging its feet?
oh wait_
the USA is EXEMPT from such EARTHLY matters...it is the KINGDOM of GOD on earth!
let's consider some of the facts about obama (and i'm not talking about the birth issue):
he was invested with 600 million dollars from wall street for his campaign
he chose wall street insiders for his economic team, emmanuel, geitner and summers to name a few - the very guys who brought in the deregulations that led to the ponzy scheme meltdown, now 1 year old and still aging fast
he has continued and then enhanced the imperial wars in the mid-east with his psychotically named "right" war in afghanistan. now, as noted in another column posted here today, he has reneged on the right war to focus on attacking our "ally" pakistan
he is building seven new bases in colombia (in addition to the twenty that already exist) and has provoked a continent wide protest from most of the other governments in south america with what they see as he new threat of imperialism - a legacy they are all too familiar with...
he supports gmo's - the sick rockefller non-food stuffs that is poisoning not only the people and animals but the entire environment of this world.
he is expanding the already bloated military budgets past even bushbaby's level of finance and that is saying something
obama is kissinger’s boy and here is what that evil bastard has to say about obama:
“Conflicts across the globe and an international respect for Barack Obama have created the perfect setting for establishment of "a New World Order," according to Henry Kissinger, the Nobel Peace Prize winner and former secretary of state under President Nixon.
Kissinger has long been an integral figure in U.S. foreign policy, holding positions in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations. Author of over a dozen books on foreign policy, Kissinger was also named by President Bush as the chairman of the Sept. 11 investigatory commission.
Kissinger made the remark in an interview with CNBC's "Squawk on the Street" hosts Mark Haines and Erin Burnett at the New York Stock Exchange, after Burnett asked him what international conflict would define the Obama administration's foreign policy
"The president-elect is coming into office at a moment when there is upheaval in many parts of the world simultaneously," Kissinger responded. "You have India, Pakistan; you have the jihadist movement. So he can't really say there is one problem, that it's the most important one. But he can give new impetus to American foreign policy partly because the reception of him is so extraordinary around the world. His task will be to develop an overall strategy for America in this period when, really, a new world order can be created. It's a great opportunity, it isn't just a crisis."
now that is nwo shit "you can believe in"
If he is as bad as you imply, Do you want him to be Potent too?
I wonder if any president would have the power to fix the economy and end the Wars... it is gonna be a long long struggle.
The world is in a beginning stage of revolution against this evolution we are dealing with.....
Good Luck
"If he is as bad as you imply, Do you want him to be Potent too?" -- Jim Glover
Jim, you ask a very good question, and I had to laugh, as sad as it is!
Thank You
Obama and the Democrats are Bush-lite and that's good enough for some, but not for most of us.
As for the structural impasse allowing the minority to thwart majoritygoals, it never worked for the Democrats. Even as the majority, they are useless.
As your article states, Obama is impotent when not complicit. if he wanted to accomplish something he could as demonstrated by the arm-twisting of the progressives when they don't fall in line.
Unfortunately, Obama is leveling the playing field. Bush was an easy act to follow, and it looks like Obama will end up bearing the burden of failure as well.
Sioux Rose
VERN: Thank you for pointing out the obvious contradiction. That the democrats seldom used their "minority advantage" during the prior eight years, and now they all too conveniently, with Obama's overt or covert support, fail to use their MORE advantageous (were there the will to execute laws of interest to America's actual, as opposed to corporate citizens) majority at present.
Given my eye for symbolism, I can't help noting the parallel between the world's focus on the HEALTH of its shared climate, and the battles over HEALTH care in the U.S. In both cases, the U.S. is consistent in one thing, its upholding profits--the transitory matter of supposed wealth--over persons, ecosystems, and the more long-term factors that bear most upon sustainability.
The U.S. can no longer hide behind its bloodless coup and the sinister positing of Bush, the unworthy, into office. Obama came in on, virtually carried on a wave of hope, and he has shown his hand for providing despair instead.
Eventually the list of moral crimes to which US leadership remains complicit will lead others like the Spanish Judge Garzon to take judicial matters into their own hands. The record for depraved indifference on the part of U.S. foreign policy is as clear as are its profit-oriented motives in the current climate talks. The one fly in the ointment is the fact that so many countries, like rich kids looking for the corner pusher man to get their weekend high depend on the U.S. for weapons sales. The ruse of the war on terrorism has upped the ante of fear across the globe, and resulted in more weapons sales. This in turn has necessitated a vicious cycle that breeds yet more violence. This DRUG has to come to a stop, the addiction to brute force is something the US may be most responsible for, but other nations have fallen under its thrall.
The health of the planet should be the foremost issue on any leader's plate today. Instead, the US plays the fiddle while "Rome" burns, and this policy of careless disregard is showing the world all the reasons to bind forces together and leave the U.S. out. It does not qualify as a leader, just a bully, misguided, under-educated, and willing to show an embarassing disregard for its own citizens. All the PR in the world can't change the truth which is on display for citizens everywhere, even if too many of our own are habituated to the stupidity and farcical alernative reality as cast by Fox and its right wing radio comrades.
Our nation has gone through numerous cycles, some inordinately ugly. This one compares with the worst of them; but there remains the energy and wisdom of citizens who have never gone along with the crap passing for policy today. Out of THEIR fire may eventually spring the awaited Phoenix. Often THIS forum stokes a holy flame!
Sioux Rose,
Well stated and well played.. I shudder to consider the range of potential denouements awaiting Empire America.. If one were to game out potential scenarios one would find them quite ugly; Empires have an annoying tendency to go out with a bang. What's truly stunning to me is the willingness of so many citizens to remain willfully ignorant of what's going on around them.
The Rubicon was crossed with the deeply fraudulent and criminal installation of the cheney/bush ruling junta.. Obama appears to be clueless and/or complicit and in fact is indeed complicit to the war crimes committed by the aforementioned regime as a direct function of his failure to prosecute those felonies. I'm not sure there's a credible map away from the precipice at this point.
Staring into the abyss is seldom redemptive.
Hey, Obama bailed out predatory capitalism--he can't do EVERYTHING. First he has to ensure continued government by the rich, for the rich, and of the rich.
Well, money is the thing.... and in the USA when you follow it, it is gone.
How about a 2008 election "DO OVER"?!
Better yet...How about lie detectors installed during debates? This guy would have blown out the circuits with his honest-face lies.
He's the long shot from Cleveland, a man who loves his spinach...Put the little guy in the white house, Dennis Kucinich.
From the Ballad of DK
It's significant, I think, that the man considered the "Greatest Canadian", the late Tommy Douglas (a Scotsman, I'm proud to say), was also short, slight, and like DK much more a teacher than a commander.
It holds out hope that one day soon the USAians, too, will wake up. Perhaps Obummer will be the final straw.
What a misguided and ignorant article. We have a financial crisis, we have a health care crisis, we have globalization and manufacturing crisis and all of these are more important than some misguided ecological adventures. Obama is the rat who campaigned under the image of a lion. He can't solve any of the above problems, so leave him alone before he's made a mess out of the environment too.
Ecologists are hypocrites. They never propose any real solution to ecological problems. China is the world's biggest polluter (INCLUDING CO2) but they are exempt from control, so is India and other large countries. The result is that business moves there and the polution continues. Talk about hipocricy.
The so cold ecology movement is a bunch of leeches who do everything to derail any solution to the environmental problems. It's greedy self interest on their part - if the problems were resolved, there would be no need or funding for ecology pundits.
Physicists have shown that fast breeders and fusion are the only solution for CO2-free energy production. The eco-terrorist come up with ridiculous and false scaremongering to derail these solutions and waste all the money on non-solutions. Can you imagine, if we had no eco problems, the eco-terrorists would not get payed for munching the same old fertilizer over and over again.
Disgusting, greedy, selfish environmentalists posing as our "friends". They are much worse than even Obama. I dare you, ecology "leaders" and "pundits" - give up you government funding, give up your NGO grants and your rich daddy inheritance then get off our cars and go live without energy. Call me to take pictures. Can you imagine Gore and the environmentalists in Congress/government living that way? Can you imagine the NGO's rich sponsors living that way? Stinky hypocrites all of them.
You really need to get over the environmentalist woman who dumped you, not that she didn't have good reason. The raving and contempt you display here for "ecologists" is too disproportionate for words, even if now and then they prove to be imperfect human beings. You've added nothing to this discussion except a little inconsequential fodder for more frothing from the far right. Which is perhaps your weasely intention.
You apparently got sooo offended that you didn't see my points about pollution limits exceptions for China et all, my technology proposal, etc. Your "criticism" on the other hand is totally baseless. Please, don't try to scare me with THE BAD COP on the right. The good cop on the left is NO better. They are a team, and you are THEIR tool. We have two right wing parties, one of them is also a left demagogue...
Arktig, I think you need to send your post back to the shop for a re-tool.
Not to repeat what other commenters have said, suffice it to say that nuclear fusion energy, as a solution, exists only in fantasy land at this point.
You missed the fast breeders part. The tech has been available for 20/30 years now. It's not perfect but it's CO2 free and it gives very low amount of low radioactive waste. Cheap to store the waste. Read my post again. Retool your attention. Learn the sciences and until you invent something better, don't allow yourself to be used as tool. I know your heart is in the right place, but it takes guts to see the truth and accept it.
Arktig, your arguement could use a little more integrity. To begin with you lump all Ecologists together and accuse ALL of them of ALL of same failures. It was not so long ago in this country that rivers were catching on fire and rain was a type of poison, but your not giving them any credit for ANY of some rather obvious accomplishments.
You also refute facts, which were clearly explained in the article, without presenting any facts or reasons as to why the reader should believe you as opposed to the author. China's CO2 emissions for example are only one fourth of those in the U.S. when measured on a per capita basis, and, there are viable arguements to the effect that some responsibility for emissions should fall upon the consuming nation, due to the fact that global trade is a matter of give and take. Then too it is wise to consider where the idea of globalization began and who has benefitted the most. According to Joseph Stiglitz, for every dollar that the developed nations spend on aid, they gain $3 in trade profits. As you become more informed you find that the issues are far too complicated to be resolved with distorted assertions and name-calling. In fact, low quality arguements tend to substantiate the opposition, but that is too complex for now.
@"R.L. Love"
I did not blame all environmentalists. I blamed the current leaders and pundits. The rest of them dupes are just that. The movement has been subverted long ago - right after it had showed some political viability. At the present day, all environmental organizations I'm aware of are STUFFED ANIMALS. The old glory days are long gone. Don't hide behind dead skins on frames.
Address the issues - reparations, exclusions for China, India, etc, CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROBLEMS WITHOUT solving anything:
1) Business moves to these countries and kills the US economy
2) There they can pollute MORE than here!!!
No environmental organization addresses the problems of finding viable solutions and funding them. Face it, you can't have it all. Lots of energy is necessary or lots of of people shall perish. One can't have it both ways. The best approach is to use fast-breeders until fusion is developed - check Prof Robert W. Bussard's Polywell... None of the selfish, power hungry, restriction-worshiping environmentalists even mentions any of this.
Arktig, read the second and third paragraph of your original comment (11:06). Then read this sentence: "I did not blame all environmentalists". ???
This sentence also: "None of the selfish, power hungry, restriction-worshiping environmentalists even mentions any of this". You could not possibly know what all environmentalists mention and the insulting adjectives are simply cheap-shots because you don't explain WHY, or as opposed to what or who.
That is just the tip of the iceberg.
Is there anything for which Obama has not been a sweeping disappointment?
"Why is it," he asked during a recent interview, "that we're going to cap executive compensation for Wall Street bankers but not Silicon Valley entrepreneurs or [American] football players?"
Well, hell, why not mafia bosses and a spectrum of crooks and rip off artists?
Our laws have become a mockery, like money as free speech.
"Free speech" is for those who can afford it and for those who buy government and own politicians, laws (regulations) are an obstruction to be removed so they can plunder "legally". While we foot the bill, Obama.
Obama you betray this country by being a servant to the corrupt criminal element that is destroying it.
Obama has been a colossal failure for anyone who is not a corporate dominated imperialist. HE has taken Bush's Orwellian double-speak to new levels. We still have: clean coal, mountaintop removal, extraordinary rendition, gitmo justed moved offshore to iraq, trickle-down economics, and NOT ONE WORD ON DOMESTIC MANUFACTURING, went to Mexico and pushed MORE free trade(ie handouts to the multi-national corps)AND the Obama admin is hammering the progressives while donating to the BLUE DOGS.
THE Obama Admin even has it's fist coup (in Honduras) at an earlier date than the Shrub Bush Administration! Now we get talk from S and Central America about the "Honduras Solution".
He gives the republicans a chance to write the health care legislation EVEN though THE REPUBLICANS WILL NOT VOTE FOR IT. And the inputs they've inserted guarantee that the Health Care reform will FAIL - AND it'll be the democrats fault.
AS I said what a Colossal FAILURE!
"Yet many in the US and abroad are impatient with the pace of progress under the Obama administration."
----------------------
Yes, and that's just the rightwingers.
The rest of us --even those who saw through him and voted for Cynthia or Ralph-- are appalled by how blatantly and unapologetically he's chosen to be Bush 3.
Some of us voted for the socialist. Nader and McKinney are cappies. They are on the right track, but they are capitalists nevertheless.
I agree!
I supported Ralph Nader for what I thought were good reasons at the time, but those reasons are turning out to have been completely sound!
In my wildest dreams, I didn't think Obama would turn out to be as inept as he is.
I know what you mean. I voted for Cynthia and I, too, am surprised by how very bad Obummer is. I never expected anything from him but lip service, but my worst nightmare didn't prepare me for him being Bush 3.
Good analysis except the USA would be in better shape if it were ruled by the practical, handshake contract, smalltown people with guns and pickups.
But it is in fact ruled by bloated corporate slugs in limmos, with bimbos in Manhattan.
Adherence to the Constitution is not USA big problem it is the recent shredding of the Constitution.
USA's main impediment to survival is corporate personhood and money is speach. Allowing the wholesale bribery of Congresspeople.
The Senate's composition is partially to prevent a Tyranny of the Majority, which is a good safegaurd.
In general we should not forget the evil and demise of the USA was present even in it's inception as a white male landlord expansionist nation.
Places like Oklahoma are like what you want. But Oklahoma is at the bottom of many US statistical comparisons and comes across like the third world on many counts. Intellectually, the ignorance there is mind-boggling. Racist to a tee, BTW. Only state where McCain got more than 60%.
That's your ideal America, right?
The tyranny of the unrepresentative Senate is indeed the problem. This will not be resolved by voting third party or ousting Obama and the Dems.
In fact, progressives should push much harder to use the Democratic party to assert the critically important issues of environmental degradation, unregulated financial markets, health care, etc. etc. Dems are extremely frustrating to be sure, but this powerful party can be a truly effective vehicle if progressives put pressure on and don't let up.
Repubs would love to see frustration with Obama become their ticket back to power. Vote third party and make the Repub's dream come true.
The Senate should represent the interests of the people of each seperate, which is necessary to prevent populous states from abusing sparsely settled states.
The is no way this safegaurd should be discarded.
Congress in almost it's entirety is unrepresentative because of the corporate lobbyist bribes.
In what way could populous states "abuse" the low-pop ones? That's a very intriguing idea, but I can't imagine how it would work. Could you explain what sort of "abuse" they could commit, and why whatever it is should be characterised as "abuse"?
"...this powerful party can be a truly effective vehicle if progressives put pressure on and don't let up..."
- Ugh. Hard to believe anyone can still be hawking this line of "thought."
Note how the poster generously concedes, "Dems are extremely frustrating to be sure..."
- "Frustrating"? An interesting word choice. In fact, it's the only interesting thing about the post (though unintentionally so).
This is exactly the specious moderate faux-progressivism that asserted itself here and elsewhere during the 2008 campaign, and preached the gospel of lesser-evilism from the caboose of the Obama Express.
As soon as Obama captured the nomination, the engine switched to the right-hand track, and that caboose was quietly decoupled and left to roll backwards. It's not going to be "pushed" by its credulous occupants hard enough to catch up to that departed train.
Your fingers will become charred and blistered holding Obama's "feet" to the fire; apparently you haven't noticed that they're cloven hooves, quite comfortable in a warm place.
· Yr Obd't Servant
The point is not that Obama is great. The point is rather that disappointment with Obama is now being used by the Republican PR machine to try to tip the balance back toward Republicans. This is a bad thing, no matter how much one objects to Obama's policies.
Suppressing the critique would lead to sheer passivity and stagnation.
Joe
Like Glenn Beck's new plan to tie BO to the Weather Underground Organization, and Students for Democratic Society.
Smearing the present administration by tying it in with debatable crimes the old organization was charged with. Saying these are the SAME people.
Fox viewers are sitting on the edge of their seat buying every bit of it!
Meanwhile, if Barak cannot stand up for the truth, how can I support him! He is not speaking for me! If he would just say what needs to be said WE ALL could come out of our shell and defend him, and FOX would have to eat their smear!
Because a LOT of people will stand up when they recognize the truth. The truth will stand alone! It won't matter, right wing or left wing, when things make sense everybody but a few die hard capitalists will get on board.
It seem all the opposition has to do is call us socialists and we run with our tails between our legs. Call us whatever you want, but counter by stating in simple and clear terms what it will look like.
Like Single-Payer, where the taxpayer owns all the physical parts of our health system so there is NO CHARGE for anybody using anything. How does that interfere with how doctors do their job?
The clever thing to do is to subvert the disenchantment with the corporate shill named Obama into a universal populist movement against the corporate dictatorship.
Are you the Glen Ford from Black Agenda Report? Great blog. :o)
Being "impatient" with the Obama Regime implies that it is dragging its feet and not doing anything. On the contrary, the Regime has been working hard to make sure Wall Street (banking and insurance) and the drug companies' profits are not only preserved, but enhanced.
The banks that were too big to fail a year ago are even bigger now and continue to require taxpayer bailouts. The irony of Obama giving tough guy speeches on Wall Street while not making any effort to break up organizations that are too big to fail proves that Obama is either very naiive and/or very corrupt.
14,000 Americans per day are losing their medical insurance due to job loss and 75% of Americans going bankrupt due to medical bills have insurance, yet single payer medical insurance has been excluded from "health care reform" discussion and Obama's 9/9/09 speech identified corporate profits as the centerpiece of "health care reform". Another example of Obama being very naiive and/or very corrupt.
Obama turned "health care reform" over to Congress early on, yet he concurrently cut a secret deal with Billy Tauzin to prohibit the Gov. from negotiating drug prices. Politics doesn't get much more corrupt than this.
Sioux Rose
RAY: With all due respect, your Santa Claus list of perks to the elites would not be complete without mentioning an INCREASE in funds (and intended troop levels) for the MIC and its rabid arms of destruction, the force(s) felt 'round the world. Of course Wall ST and big pharma function as two intrinsic evils, for where would Mars, god of war be without funding (hello, Mammon!); and how would a population go along with so much witless wounding of so many were not big pharma keeping a lid on their collective psyches, defusing the "mad as hell, and not gonna take it anymore" communal rage? Big media already got its payout when the FCC deregulated allowing a handful of corporations (all beholden to the three already mentioned) to seize ownership of the public's air waves and thereby deliver their messages lockstep so the pesky thing known as dissent (along with valid information-transmission) could be done away with. Sure makes governing easier! Then it's the mere matter of maintaining the illusion of a rigorous democratic agenda, with two distinct sides representing fundamentally antithetical policies. We know what we've got instead, but it sure fools the teabaggers and all those convinced Obama is a socialist! The U.S. sold Hollywood and its stream of images to the world; and now it's become its own on-going sit-com farce, a tragi-comedy of epoch proportions!
"The banks that were too big to fail a year ago are even bigger now and continue to require taxpayer bailouts. The irony of Obama giving tough guy speeches on Wall Street while not making any effort to break up organizations that are too big to fail proves that Obama is either very naiive and/or very corrupt." -- raydelcamino
It's not just that the banks are bigger, and they are, but here in Manhattan more and more banks are popping up in what were empty commercial spaces -- as if we need more banks! The other night, when I was walking up Broadway, on the upper-west side, I passed an empty commercial space and someone had written on the window, in big letters -- "NO MORE BANKS!" I'm not the only one noticing.
In July, according to a librarian I spoke to, 1/3 of the NYC library employees were fired in July. That's a lot of "we the people." And, there are not jobs to be had, either. However, on the other end of the spectrum, the CEO of the library system continues to draw his $800,000 per year salary (reported by Katha Pollitt in one of her Nation columns), unhindered by the finanacial crisis. No wonder the CEO is so devoted to public service, huh?
Sioux Rose
KAY: Wasn't it American Express that reconstituted itself as something of a bank to get access to all that "welfare" money? All those banks are popping up because this is the era of "NO Bank Left Behind," and they want access to the treasure chest. Imagine what the various deities must perceive when they observe our nation as it lends its treasure to those who made misery for so many, while continuing to leave the needy out of every fiscal equation as they pound on the bounty for themselves alone? If there was such a thing as evil incarnate, then every major US policy determination would appear made in homage to that entity's bankrupt values and likeness. Yes, there IS a dark side, and yes, its key power is the use of deception. And yes, evil has become the great banality in our midst, posing for business (and war is a very lucrative US business) as usual. Karma will not long be mocked. It's unfortunate that so many lives are being wrecked as its boomerang heads back our way. Duck and cover, live simply and honor the gift of your daily bread. There may soon come a time when it can no longer be taken for granted.
Yes, several varieties of businesses are reclassifying themselves as holding companies -- I think that is the correct categorization. Then, they qualify for bailout money, or, as you put it so well -- "welfare" from "we the people."
The other day, I was in Midtown and noticed that a brand new Bank of America Tower is under construction. Hhhhhmmmmm....not long ago, they were bankrupt -- until we bailed them out.
Disgusting, isn't it?
"Yes, there IS a dark side, and yes, its key power is the use of deception. And yes, evil has become the great banality in our midst, posing for business (and war is a very lucrative US business) as usual." -- Sioux Rose