Most Popular This Week
- Not to Worry, Rape Victims Who Want An Abortion: We Won't Charge You With Felony Tampering With Evidence, Just Your Doctor
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Obama Administration Compromise Would Implement No-Cost Birth Control
- The Right of the People, Even At the Airport
- To End Extreme Poverty, Let’s Try Ending Extreme Wealth
- The Non Zero-Sum Society: How the Rich Are Destroying the US Economy
- Don’t Put a Fork in It: On the Perils of Genetically Engineered Salmon
- Five Possibilities for the Next Great Progressive Push
- An Economic Alternative to Exploitative Free Market Capitalism
- As Hurricane Victims Freeze, Billionaire Mayor Gives Away $1 Billion to Wealthy Med School
Popular content
Today's Top News
Now I’m Really Getting Pissed Off
Hey did you hear about the iconic African-American guy who plays golf, and whose relationship with the public is in a free-fall lately?
No, as a matter of fact - I'm not talking about Tiger Woods.
You know, I've really been trying not to write an article every other week about all the things I don't like about Barack Obama.
But the little prick is making it very hard.
Like any good progressive, I've gone from admiration to hope to disappointment to anger when it comes to this president. Now I'm fast getting to rage.
How much rage? I find myself thinking that the thing I want most from the 2010 elections is for his party to get absolutely clobbered, even if that means a repeat of 1994. And that what I most want from 2012 is for him to be utterly humiliated, even if that means President Palin at the helm. That much rage.
Did this clown really say on national television that "I did not run for office to be helping out a bunch of you know, fat cat bankers on Wall Street"?!?!
Really, Barack? So, like, my question is: Then why the hell did you help out a bunch of fat cat bankers on Wall Street?!?! Why the hell did you surround yourself with nothing but Robert Rubin proteges in all the key economic positions in your government? Why did you allow them to open a Washington branch of Goldman Sachs in the West Wing? Why have your policies been tailored to helping Wall Street bankers, rather than the other 300 million of us, who just happen to be suffering badly right now?
Are you freakin' kidding me??? What's up with the passive president routine, anyhow, Fool? You hold the most powerful position in the world. Or maybe Rahm forgot to mention that to you. Or maybe the fat cat bankers don't actually let do that whole decision-making thing often enough that it would actually matter...
But, really, are you going to spend the next three interminable years perfecting your whiney victim persona? I don't really think I could bear that. Hearing you complain about how rough it all is, when you have vastly more power than any of us to fix it? Please. Not that.
Are you going to tell us that "I did not run for office to be shovel-feeding the military-industrial complex"? But what - they're just so darned pushy?
"...I did not run for office to continue George Bush's valiant effort at shredding the Bill of Rights. It's just that those government-limiting rules are so darned pesky."
"...I did not run for office to dump a ton of taxpayer money into the coffers of health insurance companies. It's just that they asked so nicely."
"...I did not run for office to block equality for gay Americans. I just never got around to doing anything about it."
"...I did not run for office to turn Afghanistan into Vietnam. I just didn't want to say no to all the nice generals asking for more troops."
Here's a guy who was supposed to actually do something with his presidency, and he's turned into the skinny little geek on Cell Block D who gets passed around like a rag doll for the pleasure of all the fellas with the tattoos there. He's being punked by John Boehner, for chrisakes. He's being rolled by the likes of Joe Lieberman. He calls a come-to-Jesus meeting with Wall Street bank CEOs, and half of them literally phone it in. Everyone from Bibi Netanyahu to the Japanese prime minister to sundry Iranian mullahs is stomping all over Mr. Happy.
And he doesn't even seem to realize it.
Did you see him tell Oprah that he gave himself "a good solid B+" for his first year in office? And that it will be an A, if he gets his healthcare legislation passed?
Somebody please pick me up and set me back on my chair, wouldya?
I am seriously beginning to worry that this cat is delusional. He has lopped off twenty full points from his job approval rating in less than a year's time, falling now below fifty percent. His party, once dominant in generic congressional election poll questions, is today almost even with hated Republicans in the public mind. Last month, Obama's inverted coattails (don't even ask where those go) got two Democrats clobbered running for governor in New Jersey and Virginia. The otherwise obnoxious George F. Will (very) rightly points out that in Kentucky, "a Republican candidate succeeded in nationalizing a state Senate race. Hugely outspent in a district in which Democrats have a lopsided registration advantage, the Republican won by 12 points a seat in Frankfort by running against Washington". Wow. Obama is now wrecking state senate races! What's next? Will local Republican candidates for sheriff win office just by opposing the embarrassment in the White House who chooses abysmal policies and then refuses to fight for them, lest he should ruffle any feathers?
"For Democrats, the red flags are flying at full mast," said Democratic pollster Peter Hart in a recent AP article. "What we don't know for certain is: Have we reached a bottoming-out point?"
Au contraire, Peter. Au contraire. I think anyone more sentient than a newborn amoeba can answer that question. The first thing to note is that the economy is not coming back anytime soon, if it comes back at all. Unless, of course, you're a fat cat Wall Street banker. Then you're just fine, because the Bush-Obama administration took care of you quite nicely, thanks very much. The rest of us poor slobs out here in real-world land, on the other hand, got a "jobs summit".
I can't even begin to describe how insulting Obama conducting a "jobs summit" is to me, or what an unbelievably ham-fisted piece of public relations that was for the White House, which is increasingly showing itself not just to be sickeningly regressive, but also fully inept. I think I speak for a whole lot of Americans when I say that, one year into his stewardship over a destroyed economy that was actually atomizing for at least six months before inauguration day, I don't want my president sitting around a table, running a dog-and-pony show, pretending to kick around ideas on how to generate jobs. I wanted him to have those ideas, himself, before he was inaugurated. I wanted those to be real ideas, that produce real jobs for real Americans who are really hurting. I wanted that to be, and still be, the be-all and end-all of his presidency, not some distant fourth-place priority, behind healthcare and the White House dog selection process. And, especially not some fourth-place priority behind jive healthcare reform.
Which brings us to the second answer to Mr. Hart's question. If Democrats think they'll be screwed next November because of unemployment, wait till Congress passes this healthcare monstrosity. Or doesn't. At this point, either way they're gonna get slammed for it, and rightly so.
If they don't pass anything, they will be seen as unable to govern. This perception will be quite true because they will have failed to pass a major piece of legislation, despite having 60-40 majorities in both houses of Congress and control of the presidency. It doesn't get much better than that for a governing party in the American system. But it will be true in an even more profound sense, because the whole priority structure of the Democratic agenda is wrong. Sure, people want healthcare reform right now (especially if it were to miraculously also have the virtue of being authentic healthcare reform), but what they really want, overwhelmingly, is jobs. This choice of priorities is the equivalent of, say, invading Iraq when you've been attacked by people in Afghanistan. Surely no president would be that stupid, right? Surely any political party would realize the costs of having priorities so divorced from those of the voters, right?
On the other hand, the Democrats and their hapless president are probably in worse shape if they actually pass this legislation. Especially now that it's been stripped of nearly every real progressive reform imaginable, it has become an incredibly stupid bill, from the political perspective. It will force people who can't afford it to spend a giant amount of money on lousy insurance, without any real choice to hold down costs, and it will fund this by hacking away at the Medicare budget. No wonder an insurance industry lobbyist broadcast an email last week declaring: "We WIN. Administered by private insurance companies. No government funding. No government insurance competitor."
But here's a little riddle that any sixth-grader can easily figure out, although it seems to have eluded the brain trust at the White House: If insurance companies are winning big-time, then who is doing the losing? Something tells me that if Democrats are dumb enough to pass their own legislation, voters will provide them the answer to that puzzle in November of 2010, and then again two years later. What could be stupider than saddling thirty-five million Americans with a new monthly bill that will probably represent the second or third biggest item in their budget, in exchange for crappy private sector health insurance that is unlikely to pay out when needed, and wastes a third of the dollars paid in premiums on bureaucracy and profits anyhow? Slapping big fines on them if they don't pony up for the insurance, perhaps? Yep, that's in there too.
This bill alone could mobilize legions of people to go to the polls and vote for whichever party didn't do it, and I'm pretty sure the GOP won't be shy about reminding Americans who that is. I mean, if Democrats were searching for legislation less likely to win them votes, why didn't they just bring back slavery or the debtor's prison? Why not come out for pedophilia? It would have been so much more efficient. At least they wouldn't have spent the last year looking like idiotic bunglers who, in addition to sponsoring really unpopular ideas, also inadvertently left their testicles at the coat check and have spent the last thirty years trying to find their way back to the gala.
Ah, but wait! If you order now, there's more!
As I understand it, the bill doesn't even actually force insurance companies to cover people, at least in the sense that they can charge prohibitive amounts to those with whatever they define as pre-existing conditions. You know, like the young woman who had a policy but died when she was denied cancer treatment because she had a bad case of acne as a teenager.
This will be a total train wreck for the Democratic Party. Already, the public opposes the plan by a ratio of 47 to 32 percent. And they haven't even been handed the bill for it yet. And they haven't even had their premiums skyrocket yet. And they haven't even seen insurance corporation executives buy small countries for use as second homes with the increased compensation they will be floating in. And they haven't even found out what this does to their Medicare yet. And they haven't even seen the impact on the national debt yet. And they haven't even realized that the ‘good' parts of the bill don't go into effect until FOUR YEARS from now.
You know, elite Republicans may be sociopaths, and they may be lower on the moral totem pole than your basic cannibal, but they're not stupid. I bet they're salivating at the idea that this thing passes. I bet they'd even have Olympia Snowe vote for it if necessary, just to put it over the top. They must be laughing their asses off at this gift. All they have to do is oppose it right down the line, then say "Told ya so!" at the next election, squashing the pathetic Demognats, one after the next. Hey, even if worse comes to worse and the thing eventually becomes popular, they can always wait a decade or two and become champions of the new publically beloved healthcare system - just like they did for Medicare, Social Security, civil rights, etc.
This is President Nothingburger's great gift to America, along with doing nothing about jobs, doing nothing about the Middle East, nothing about civil liberties, nothing about civil rights, and now doing nothing at Copenhagen. Regarding the latter, the world is literally on fire, and he jets in, gives a speech haranguing the delegates that "Now is not the time for talk, now is the time for action", then splits even before the vote in order to beat the snowstorm headed to the east coast that might delay him getting home to his comfy bed. I'm not kidding. You can't make this shit up, man.
This guy is killing me, though at the same time I still can't quite figure him out.
Here's what I get: This president is a corporate hack. Like Bush or Clinton, he has constituents, alright - but you and I are not on that particular list.
Here's what I don't get: He is radically tanking, at a moment when people no longer have patience for those kind of politics anymore.
Here's what I get: This president has his fingers in many pies, as he needs to, ranging from global warming to economic implosion to two wars abroad to massive federal debt.
Here's what I don't get: Why does he bother to do these things in a way that pleases no one, and only dramatically undercuts his own political standing? Why does he refuse to make anyone his enemy, thus making everyone his enemy?
Is he just massively deluded? I wouldn't have thought so, but watching the guy give himself a very good grade for 2009 - straight face and all - during the same year he's lost twenty points off his job approval rating, and at a moment when even blacks and gays are deserting him, you know, you have to wonder.
Is he happy just to be a one-term president - just to say he's been there and done that, and then sell some more books - even if he is reviled as one of the worst in history?
Maybe. But what about the rest of us?
The rest of us, indeed. It's been quite some time since anyone in the White House ever cared about that sorry pack of rabble.
Obama looked like he could've been something different. He ain't.
So this is it, folks.
Change you can believe in?
More like bullshit you can take a bath in, if you ask me.
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...


184 Comments so far
Show All"He was selected (not elected) for office"
Are you saying that 100 million USans essentially wasted their votes for the two elite candidates in Nov 2008 because the two were pre-selected for loyalty to elitevil?
It is half correct;
Obama was selected to be president
McCain was used as fodder
I agree with Buck. And it's far from the first time I've heard this suggested. Throwing in Palin was perfect. And, I have to admit, I fell for it. I should have voted third party, because I was motivated by fear of Palin "a heartbeat away." McCain didn't bother as much because he was a known entity (better the devil you know). It's comical really because thanks to Obama I do not fear a President Palin scenario. By the time Obama is through with us how much more is there to lose?
True, there are just two parties, made for and by wealthy elites. It's just that WE prefer the Republican elites. Don't ask why, just keep insisting there is no difference, that'll work out great for Sarah.
[misposted comment deleted]
"This choice of priorities is the equivalent of, say, invading Iraq when you've been attacked by people in Afghanistan. Surely no president would be that stupid, right?"
David Michael Green is one of the best, if not THE best, in the business. His editorials are consistently filled with one gem after another and reading them makes me regret that he only has time for one a week.
Regarding his statement about not getting how Obama made it look so easy to get elected just to squander the victory Americans handed him on a platter: I was the same. I could BS my way into nearly any job I interviewed for, so eloquent could I wax when sitting in the interviewee seat opposite the most hard-nosed of bosses. To the surprise of everyone (but myself) I was usually out the door after a mere six to twelve months in the workplace as my supervisors watched the veneer wear off and my incompetence quickly rise to the surface. President Obama and I might just share this same trait.
By Jove, I think Green has got it.
Eh, DMG has been doing this for months, only now he invokes childish name calling and a little bit of obscenity.
Ooh, I'm sure Obama is quaking in his handmade designer dress shoes (I guess they are, anyway).
Seriously man, grow up and try to focus on something that you can make a difference in instead of ranting and whining that the leader of the corporate hack party is acting like a corporate hack. You're getting Rush Limbaugh-esque here.
We Shall Overcome Odubya and his DEMiserepublicans. Yes, We Shall!
Gee, what if Obama has come as a martyr, knowing that if he doesn't give the masters what they want his kids will be killed, so he will be the ultimate betrayer just in order to generate enough rage to create a critical mass of energy to change the system from the bottom. Didn't he always say change must be from the bottom up?
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
Man, I wish I could get paid like Green to rant like that. I'm as long-winded as he is but I'm still not quite THAT self-indulgent. Not that his critique doesn't nail most of its topics, with the most notable exception of his assertion that Obama "is doing nothing" on civil liberties. In fact, Obama is, according to the ACLU (that fights most of the litigious battles on this front),
building a legalistic framework for future administration practitioners of torture to do so with impunity. Now that's doing something. It just isn't the right thing and it is the opposite of what Obama said he was going to do on the subject, namely obey actual law.
The most damning comment on President Oblithering is that his support among black Americans has fallen roughly forty percentage points according to some polls. I noticed this fall by the nearly complete disappearance of Obama T-shirts and baseball caps previously worn by blacks on our local commuter rail. These proud outward signs of support vanished between late October and the end of November. As with so many aspects of the black experience in this country, the significance of this is multi-dimensional and will have lasting negative effects on the DLC-ruined Democratic Party.
Young blacks are abandoning Obama because he has done NOTHING for them but help pressure them into military enlistment. Older blacks have realized he's an in-your-face "house nigger" as Malcolm X would have called him.
Middle-aged blacks who are politically savvy sense that with the already achieved failure of the first black man to become president will come a racist neo-conservative political, media and economic broad cultural backlash aimed at America's working- and under-class blacks. For more and more of them Obama is an increasingly obvious plague carrier of more high-tech Jim Crow (circa 2000) and renewed and more virulent racism.
Metal, you made a much better case for overt fascist than I did for covert organizer. As so many are pointing out on these posts, we're on our own.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
The Chinese character for chaos consists of two sub-characters. One means "danger." The other means "opportunity."
As I have pointed out on several other posts, the biggest danger we as authentic progressives face now is failure to unite until after the Democratic Party destroys itself. The biggest opportunity we have is to take the necessary time to unite and consolidate our base while the Democratic Party is still in the process of crumbling so that when it has fallen & can't get up we can offer a CLEAR AND UNIFIED alternative.
To do so we must not listen to GOP or DLC or MSM corporatist spin about which part of the electorate on whom we must focus our appeal. The Democratic Party has finished itself by listening to right-wing operatives for 30 years who constantly pushed them to reach out farther and farther to the Right to appeal to "conservative leaning" independents and now extinct paleo-conservative moderates. This non-strategy has consistently failed since 1994.
To succeed a new umbrella Progressive Unity Party must first consolidate its base, then use our campaigns to simultaneously educate and reach out to alienated Democrats AND the roughly 80 million predominantly poor & minority eligible voters in the U.S. who have been so ignored by both the Democrats & Republicans for so long that they no longer bother to vote. Those many dozens of millions of potential progressive voters for whom only our policies will effectively resonate are OUR opportunity. The Dimocrats blew their once-in-40-years opportunity this last year. America's true progressives cannot afford to waste the opportunity this now creates for us. We may never have another such chance in our lifetimes. It takes time to ramp up a movement of the kind I am describing. THE TIME TO UNITE IS NOW TO BE READY IN 2012 AND BEYOND.
Change you can believe in?
Chains we should have seen coming.
We were offered a choice of two corrupt AIPAC controlled parties.
I voted Green.
With DMG laying out the case for O to be the "little prick" and carrying on in the style of willie slick";does that mean all things bush and clinton to him will stick?what of the arse,with attachments,of his masters that he doth lick and for services rendered do he need a mick? Tony
Criticism of elites as a product for mass consumption is like a cooked meal - the people have to eat it and convert it to useful energy, or it becomes rotten wasted fodder for the compost heap. Demoks are basking in the attention lavished on them by DMG, et al. because the people aren't converting the criticism to energy/action. Try shifting all of your exchange/association away from the elite enterprises and toward your local community. Basically, away from far-flung strangers and toward your neighbors who you can trust. This is the long-term strategy for spoiling the prize of the elite enterprise. It's a cultural shift. We're building an anti-elite culture. This weakens the elites and makes it easier to cage them.
Well, you have to admit, it was a great ruse. Get an intelligent man who can actually string words together in a sentence. Someone who projects charisma. Someone who is even a minority for that symbolic effect. Get the American people to identify with him and put in him all of their hopes and dreams of peace and justice. And then, inspire the people to vote in mass numbers enough to override the rigging of electronic voting machines. And then, when he gets in, have him turn his back on the people and continue business as usual, churning out the neo-con fantasy. Usually when the Republican half of the War Party puts someone up, it's real obvious that the person is a certifiable dufus that is being controlled behind the scenes. The only reason they can win is by stealing the election. What idiot would actually vote for the dufus? But, this was brilliant. Kiss the country goodbye, friends. It's sliding down the slope with nothing to stop it. The Americans are standing on the side of the slope, too busy watching Tiger Woods and the Golddiggers. Blowback is coming and it's going to be a bitch. Don't worry, those rich corporate execs and wealthy congresspeople you've been protecting will be ok. They'll go their beautiful Caribbean homes with their money protected in off-shore banks while the rest of us perish. Ain't Amerika wonderful?
It like pro wrestling;
Republicans wear the black hats
Democrats wear the white
They take turns wearing the belt
After the show they gather to smoke fat cigars
drink french champagne
compliment each other on the night's performance
the paychecks have common origins
So we have "this little prick" and the truly sad thing about this country is that the people organizing (teabaggers) against him do so becuase they actually think this Wall St. frontman is a Marxist and they're gonna save the country from the commies. Or the usual god guns and gays. Are we living in the freakin' twilight zone or what? Then there's the corporate masters who play one side against the other.
So what's the solution? No way in hell a third party is going to win. Do we just elect wolf-killer Barbie for more of the same but with a more aggressive agenda against workers and the environment, and hope the dems learn their lesson from the beating?
"dems learn their lesson "
You're kidding right?
Or do you really believe
they are working for you
but made some honest mistakes
if so, you are blinded by faith
No Buck i don't think the dems or pubs make any honest mistakes, or are working for us. Just commenting on the idea of hoping the dem party will see the left won't just follow them because there is no alternative, which will cause them to change.
Just feeling fustrated that there isn't an alternative in this country especially when so many are still concerned with gettin them terrorists and lettin the "free market" work.
Maybe if there was an Obama-like groundswell for a candidate with some integrity like Kucinich, which then completely dies when he isn't nominated...but just like a third party winning, that won't happen either.
What's next?--Watch for the Dimocrats to try to resurect "Morning in Amerikkka" with Mr. Ice Kool Obama-Velva as the leading logo in 2012. Why not!?--it worked for the amiable dunce Reagan--and BO has just as much--if not more--money backing him up.
As far as the 2010 elections are concerned, the only principled protest avaiable to most progressives is to stay home, place a stiff clothes pin on your nose for the next 2 years, and watch as "Kontract on Amerikkka II" makes its comeback.
Poet
Ok, I don't get it. I know at least some of us saw through the whole election campaign process and came to the realization that Obama wasn't progressive enough BASED ON HIS VOTING RECORD AND HIS RHETORIC. There are some fairly educated people who continue to whine about Obama now that he has let them down. Do you really mean to say that you didn't see this coming?
Let's review:
1) voted for FISA without retroactive immunity
2) voted for continuation of the patriot act
3) didn't VOTE on several very important bills in the senate during his campaign run
4) said that "all options are on the table" with respect to Iran, meaning nukes.
5) said he didn't support gay marriage, but did support civil unions.
6) said he wanted to repeal or rework NAFTA but then told the Canadians he had no intention of doing so.
7) supports tort reform.
This was all BEFORE the election. How can people be so blind? I'm angry too, Mr. Green. Because I warned people up and down about this on every freaking message board there was asking people to look at his voting record. I went to my state caucus and stood up for Mike Gravel (since Kucinich was already out and Gravel was the only decent Democrat left). What did I get? Crickets in the audience. No, I'm sorry. You got what you deserved by voting for this man despite ALL EVIDENCE to the contrary that he was going to enact any kind of change.
Senator Gravel even warned people about this. They kept portraying him as the crazy uncle in the attic. But the man is very wise. Maybe people will FINALLY vote outside the two party system for a change next time around, but my faith in the average American has dwindled to next to nothing. Especially when such a huge portion of them still thinks Palin is qualified for anything other than the role of a Faux News talk show host.
Especially the 1st clip!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vH9SbwSQCk4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JXzGkdABVzk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DbqrJMGZL_U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ngY0zMCSfQY
the military commissions act
There are so many reasons not to have voted for this man. Every time I raised these issues, I was called a racist. My answer to them was I would have voted McKinney before Obama any day. It's not about race, it's about electing a candidate that actually represents US and not corporate america. Some people will never get it though.
Does anyone here know why the Green Party is basically non-existent in Washington State? I checked recently and they claim to be dormant. Whatever that means. Of all parties to be dormant in a left-leaning state such as Washington... why?
in other words .. "TOLD YOU SO!".
Also, you did not mention Hillary
I almost feel sorry for Obama. He seems to have lost weight; in some pictures standing next to the robust Michelle he looks more skinny than lean, wimpish rather than wiry.
Since I gave up listening to him months ago, I catch only glimpses of his speechifying or talking face now and then. Does he have a bit of a shamefaced expression sometimes?
Not that I think he's the poor manipulated man so many Obama supporters still maintain. He knows exactly what he's doing (or not doing). He hasn't forgotten all those campaign slogans. He's just surprised perhaps at being called out by so many of us and his ego is hurting.
It's that ego that has him believing what Rahm, et. al. are obviously telling him: just keep repeating those great sounding words: I-didn't-come-to-help-fat-cats, etc.
I can't believe I'm going to write this, but, with the increasing gap between Obama's tired old words and the worsening reality, I can see how Palin's inanities sound fresh and plausible to some.
Pair her with the Newt and his bright-sounding ideas and 2012 is lost for sure.
"The cynics are the Congressional Representatives, the President, his Military, the Courts, the Police, the 50 State governments, the thousands of local governments and the anti-democratic bureaucracy of this nation. I have shed my cynicism for President Obama has proven this to be true, that the government of The United Sates of America has nothing in common with the working people of this nation. And that the government of the people, by the people and for the people shall be restored only when we the people demand self-rule."
“Yes, we can” was Obama’s ironic message to us to demand democracy through the vote. It seems now that the broken hearted missed that irony."
“Yes, we can”
"People liberate themselves"
105 comments later I will express rage--at an arcane dysfunctional political system. It starts with Congressman who have to sell their souls to raise enormous amounts of money to run thirty seconds spots that lie or misinform in an attempt to play on some resentment of mine as a motivation to vote. It follows with deliberations in both chambers marked by rules of procedure that even a Ph.D in Political Science could not fully grasp but which allows moneyed interests at every turn to block anything resembling the public interest. It embodies a two party system in which left of center advocates work hard to elect a right of center president--and then have no mechanism to get rid of him. It ensures a supremely unrepresentative body like the Senate can easily block the will of 75% of the American public. When it grinds out legislation it produces two equally unpalatable alternatives-- no reform or reform that does not solve social problems but merely enriches moneyed interests. What kind of democracy is this? No democracy at all.
What a dummy Professor Green is! I quote....
'Like any good progressive, I've gone from admiration to hope to disappointment to anger when it comes to this president. Now I'm fast getting to rage.'
Professor, I am a progressive, too. But I started out with RAGE, never had any admiration or hope in the guy, and am not a dummy like you. My disappointment is in you and the other liberal dummies out there who have sat around doing nothing for the last 2 and 1/2 years except admiring and hoping. What dopes you have been!
I agree. Only, if Palin is the next president, I plan to leave the country. (I already have a plan in place.)
So many people I know (including my husband and I) have been contemplating which country to emigrate to as things get worse and worse here. Anyone know which European country has the easiest citizenship rules? :-)
Most countries it's a 5 year residency. A US born friend of mine married an Englishman
which gave her a resident alien visa. She took UK citizenship for herself and her children so they would have a foreign passport and right to abode in the EU. Most jobs in Europe don't sponsor so getting a work permit there without being married to a national is difficult. Much more difficult than here with the H1 visa's However a number of countries do allow expat citizenship petitions. For instance another friend got Irish citizenship for her sons to give them an escape route if the draft comes back or the economy really tanks. Her grandmother was Irish and that was enough. For the time being the best thing to do is to buy some property in a country that values in Euro's or perhaps Real's to start moving assets out of dollars and out of the country. You do not want to be holding US dollars when the shit really hits the fan..
If Palin's the next president I might just stick around for the laughs. There are too few of us to effect the massive changes necessary* to save our country, (and we can't stop fighting among ourselves, either) so I might as well lay back and enjoy it.
*The truly aggravating thing is that Rahm, who famously said no crisis should go to waste, wasted the universal right-to-left anger at the home-wreckers of the financial industry and failed to even begin to take back our country from the obscenely rich. If Obama truly believed he was not elected to help out fat-cat bankers, that was the time to prove it. That failure should have been the turning point for any remaining Obama cheerleaders.
And when the going gets tough she might just resign anyway. She lasted as Governor of Alaska for what, two years?
There's just no money in it.
Are as many of us as appear to be so saying really unwilling to let Professor Green follow his own trajectory to the truth? So what if he could or should have known ahead of time. What matters is that he can be moved. There are around 70 million people who habitually vote Democrat in this country. We're not going to get more of them interested in stopping that if all we do is pick on them as they come to awareness, and since around 65 million people habitually vote Republican, we are definitely going to need almost all of the Democrats to feel welcome.
But the bottom line is this: all of this rage is of no use because we on the left still have no acceptable answer to what happens when people stop voting for the mainstream Democrat. We are a very long way from having any truthful response other than "for the indefinite future, something much worse." And that, too, is going to keep people away. It's not just because we third party types are too few in number. It's also because we don't really have that many credible candidates with public service resumes that would qualify them for jobs like Governor, House, Senate, or President. People actually care about that stuff. I do myself. Having totally inexperienced people or overt oddballs seeking to be in charge of the nuclear arsenal, or even just a multi-trillion dollar budget that effects every element of everyone's lives, is at least as frightening as having Sarah Palin. We have a lot of work to do, and there still aren't many people willing to do it, let alone actually doing it.
Whether your plan involves running successful candidates, or building institutions that can successfully influence seated legislators, or some combination of both, what everyone needs to do is start organizing their own locales. Take a look at what they do with Progressive Dane. They win a lot of elections without being hung up on party affiliation. There are other places with similar operations going on -- I live in one. You can, too. But you have to do it yourself. The super-rich are not coming to save us.
Steve
Cicero: "Freedom is participation in power."
I don't know where you're getting your 70 million and 65 million figures. In '04, which saw one of the highest turnouts of Democrats in many years (prior to the electoral demographic pc freak-fest when people were desperate to buy the Obama fantasy in '08) the split was 59 million Republicans and 56 million Dims. There was roughly another 80 million eligible voters who did not vote. That is a more typical recent election result than the anti-Bush II fueled Obama con-job.
I've never heard you mention either this 80 million of mostly poor and minority eligible non-voters or the possibility for a true progressive Party to reach out to them along with reaching out to the soaring number of alienated Democrats.
As to your typical CAN'T CANT about "we don't really have that many credible candidates with public service resumes that would qualify them for jobs like Governor, House, Senate, or President..." and "Having totally inexperienced people or overt oddballs seeking to be in charge of the nuclear arsenal, or even just a multi-trillion dollar budget that effects every element of everyone's lives"--just who do you think was running the country between 2000 and January 2009? Have you paid attention to the kind of thoroughly incompetent Republicans and DLC Dimocrats running their States and localities into this and that ditch over the last 15 years, let alone the neo-lib/neo-con scuttling of the entire national economy?
How is ANY informed authentic progressive going to be worse at any elected or key appointee position in government than
Bill Clinton, Robert Rubin, Phil Gramm, James Inhofe, Max Baucus, Joe Lieberman, Lawrence Summers, Mitch McConnell, Tom Delay, Dick Cheney, Alberto Gonzalez, John Ashcroft (ever taken a look at HIS "credentials?"), former Governor George W. Bush, Rod Blagojevich, Arnold Schwartzenegger, Senator John D. Rockefeller, Newt Gingrich, MIC corporate VP wifey-poo Nancy Pelosi, every other Dimocratic bitch and bastard who voted us into Iraq, voted to eliminate habeas corpus and posse comitatus, voted to electronically surveill every aspect of our lives and Bill of Rights be damned. Who are you spewing your defeatist bullshit for? Who do you really work for? I think you're a lying PR operative for the DLC or the GOP, but either way, your message of defeatism and hopelessness is unwelcome on this site. Too many of us have our backs up against the wall to put up with goddamn Rethuglican/Dimocrust business as usual anymore and every month that passes now more and more Americans are going to feel the EXACT same way. If you won't help organize a united response then get the fuck out of the way, loser.
Dude, you have to take a breath. You've read me here enough to know that I've been on successful campaign committees for third party candidates and that I'm a successful non-party enrolled candidate myself. If you're looking for someone to get the fuck out of your way, I shouldn't be the person you're yelling at. I'm one of the tiny handful of people in this country who has figured out how to make this work, and being successful at it definitely involved registration drives for new voters and efforts designed to activate registered but inactive voters. And that was my first point -- there is way too much hate in this forum, and in all the progressive forums I scan. Progressives don't vote for hate. That's Sarah Palin's crowd. Our people are not looking for flame throwers. Informed, dynamic and steadfast, yes, but not fire-breathing. If you want to cultivate progressive votes, you have to study the qualities progressives demand of the candidates they not just support in principle, but make those extra efforts like donating and getting out to the polling place and vote. And that was part of my second point -- not too many of us have done that yet, and figuring out the math that's operative in any particular endeavor is part of successful organizing.
My math, that you excoriate, includes the voters who vote habitually but not in Presidential elections, which is the single race in which most people feel their vote doesn't count. Many millions of those people vote in every local race, many of them in all or most state legislature races, referenda, etc. They are the ones most likely to be receptive to becoming active for votes for higher office, because they're voters. And the overwhelming majority of those who are liberal-to-progressive in their leanings vote for Democrats. When you have limited resources, you start with the segments that can be turned around easily and cheaply. That means regular local voters come first, which makes additional sense because those are the "winnable" races and they're also good resume builders for runs at higher office. Long-term disenchanted people who never vote at all come much later, after you've gotten a good program up and running, have more personnel and money to work with, etc.
Even disenfranchised voters have issues regarding presentation and perceived competence. I'm not arguing that the Reps in power have NOT been incompetent. But you can't get around the fact that an awful lot of people in this country don't perceive them that way, despite everything that's crumbling down around us and in most of their own individual lives. If you want to play elections, you have to learn how they work. A guy in a torn t-shirt that says "Free Your Mind" whose scraggly hair looks like it hasn't been washed in a week, and whose public service resume includes nothing but his local chapter of the "Justice for Cuba Committee" will definitely be conveying a good "it's The Suits that got us into this mess" message, but he's also screaming out "symbolic candidacy" and nothing that would inspire more than the tiniest handful of those 80 million non-voters to change their habits.
You don't have to sell the concept to me, nor do you have to accuse me of anything. I'm out there doing it, for 7 years now. It's working. If you're doing something that's working much better, share it with the group, in a nice tone of voice, because in theory we're trying to gather ourselves together, not drive ourselves apart. Right?
Steve
Whenever I read Green these days, I think of the Biblical passage, "Calm your anger and forget your rage. It only leads to sorrow." As satisfying as it might be to unleash, I'm reminded of a Zizek passage in his recent book First as Tragedy, Then as Farce, "Instead of such impotent acting-out, we should control our fury and transform it into an icy determination to think - to think things through in a really radical way, and to ask what kind of a society it is that renders such blackmail possible." Slavoj Zizek, First as Tragedy, Then as Farce, p. 17.
Such thinking things through to a really radical conclusion is what is lacking here. Let's begin by sweeping aside the details of the individual regressive decisions and focus on the big picture. We are still in the midst of a massive economic crisis and one I believe is probably more fundamental than otherwise solid thinkers like Krugman and Galbraith imagine. In order to restore the profit margins of the last few years, the corporate powers must employ a brand like Obama to enforce new labor discipline while minimizing social disruption. Reining in soaring budget deficits will not be achieved with the conventional instruments. In order to pull out of this crisis, the ruling elite will have to wage a vicious class war against the middle and working class. The capitalists in the U.S. and other countries will seek to brutally cut back on social security, free health care, free education as well as all other elements that make for a semi-civilized society. How can they be expected to worry about the fate of the working class when they have profit margins to be mended?
Once seen in this context, his actions start to make sense. What appears to Green as bizarre personal weaknesses are simply rational (and effective) decisions in favor of the interests of his class. We need to join President Evo Morales from Bolivia in placing the blame for the current crisis where it belongs - on capitalism: "The real cause of climate change is the capitalist system. If we want to save the earth then we must end that economic model." In words whose irony will ring down the centuries, Hugo Chavez said, "If the climate were a bank, they would have bailed it out already."
If you read carefully, you will see that it is not just the death of the illusion of Obama that is sparking Green's rage, but the death of the illusion of a democratic America.
You are absolutely right.
Thank you
The rich fat cats will not retire to their homes on the islands.
The country is bankrupt. The country is funding a military it can no longer afford.
The country has not created new sustainable industry and this is causing massive bankrupcy within the citizenry.
The environment is damaged and becoming hostile to human life.
AND OBAMA AND HIS FAMILY, and the families of the people running the show live on the same planet.
If you want to see Obama and those in power lose this game, just do nothing.
Obama himself said we are on a train about to hit a wall.
Obama and those running the show are on the same train. There is only one train. They can't get off the train simpy because they have money and power.
The Obama plan is simple. Mass suicide, and make a profit until it happens.
Professor Green, surprisingly misses the point here. We are all being played. There is absolutely NO difference between the democraps and the repuglicans. None on any of the important issues. Monetary policy, foreign policy, health care or constitutional government. The Republicans screw us with Bush and we get all tuned up and see the democrats as the "solution" The democrats screw us and now the republicans are the solution. NEITHER of them are the solution because they both have the same masters and they aren't us. The solution is for EVERY voter to ignore all the electioneering bullshit and vote for the candidate the best reflects their interests. They ALL have Websites you don't have to watch any of the TV bullshit, just research and vote based on what YOU see and want. Forget all this crap about "he can't win so it's wasting a vote" Thats what they want you to think. If enough people vote for him he'll win. That candidate WILL NOT be a democrat or a republican. That's how we break the back of the mess. We need 3rd party majorities in both houses and a 3rd party president.
Maybe an organized movement for instant runnoff voting would get somewhere as far as giving a third party a chance. Can anyone really see enough people self organizing to vote for someone outside the system, ie virtually no media exposure and no corporate millions for their campaign?
Sorry, don't mean to say what you just said not to say, but i just don't see it ever happening, especially in this country. Like with civil rights, or workers rights, taking it to the streets is probably the only solution.
approval voting would be way better. I say approval voting with no more primaries.
www.approvalvoting.org
what do you think, guys?
I like it. The choices we are given are a crime and then the 'spoiled vote' thing makes it hopeless.
The incumbents won't allow it. They work constantly to strengthen their parties' grip! Everything from gerrymandered districts to congress' rulemaking etc.
Proposals to fix politics, thru the political system, reminds me of a time when I was about 7 years old my younger brother found a little jar of baby teeth in my mothers' bureau. He took them and put them all under his pillow, expecting to get a quarter for each tooth, from the tooth fairy. I don't mean to imply you are so foolish! it is just a funny story I cannot forget, and it may be true that you cannot trick the parties into reducing their own power. It's not going to be that easy.
Obama was the least acceptable corporate stooge, but Hillary would have been acceptable as well. None of the picked candidates were going to buck the powers that be. The final looting of the Empire is unfolding.
Green has given us a marvelous self-portrait--loudmouthed, arrogant, and puerile. Here is a "perfisser" who has never run for office, never won any position, never had to battle the collective inertia of politics, never done a darned thing except lecture and blog, berating someone who at least is standing in the trenches. Sure, the health care bill is not the best, but if it passes Obama will have done what no other president for at least the last 50 years was able to do. Sure, there was no real accomplishment in Jokenhagen, but that is because the real action is not global but very local--the two super-emitting superpowers, the US and China, are the ones who have to agree and act--and that, at least, was recognized.
Anyone who would even consider having a bimbo like Palin take over as a way of "punishing" Obama and the Democrats is beyond redemption, a silly, irrational, incoherent little boy.
I completely agree with your comments, Dayahka. Anyone who would gleefully punish the entire country with Palin, or some other fascist because Obama hasn't met every dream he had to clean-up the mess of the last thirty years is beyond redemption. I, too, am disappointed, but, as a friend pointed out to me yesterday, FDR's first attempts at social progress were incremental and then refined. I wish Obama had more of FDR's fire, but he is living in a world controlled in great part by what used to be fringe right-wing radicals and he has to work with what he has: a weak, rightward leaning Congress and an gullible,ignorant public.