Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Sorry State of the Union
The state of the union is just miserable, no matter how President Obama sugarcoats it. He will claim that progress has been made in stabilizing the markets, increasing national security and advancing toward meaningful health care reform, but he will be wrong on all three counts.
What he will be right about is that none of these problems were originally of his creation, and that the opposition party wants to exacerbate rather than solve any of them - believing, as they do, in that destructive maxim of desperate losers who find their salvation in the stumbles of the winners.
There is no doubt that Obama and his party represent the lesser evil, but it is deeply disturbing to have to defend the leaders of our nation in those terms. They were supposed to lead us to peace, but as the cables from the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, printed in The New York Times on Monday, make absolutely clear, the escalation in Afghanistan is tantamount to a disaster without end. Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry, a retired lieutenant general who was previously the top American commander in Afghanistan, warned: "Sending additional forces will delay the day when Afghans will take over, and make it difficult, if not impossible, to bring our people home on a reasonable timetable."
Obama distracted progressives with a grand crusade for health care reform that reasserted the fundamental fallacy of the previous health reform effort of the Clinton years: Give the insurance companies a captive universal market under the absurd illusion that we can control costs without undermining their greed with a competitive government-run option.
The same is the case with the collapse of the economy, as Obama shamefully continued the Bush administration's mugging of U.S. taxpayers by throwing trillions of dollars at the Wall Street bandits who caused the financial meltdown. Meanwhile, 7 million Americans have lost their jobs and 15 million families owe more on their homes than they are worth.
Someday our president, whom I still regard as a decent and well-intentioned politician, will have to confront the demons of that fatal opportunism that led him to turn over the economy to the likes of Lawrence Summers and Timothy Geithner, who can most charitably be described as hugely successful Wall Street pimps. Obama knows of Summers' devilish role, during his time in the Clinton administration, in pushing the radical deregulation of the markets that the president blamed last week for our economic debacle. And he is aware that the TARP inspector general is hot on Geithner's heels for his role, as head of the New York Fed, in the funneling of $62 billion dollars through AIG to Goldman Sachs and the other bonus payout alchemists.
But there is no indication from the carefully orchestrated leaks of his State of the Union speech that Obama is truly set to reverse course. Rhetoric about the "fat cat" bankers aside, his policies represent more of the same. There will be some hokey gestures of support for the disappearing middle class, but at the heart of his new budget proposal are cuts in needed domestic spending for education, nutrition, air traffic control and just about every other worthwhile domestic program. But there are no cuts for the military budget that already makes up 60% of the federal government's discretionary spending and is comparable to the total military budget for the rest of the world's nations combined.
Budget director Peter Orszag, who is overseeing those cuts, is, like Summers and Geithner, a disciple of former Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, whose radical deregulatory policies brought us to this point. Orszag's freeze on domestic spending, projected for the rest of Obama's term, will reduce the domestic budget to its lowest percentage in 50 years. That portion of the discretionary budget is already so small that the proposed cuts will save a scant $10 billion to $15 billion next year-chump change compared to the $145 billion in bonuses for Wall Street's high rollers dispensed after a year of massive national suffering that they engineered.
Shame on Obama for now telling us after wasting many trillions on Wall Street and the Pentagon, that he will now seek to balance the biggest indebtedness in U.S. history not by cutting from that greasy pork but rather into the bone of our civic life, found in funding for schools and other desperately needed social services. That is the opposite of a New Deal for ordinary folks in need of their government's assistance more than at any other time since the days of that last great Democratic president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Will we ever have another?
- Posted in
175 Comments so far
Show All"... whom I still regard as a decent and well-intentioned politician ..."
All of the points that Scheer makes in this article throw this line right out the window. I really wish these former Obama cheerleaders would just let it go.
Will I watch the speech or not? Big Brother is going to make another Big Speech -- Big Deal!! Just this once, though, I wish they would put the teleprompter right in front of him so I don't have to get nauseous watching his head bounce from side to side.
Samalabear, that certainly is the phrase that jumps out at you.
First of all, "decent politician" is an oxymoron if I ever heard one.
Second, he IS just a politician; not a Visionary Leader, a Champion of the People, a Good Role Model, a Compassionate Christian, or any of the other things he acted like he was. He's just a slimy, lowly, backroom-deal-making politician and all he cares about are other politicians and political victories. He's completely forgotten that there are People in the world.
Yup, that's the part that caught my eye too. "Decent and well-intentioned" people tend to do the right thing most of the time.
Obama is a graduate of the Chicago School of politics. His economic 'advisors' are graduates are from the Chicago School of Economics.
Both just sat by as the final nail was driven into the coffin of 'democracy' in the US, as planned.
Obama is a blatant opportunist. He is doing exactly what he was hired to do. And that is to stage manage the Collapse until the real puppet, probably Palin, can be appointed President. Then the real looting will begin.
Yep. That's about how I see it. I sometimes wonder whether the delay is just meant to soften us up before the final shoe drops and the fun really begins or whether it is to give time to DARPA to perfect the new robotic soldiers that will be able to mow protestors/rioters down in the streets without remorse.
The Palin thing has been the most interesting aspect of this. Like Obama, pretty much came out of nowhere -- suddenly front and center. How much did McCain really have to do with choosing her? No matter what else anyone might think of McCain -- and I am certainly not a defender of his -- this choice of VP was very, very odd.
Thanks for raising the out of nowhere point. Obama, Palin, Brown from MA (and probably many others about whom I'm unaware.)
But I must disagree with your statement that the choice is 'very, very odd.' It shouldn't take more than a couple of brain cells to realize that the out-of-nowhere's were and are chosen (and funded, and owned) by the monied elite. Everything the out-of-nowhere's say and do will be to serve the elite. There is nothing commendable about that.
Yep, he's going to turn things around on the backs of the poor and working class. Personally I am afraid. I am on fixed income, cannot work, and can be cut off at the knees at anytime. Obama is making the legacy of the Chimp look good. I read a comment this morning that Obama is even talking like the Chimp. WTF, he's already has his ears and flag pin!
Yeah, thanks to Barrage Obomber, going SOWT (Still On the Wrong Track); and nothing left unblown!
Again, providing cover and giving Obama a pass.
So much for holding him accountable--much less calling him out. There is ALWAYS a qualifier, critism is ALWAYS couched in some apologetic rationale, the blame is ALWAYS deflected--and until the confrontation isn't sheepishly sugarcoated, it is the RIGHT WHO WILL BENEFIT from populist outrage.
The same ones always demanding a progressive movement are sabotaging it with dissembling.
Did I also hear that foreign aid wouldn't be touched? You know who is the greatest recepient of US foreign aid? Israel. So, that means that US taxpayer money will go to provide for the health care of those Israelis building settlements on occupied land before it goes to feed a jobless, homeless family in the US.
Yeah, let that get out.
Something to write a letter to the editors of our local papers. Post signs on the streets! Hand out a short, clear message with a few details and websites.
Can't do it. Don't want to be labelled "antisemite".
"He will claim that progress has been made in stabilizing the markets, increasing national security and advancing toward meaningful health care reform, but he will be wrong on all three counts. What he will be right about is that none of these problems were originally of his creation"
Wrong Mr. Scheer. Health Care was entirely his creation. No one asked for it. About 5% of the US thought it was the #1 priority. He created the mess that will stop real health care reform. And he is the one that refused to allow any participation by Republicans so your charge of "they don't wanty to solve"
As to the economy, you are correct, he did not create this mess. But he has also done nothing to solve it. By his inaction he has worsened and lenthened this recession. Oh! Thats right, you boys told me its over!! Watch as it double dips and gets no better.
His spending freeze is window dressing.
I don't consider calling "Shame" while apologizing for this failure to be helpful.
BUSHWARICO! Franklin, he's no FDR!!
Obama kept repeating during the "debates" with Clinton that he was AGAINST a spending freeze on any segment of the economy. "We need to take a scalpel, not a HATCHET"...blah, blah, blah:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/01/26/obama_campaigned_against_spending_freeze.html
The Republicans will have a field day with this flip-flop.
It's time for Obama to dump Summers, Geithner, Rahm and hit the "refresh" button on his administration.
If he had any brains/guts he'd hire Elizabeth Warren to be his chief economic advisor.
Maybe his brains are in Darth Cheney's body.
Elizabeth Warren for President! Warren v. Palin debate, can you just see it?
Shock Doctrine. Demographic Collapse. Human Die Back. Put THAT in your speech and smoke it Barry.
Robert Scheer you are decent man with a long history of work. Barry is not our "guy". He is our executioner.
You mention Larry Summers again. This man orchestrated Demographic Collapse in Russia acting as Klinton's Neolib emissary in '93, "to help them out". Larry is going "to help us out" too, out of our lives and into DEATH for his richfilth animal masters.
It changes things a bit when your body and the bodies of your children are MARKED as burnt offerings by Barry for his richfilth animal masters.
Do not stand with our ENEMIES Robert. Things are going to become uglier than anything Americans have ever seen, except for folks like Chris Hedges and he's been living with nightmares for longer than a human should.
Robert, do you wake up in the morning sick in your stomach with fear so you can't eat or you'll throw up? How long do you think you could live like that?
Yes tonight he will go before the American people and spout his gibberish about how we must all work together, then in the morning you will hear on CNN and FOX NEWS how 55% of the American people agree that we do need to cut our throats even more! The hopers keep on hoping no matter how many times they get kicked in the teeth! What a bunch of MORONS!
We have got to get a grip on this gov gone wild--imagine how our image is suffering as we speak--the world was as ready for some drastic changes as we the people of these united states(wtpotus) were, but so were wtpoe(=we the people of earth)This second group trumps the first because it is a larger number. DANGER! Our final warning to the traitors of our American ideals. If this sick and sorrowful group of wicked individuals running the show at present get back to your old job, and get out of the way for real leadership. A Governance that is responsive to the citizen over the vendor.
First Clinton removed Glass-Steagal, the bill for removal put forward by the moronic Republicans House and Senate majority, setting the stage for the ruination of the economy.
Then Bush illegally invades Iraq increasing the number of terrorists tenfold making us less safe than ever in the history of this country.
Now, Obama, with his ilk of Summers and Geithner, is continuing that economic fall and in addition to that, he back room deals with big pharma and big medicine, and refuses to even let single payer advocates to the table.
Yep, the State of the Union, with respect to the economy, security and healthcare, is not too stately.
"First Clinton removed Glass-Steagal..."
Not true.
In fact, the Clinton Adminstration fought against repeal of Glass-Steagall. Clinton signed the bill because it had a veto-proof majority.
"Not true.
In fact, the Clinton Adminstration fought against repeal of Glass-Steagall. Clinton signed the bill because it had a veto-proof majority."
Sorry to burst your bubble, Perry logan, but it IS true.
independent minded, Perry Logan is right. And I always blamed Clinton for signing it. The partners in crime are listed below:
Glass-Steagall repeal Senate vote- 90-8 for, brief recap
REPUBLICANS FOR (52): Abraham, Allard, Ashcroft, Bennett, Brownback, Bond, Bunning, Burns, Campbell, Chafee, Cochran, Collins, Coverdell, Craig, Crapo, DeWine, Domenici, Enzi, Frist, Gorton, Gramm (Tex.), Grams (Minn.), Grassley, Gregg, Hegel, Hatch, Helms, Hutchinson (Ark.), Hutchison (Tex.), Inhofe, Jeffords, Kyl, Lott, Lugar, Mack, McConnell, Murkowski, Nickles, Roberts, Roth, Santorum, Sessions, Smith (N.H.), Smith (Ore.), Snowe, Specter, Stevens, Thomas, Thompson, Thurmond, Voinovich and Warner.
DEMOCRATS FOR (38): Akaka, Baucus, Bayh, {{{{BIDEN}}}}, Bingaman, Breaux, Byrd, Cleland, Conrad, Daschle, Dodd, Durbin, Edwards, Feinstein, Graham (Fla.), Hollings, Inouye, Johnson, Kennedy, Kerrey (Neb.), Kerry (Mass.), Kohl, Landrieu, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Lincoln, Moynihan, Murray, Reed (R.L), Reid (Nev.), Robb, Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer, Torricelli and Wyden.
REPUBLICANS AGAINST(1): Shelby.
DEMOCRATS AGAINST(7): Boxer, Bryan, Dorgan, Feingold, Harkin, Mikulski and Wellstone.
NOT VOTING: 2
REPUBLICANS (2): Fitzgerald (voted present) and {{{{MCCAIN}}}}
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
"There is no doubt that Obama and his party represent the lesser evil, but it is deeply disturbing to have to defend the leaders of our nation in those terms."
This one sentence destroys your credibility.
Is our war effort up or down, overall? Are Gitmo, Baghram, etc., closed? Have all detainees been charged and tried, or released? Has habeas corpus been restored? Does rendition continue? Has gov't "transparency" been restored? Have admitted war criminals been prosecuted? Have trillions of dollars been given, lent or guaranteed to the banks with no strings attached? Is Obama supporting anything remotely approaching single-payer, as the overwhelming majority want?
Get it through your dense-as-neutronium skull:
Obama is not the lesser of two evils. He is simply the same evil, packaged in a way that we (by "we" I mean "you" and other neuron-deficient sheep like you) will tolerate. W's Aw-shucks cowboy shit wore thin, and the suave urban hipster stepped right in.
Sure, I resorted to name calling. But I am so bloody frustrated...does Obama have to eat a live, shrieking child at the the SOTU tonight for people to see WTF is happening? Or will the progressives (sic) simply point out BHO didn't actually DIGEST the child...he regurgitated the body parts, wiped his chin and promised that he's really on our side, and that the cuts in aid to normal (non-elite or the political class folks) he's proposing tonight are for our own good--
So, CD, do you post these idiocies to draw attention to the idiocy? Or do you collectively believe the apologists in the MSM?
Color me cynical, but take off the goddamn reverse-optic rose-colored glasses first, so I can clock you properly in the face. [sarcasm, obviously, since this is cyberspace]
"'There is no doubt that Obama and his party represent the lesser evil, but it is deeply disturbing to have to defend the leaders of our nation in those terms.'
This one sentence destroys your credibility."
Let me get this straight. You disagree with Scheer's assertion that Obama and the Democrats are less evil than the alternative. In other words--this is logically equivalent--you think that things would be NO WORSE than they are now if McCain and the Republicans were in charge.
You're not cynical, you're just dumb as a box of rocks.
Really?
You think that Obama's embrace of McCain's policy proposals makes Obama the lesser of 2 evils?
Pray tell, why?
And don't give us your regurgitated partisan talking points and buzzwords--all it does is breed resent.
There is one reason why we might still be glad we did not get McCain. So far there is not an Iran war. Perhaps had McCain won, he would have followed up on his rhetoric and started that war. And if so, it might have been a disaster as big as Iraq and Afghanistan put together. Of course, like everybody even McCain does not know what McCain would have done.
You can't be the lesser of two evils if you are the same as the other guy.
Yeah, man. 'Zactly what I meant. And I ticked off JUST A FEW of the reasons. (War, torture, looting the treasury, etc.)
Can't you read?
And if you can, please elucidate where you think I'm wrong.
And if you can't, try to learn something.
I voted for BHO, hoping we might get a few things (no torture, for one).
What a sucker I was. No more.
But unless you can refute what I say, you'll just have to concede, that, well, you're still sucking, yourself.
I await your response, but won't be surprised when it doesn't show, or fails to address the points.
I think Obama's destroying the progressive movement. While even I think there are more important (and less symbolic) issues such as ending the Wars and re-establishing our Constitutional rights, if you really believed that progressives had a shot at changing for the better our Country, it is a hugh loss.
We've had three bad Presidents now in a row, and I don't think the Country can recover from 7 more years of Obama.
And yes, I did vote for him. I did contribute to his campaign and I did rejoice on election night.
Well, SOMEBODY is certainly as dumb as a box of rocks.
It's not the puffin, though.
· Yr Obd't Servant
It's impossible, literally, to say what things would be be like if McCain had been elected. All anyone can do is speculate, project probable scenarios from past statements and intentions from the Repugs and McCain. We have a pretty good idea what things MIGHT be like, but no one can say for sure, obviously. Though we all have our private crystal balls, and mine is better than yours, etc.
What we do know is that "things" are very much the same as they were from 2002-2008 under you-know-who. And McCain wanted to make all that worse. But Obama has in many respects also made it worse by not correcting ANY of it. So, it's reasonable to say, according to my time-travelling crystal ball, that Things are most likely the same now as they would have been under a McCain fascist administration. OK, maybe McCain would be ramping up the disaster in Iraq to even more insane levels and "not paying attention to Afghanistan," except to routinely bomb it with drones as Obama does and dig it ever deeper into permanent poverty and chaos, as Obama is doing.
We'd have no worse a "health care" bill under McCain than we do with Obama, even if there'd been no bill at all. Because that's what we have now, especially if the festering piece of crap under consideration passes, whether Senate or House version. McCain would have most likely continued the Bush initiated bail-out of Wall St. or suffer the wrath of our corporate gods, which wouldn't help his reelection chances any. So, saying things would be worse under a McCain administration doesn't stand up to respectable crystal ball scrutiny.
(comment removed)
You are funny! And right!
I feel your frustration with these fools. But, you know, people like this will be the last to get it. We can't allow ourselves to waste energy arguing with them. Or, they do get it and are simply trolls.
Anyone who has been paying attention can plainly see: Democrats are now far, far to the right of Republicans of 35-40 years ago. The lesser evil strategy that the two-party party has been promoting all along has taken us onto this slide towards fascism, where $big money$ makes all the rules and the rest of us obey or suffer. Obama received far more corporate money than did Bush and certainly more than McCain. Do these Obama apologists think he was propped up by corporations only to then pull the rug out from under their feet? Obama knows what his job is. We are no longer in Kansas!
Let us unite. We must destroy the Democratic Party and replace it with a true progressive one. I'm sick and tired of my money being used to fatten profits of the incredibly rich and to kill innocent children for profit and career of fat cats and politicians.
It's simple, it's elegant. Vote for candidate whose record and achievements are truly progressive. Otherwise, we keep on sliding to the right. It's a fact.
Support and grow your local Green Party. If you can't find them, start your own chapter.
Contact: www.gp.org
rvrwalker and others: I've reached the conclusion that, as between Obama and Bush, Obama is indeed the greater evil. "Progressives for Obama" like Scheer and most of the Nation crowd should realize this on their own premise that progressive policy only happens when masses of people PUSH for that policy. When Bush and the rest of his evil minions were in power, masses were acting to PUSH an anti-war agenda, an anti-Wall Street agenda. Now, with "one of us" in power, they lie back and wait for "him" to carry out the progressive agenda they tell themselves he was elected to do: "shame" him when he doesn't do so but don't threaten him at all because....well, he's the lesser evil and someday somewhere and somehow (over the rainbow) he's going to have an epiphany; I mean after all he's been in office "only" a year and FDR and JFK etc. didn't become liberal after their first years; and tonight at the State of the Union he might make a Checker's speech of mea culpa and pledge to change course and blah, blah, blah.
When I read the artical, I felt a strong urge to rail against the stupidity of "a decent and well-intentioned politician". Perhaps I was about to have a rant on my own. Now that I read your post it gave me a laugh and I realized that I dont need to.
Meeting of the Angry Geezer Club, tonight at 8. Table A reserved for those who live alone and mutter to themselves. Table B reserved for those who scream anonymously online at opinions that are not their own. Be there or be square.
..."our president, whom I still regard as a decent and well-intentioned politician..."
If Mr. Scheer regards Barak Obama, who has stolen billion$ from the poor and working class of America and awarded it to the aristocracy and who, with full intention expanded a war for empire that will cause thousands of deaths as a decent man, exactly what would one have to do to be considered indecent?
Following his logic, why do we have robbers and murderers in jail? They, too, must be decent and well-intentioned. And without O's grander goals?
Is marketing such a disabling element in our culture that sugar-coated paeans supercede recognition of evil actions and disguise premeditated acts of violence as good intent?
>>>>>>>Following his logic, why do we have robbers and murderers in jail? They, too, must be decent and well-intentioned. And without O's grander goals?
You forget the axiomatic credo of the power elite that "all men are created equal, true, it's just that some are created 'more equal' than others". Following this dictum, the power elite have no problem with the reality that offenses they commit that would land the rabble in prison for multiple life terms are freely forgiven at the highest levels of law and even encouraged because, in the long run, the power elite are furthering the interests of our great nation, not to mention conveniently lining their own pockets with billions of $$$$$'s.
Just leave me out of this "Union".
There is no way Obama can be right even on who is to blame for the mess. Scheer can crow about Obama inheriting the mess that wasn't his creation to begin with and that the opposition only wants to worsen it but since Obama is over one year into his office, that is irrelevant. What is relevant is that Obama and his loyal supporters made it clear that he intends to keep the mess and silently make it messier. That alone makes it clear that Obama is not a decent or well-intentioned politician despite Scheer's fallacious thinking. If Obama was a decent and well-intentioned politician, he and his loyal supporters would not lie and make excuses such as fear of losing elections for not being tough enough. A well intentioned and decent Obama would not be giving glib talk about reducing the deficits while increasing them behind our backs via increased military spendings and givaways to Wall Street. A well intentioned and decent Obama would not be installing and vigorously defending a Wall Street trojan horse Tim Geithner nor would he be counting on his followers to defend his poor economic choices and policies by shifting the blame on the little guy and spinning Gandhi's quote on change. Obama may be nice looking and have a lovely family but that does not excuse him for his actions.
scheer sez: "... he will now seek to balance the biggest indebtedness in U.S. history not by cutting from that greasy pork but rather into the bone of our civic life ..."
***
As a surgeon, Obomber leaves something to be desired.
The "scalpel, not a hatchet" guy now apparently plans to save the patient using only a shovel and a six-foot pile of dirt.
I'm sure Obama is bummed that he won't get to filet Social Security, yet. He's looking for all the world like Reagan's 8th term.
Regarding the new wisdom that the healthcare brawl was a distraction, I disagree. It is a victory that we have so far blocked what Scheer says would have given "the insurance companies a captive universal market under the absurd illusion that we can control costs without undermining their greed..." If that is the case, and I believe it is, then Obama's defeat was a victory for us captives. In my booklet, that pretty much cancels out the idea that he and I are on the same side.
And with regard to stimulus spending, Mr. Scheer, or some other mainstream liberal reporter, should look into the $19bn of stimulus spent upgrading medical IT. I just read that for the first time in awhile outsourcing to India is increasing. I can't help but think it has been stimulated by the expenditure which will reduce medical costs by setting up a universal record keeping system that can be run, more cheaply, out of India. Americans will lose jobs working doctor's front offices, back offices, transcription and high-end jobs such as radiologist reading of x-rays and MRI scans. How odd that stimulus money was used to create the means for the loss of those jobs. Maybe not so odd when so much money went to big IT firms and Indian outsourcing companies that supported this president.
"He's looking for all the world like Reagan's 8th term."
Exactly. More people need to say this. His praise of Reagan was more significant than almost anything else he said on the campaign trail.
I actually feel sorry for Robert Scheer. He is so desperately in denial when he could use his indignation to help people see beyond this fraud.
Pandering to those who contribute to GROSS injustice is not a sign of integrity.
Scheer, like so many liberals, still clings to delusions about Obama and the Democrats.
The "lesser of two evils" is still evil.
Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Somalis, Yemenis, Haitians, Filipinos, Hondurans, Nigerians, Congolese, Colombians, Palistinians, and so many others really don't care that the bombs and bullets killing them are now supplied by President Obama and a majority Democratic Party governmnet.
Neither do Americans out of work, with homes foreclosed, on food stamps, and lacking health care.
Actions and effective policies which care for our Commons, based on empathy and compassion, are all that truly matter, not party nor ideology nor the color of a President's skin.
Scheer gets up every morning a parrots the expected script just like the film Groundhog Day did. Another Dem apologetic ad nausea.