EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama’s Meager Pitch Meets a Brick Wall
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S State of the Union address was a reminder of why so many Americans invested so much hope in this man - and why he often makes us want to scream. There it all was again - the sheer decency, the intelligence, the plea for an appreciation of complexity, the call to higher purpose combined with feeble particulars, and the signature pursuit of impossible common ground.
"What the American people hope,'' he said, "what they deserve - is for all of us, Democrats and Republicans, to work through our differences, to overcome the numbing weight of our politics.''
But this just isn't in the cards, no matter how much the president wishes it. The Republican response to his high-mindedness was the same tactic the GOP has been successfully deploying all year: total obstruction.
Obama made a strategic mistake in framing the problem as "the numbing weight of our politics,'' as if the problem were "politics'' in general. It isn't. The problem is a president with one set of remedies to a dire economy downturn, and Republicans who simply won't play, even when he meets them more than halfway.
Vermont's independent senator Bernie Sanders put it well. "In order to dance, you need a dance partner, and there ain't no dance partner out there.''
When Obama boasted of all the tax cuts he had delivered - the preferred Republican remedy for everything - there were cheers from the Democratic side of the aisle, while Republicans sat in stony silence. "I thought I'd get some applause on that one,'' he teased, looking over at the Republican seats.
Despite his conciliatory gestures, Republicans oppose his jobs plan, they oppose his bipartisan commission to reduce the deficit (a conservative favorite); they may even reject his plan to shift $30 billion in repaid bank-bailout funds to help small business.
And that's only half the problem. With unemployment at 10 percent and still rising, Obama's proposals are too meager to make much of a dent. "The House has passed a jobs bill,'' he said. "I urge the Senate to do the same . . . I want a jobs bill on my desk without delay.''
What Obama didn't say was that the $154 billion jobs bill had squeaked through the House, 218-214, on the initiative of Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with no help from him or his staff; or that the Senate counterpart is in the range of just $80 billion. The economic drag from cuts in state and local government outlay will more than offset the stimulus of this skimpy new federal spending - which will be resisted by Republicans whether it is $8,000 or $800 billion just because it is Obama's.
The speech also had bold and compassionate words for the economic frustrations of parents juggling work and family, young adults saddled with college loans, and elderly people and their caregivers. But the actual program he proposed was a medley of small-bore tax credits that will neither deliver much help nor alter the deeper economic forces at work.
The gap between the call for sweeping change and what he is actually proposing, much less delivering, does serious harm to Obama. The Republicans get this even if he doesn't.
Given the wall-to-wall opposition, he might as well propose medicine strong enough to do the job. And might as well call out the Republicans for their sheer obstruction. On both counts, he'd win some respect for nerve and leadership.
This president is embattled. He should sound embattled. But instead, he is doubling down on the same strategy that has failed him - sweet reasonableness. His call for the Republicans to help him salvage some shred of health reform sounded almost like a pitiful plea. "Don't walk away from reform. Not now. Not when we are so close.''
One Nebraska voter spoke for disillusioned Obama fans everywhere in an interview with the Wall Street Journal. "You listen to the sales pitch,'' said 30-year-old Kevin Fischer, "and you're so excited, and then it arrives and you open the box and it just crumbles . . .''
Coming barely a week after the shock of the Massachusetts US Senate election, this speech was billed as evidence that Obama had heard the wake-up call. If he is to save the economy and his presidency, Obama must do better.
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...
106 Comments so far
Show AllWhat the American people hope and what they deserve - is that politicians in Washington will realize that there are other people besides Democrats and Republicans, other victories besides political ones, other needs besides those of bankers, other lifestyles besides constant war and fear, other ways to treat the earth besides full-on rape, and other ways of doing business besides unfettered corporate rule.
And other ways of writing than perpetuating the bullshit.
But surely our self-absorbed voting majority, most all those with great jobs, terrific homes and unlimited healthcare, surely their hope is the reverse of your hope.
In psychology its called “transference,” the overpowering conviction that a majority feel exactly as you.
John, i think you are possibly being tongue in cheek here.
However, just to set the record straight as far as psychological concepts are concerned. "Transference", coined by Freud, is what occurs when a 'client' or 'patient' projects onto his/her therapist, the childoohood feelings that he/she had toward a parent.
Some politically arrested infantiles believe that the majority will be like them.
More harm then good is this article, as it creates the illusion
that the intent of paid actor Obama is to get reelected.
Super-intelligent Obama, two Ivy League degrees has Obama,
and he is so stupid as to think he will get reelected by acting
in perfect harmony with the corporate rich?
Obama expressed his expectation that the Repugs would applaud his tax cuts.
This proves he is one of two things: 1) totally stupid, or 2) totally corrupt.
The Repugs have repeatedly proven they will never applaud or support anything he does no matter how Republican his actions are or become. they have also proven that they will criticize him for being an extreme leftist, no matter how right-wing his actions are.
"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help." ~ Psalm 146:3
Better to put your trust in the God of those ancient Hebrews who practiced slavery, genocide, stoning of women for adultery, blood sacrifice and more.
Got it in one. No more flat earth fixed creation genocidal blood gods. We've had about all the Authoritarian Patriarchy, Male Supremacy, and Gender Slavery that a species or a planet can survive.
As they say in College, compare and contrast:
"Put not your trust in princes, nor in the son of man, in whom there is no help." ~ Psalm 146:3
"That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed"... ~ US Declaration of Independence
As usual, the political beliefs of fundamentalist Christians stand in direct contradiction to those of the founders of the US.
PaulfromGA;Psalm 37 and why is it that it is always the Creators fault when man,with complete free will,shits on everything just because he is at the top of the food chain?It was man who made all these so called laws."Thou shalt love God with all thy heart and Soul and thy neighbor as thy self".That is the whole LAW and everything else was supposed to proclaim that and nothing else.Neighbors?Everyone else and as far as I'm concerned that includes what ever else is on this "living" planet!Tony
Article is more of how wonderful Obama is...."if only".....
It is fascinating how a president can not deliver at all on any campaign promises, and still, the illusion is held after a year of this. As a psychologist, actually, i am not so surprised.
It reminds me of any relationship where the partner turns out to be different than what we were hoping for and projecting upon them. After the marriage, as it were, and the 'committment' is made, well......What usually happens is that the illusions are kept and the disillusioned one will keep attempting to get the partner to change - back to the person that they supposedly used to be. Before you really knew them.
Obama was 'dating' the u.s. Now we married him, although we didn't all go to that altar. Some of us saw through the charm. Unfortunately, many out there prefer false hope.
Couples live this way for years and years. Waiting for the person they used to know, to return as they were. In the beginning. It is very difficult to admit to making 'mistakes' of certain magnitudes.
People chose Obama to be 'Saviour and Chief'. That is the biggest 'mistake' one can make. And i would say this. We do get what we 'need'. In order to learn and grow.
My hope is that america will now come to realize that no one is coming to save us from what we have created. And going out to vote one day and not having the 'republicans' rig the vote, isn't exactly the way out, nor a prfound victory.
Cheap and fast just doesn't work!
ReadyToTransform: Beautifully stated, thank you. I wonder if this is one of the many reasons why religion has become ever more tightly intertwined with politics. People are looking for a saviour - Mr. Obama, Mr. J. Christ, Mr. God. All of them very charming, but none of them have 'delivered' anyone anywhere. And yet, as the delusion (in the marriage partner, the president, the religion, whatever) crumbles, people hold ever more tightly to their beliefs (in their marriage, their politics, their religion). To do otherwise - to pop the delusion - brings up too much fear.
Religious and political and media organizations all know how to harnass that fear to perpetuate the delusion.
A person can not feel fear and love at the same time. It is always our choice of one or the other.
jld- Thank you and yes! This is precisely where the concept of a 'breakthrough' comes in.
You have described dissonance. Essentially here, it is the case of a very cherished belief, or two beliefs. One is the belief in being 'saved' by someone else and the second is that Obama is that 'saviour'.
The conflict is created by the reality that is so apparant. And it is scary to face that your 'saviour' 'betrayed' you. And also....what if he was our only 'shot' at it? There is that fear as well. So....
Yes. Most people will defend themselves against facing their fears. However, if someone is very 'real' and wants to know truth, they will face those fears and go beyond the old, unsustainable and often destructive beliefs. This is a 'breakthrough'. And it will need to happen sooner than later.
This is the process of getting out of the box. Freeing ourselves from limiting beliefs, even though, life shows us over and over again, how untrue they really are. But these beliefs go deep.
I hope this is helpful......
I don't care about Obama. But I can offer some objective advice: If he wants to win, he's going to have to crush some skulls.
Poor Robert Kuttner.
Poor, poor Robert Kuttner.
(sigh)
obama needs to realize he has to fight for what he belives in..... THAT is politics..... No one is going to "give" away anything for free or without a fight......
And obama has no fight in him - it's either that or he is playing everyone exactly as planned.......
so it's either a coward or a sellout....
which is he?
probably both!
"so it's either a coward or a sellout....
which is he?
probably both!"
Obama's a deliberate sell-out. He knew what he was doing, and his intentions were obvious from the get-go. His vote for the FISA and his war votes (i. e. the continued funding for our war on Iraq and his promises/actions on Afghanistan), plus his pre-Election Foreign Policy debate between Obama and McCain, where both POTUS Candidates took the exact same positions should've sounded an alarm.
Don't blame Republicans.
It isn't the fault of Republicans.
The problems cannot be narrowed to a party line like they were in the bush adminstration.
The animal is much larger than that.
The person standing at the top is President Obama. He is the one to blame and the ONLY one to blame if you need to cast blame.
Pointing the finger at "republicans" is a cop out.
If Obama can't get the job done he needs to step down and let somebody else get it done. Blaming others for your own inadequacy is something even bush didn't do.
Quastion. When and why did the Dems start excluding the Reubs from committee meetings on health care? The Repubs are spinning it as closed door bribery and arrogance, but what I remember is the Repubs saying "No!" to everything first.
Conressman DeMint called for Obama's failure, his Waterloo. The Republicans are working hard toward that end. The American people be damned!
Bipartisanship wont happen. The Democrats have 59 votes in the senate and a clear majority in the house (potentially). Figure out how to get things done on behalf of the country. Let's stop pandering to Lieberman and Nelson. Take on the ROYALISTS the way FDR did to give us social security and FDIC.
"There it all was again - the sheer decency, the intelligence, the plea for an appreciation of complexity, the call to higher purpose combined with feeble particulars, and the signature pursuit of impossible common ground."
I'm so tired of reading stuff like this. Where is "the sheer decency" of Obama? In the backrooms where he made deals to sell out the people who believed in him, and sent him money they couldn't really afford?
I don't see "sheer decency" in Obama. I see a glib sell-out who keeps trying to play the oke-doke on us, even after we've finally seen through him.
I'm actually worn out jumping on poor Kuttner; his pathetic appearance on Bill Moyers Journal really pushed my buttons.
So, like seriousprofessor, I "sigh".
But I yelped at the "sheer decency" canard exactly as you did, and for the same reason. Since Scheer's "better judgement", if he ever had any, has obviously eroded or evaporated, he's left with a dubious critique of Obama as Parsifal, the "Perfect Fool", who may still somehow discover the Holy Grail of honest and responsible leadership and government.
In spite of myself, I remain astonished that seemingly intelligent and moderately perceptive people are so prone to mistake their unconscious leaps of faith as shrewd, dispassionate judgements.
· Yr Obd't Servant
"I'm actually worn out jumping on poor Kuttner; his pathetic appearance on Bill Moyers Journal really pushed my buttons." -- Obedient Servant
Mine, too! I watched that Bill Moyers program. In addition, I was going to mention the recent Robert Sheer article, but you beat me to it! I, too, am astonished at the writers/journalists who continue to give Obama a break -- as if, all of a sudden, Obama is going to switch tracks completely and take the "people's" side and do the right thing.
I'd like to be proven wrong, but I can't see it happening.
Obama isn't for us. The Republicans aren't for us. Most of the Democrats aren't for us. We have to figure out what we the people can do on our own to change our country.
"We have to figure out what we the people can do on our own to change our country." - JMALH
You hit the nail on the head. I have figured out what to do to make change possible. Some will cooperate and some won't but I do it anyway. We are human so it's easy for most people to complain, get hysterical about it, and endlessly trash a leader than to do something about it.
Peace
"I have figured out what to do to make change possible."
Please share. I have been reading this and other forums and many authors for months trying to figure out what to do about what I see as a hopeless situation and if you have figured out how to change that situation I'm sure many others in addition to me would like to know.
Thanks in advance.
I will give you a hint. It takes more people cooperating. It may feel hopeless to do your part but you will feel better that you tried than if you didn't.
sierra7
Obama (and the Demplutocrats) should have learned a deep lesson from Lyndon Johnson on how to deal with opposition:
"Grab them by the balls, and their hearts and minds will follow"
(Obama is not a good "street fighter." Not at all!!
"Get rid of Israel's influence on our gov--end the occupations of all lands by all forces--ban selling weapons and war materials and set up an universal war-crimes investigative units to ferret out the truth in the investigations..."
Yes! The people must rise up.
Dear President Obama and Dear Republicans...
- While "I will never vote independent" Democrats and Democrat apologists continue to fruitlessly write Dear President Obama letters to come back to the left, President Obama is fruitlessly making Dear Republican pleas for cooperation, all the while they thumb their nose at him.
In my fantasy...
One night, after a long talk w/Michelle, Barack's like, "F**k it. I'm done working for The Owners - it's time to work for The People. The Owners don't like it - bring it the f**k on, bitches."
He figures, even if it costs him a reelection, he'll be The People's Hero and, assuming The Owners don't knock him off, he'll be able to parley said Hero status into a powerful post-presidency.
Hey - stranger things HAVE happened, okay?
Now - in order for him to succeed, in my fantasy I mean, he needs a posse - Feingold, Sanders, Kucinich, etc out there fighting the good fight and catching his back when Big Everything and their R-nut and D-pussy 'employees' come attacking.
Did I not say it was a fantasy?
Yep! That is a fantasy.
Is a plea for "appreciation of complexity" really a call for obfuscation of simple truths?
"...a common affliction of liberals: he's simply so much in love with gentle speech, and so horrified by the slashing harshness of Republican speech...
"psychological mechanisms...unprepared to sound the alert when faced with a sweet talker whose policy stances are virtually Republican."
So True!
You nailed it - especially in that last paragraph. With your permission I would like to use it in upcoming correspondence.
Liberals have elevated new-ageish-milquetoast-whimpering to a high art. They are incapable of distinguishing style from substance.
Real populist progressives from Bob Lafollette to Huey Long to the UK's George Galloway or Venezuela's Hugo Chavez today, deliver fiery, impassioned speeches that make young children cry in fear, but great masses of adults rise up and anger and indignation, and take effective action. It is the same ardor as a Republican's speech, but it is angry passion for justice and compassion rather than selfishness and swaggering arrogance.
but apparently, a liberal, like a small child, cannot tell the difference! "Mommy! why does Fr. Arthur get so mad at everyone in the church?" I used to ask my mother when I was 5 years old during his impassioned sermons.
But today, the wincing liberals even go so far as to decry any angry oratory as being "violent". Of course they also consider any kind of assembly that might cause arrests is "violence" too, but that's another topic.
I believe that Kuttner often receives compensation for writing articles that will appear in mainstream publications. Given that, I would point to this quote from Upton Sinclair:
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
Liberals are so nice they won't even take their own side in as argument.
Sioux Rose
RICH M: I am going to propose a differend kind of slamduck regarding Kuttner's lame buttery analysis. I have worked for newspapers and sometimes the editor tells you flat out, "Write something good/positive about Obama's speech." In a climate of vanishing newspapers, the man needs a job, and so he obliges. I really don't think he's as spellbound as he seems. I think this is about doing a job to get a paycheck. As you related, any thinking individual has to recognize that any gaps between Bush policies and those of Obama are miniscule. Therefore the amount of energy being generated by the right wing media machine to present the ILLUSION of polarized extremes (between the parties/candiates) is just to keep the masses fighting over their chosen team designation long enough for all the plans of the PNAC, the bankers, and war profiteers to clear out the final shelves in the USA shopping center. Their accounts are off-shore, and they have discovered the joys of living abroad. Pity the poor American people, destined it would seem, to have the boomerang known as the "Shock Doctrine" head back to its location of origin. Law is as quaint as the many once-prized tenets broken so adroitly by our recent and present unitary executives, who get BUY with a lot of help from their (corpoate) friends!
There's that ring of authenticity again.
I recall an editor who did not want more information about nuclear leaks "because there have been so many."
Sort of a supply-demand version of Truth, apparently.
"But liberal activism is sort of like sending a rabbit to sell wolves on the benefits of veganism." Joe Bageant
Let's try analyzing the speech from the viewpoint of actual power relations and it may become less befuddling. First, Kuttner is wrong when he says bipartisonship isn't in the cards. All differences are quickly laid aside when corporate interests are at stake - witness the multiple bipartisan bank bailouts. It's only when corporate interests are threatened that the "numbing weight of our politics" descends.
Corporate interests no longer see a need even to pretend to compromise with humanity and compassion. Obama's appeals in this regard are anachronisms. They know that they can have it all - all the entitlements and a stripped bare middle class and with the right President in 2012, they will get it. Why compromise?
Kuttner is right that Obama is incapable of challenging the deeper economic forces - because these are the very forces that elected him to do the job he's doing. And he's meeting all their expectations.
That is an interesting critique of Kuttner's speech. It's tough work challenging the corporate powers when there are not enough progressives out there putting pressure on Congress and Obama to counter the forces controlling him that he could otherwise challenge. When you say the forces elected him, it sounds abstract. People voted and Obama was elected for the most votes and he won the electoral college. We'll have to get Kucinich up for nomination if Obama continues till 2012.
Thanks for the feedback, Shawn. I'll try to be less abstract. Obama was elected due to large infusions of cash from several large corporations and Wall Street bankers. Yes, he won the majority of votes, but he would never have been allowed anywhere near the Presidency if he hadn't accepted the policy framework of his major backers. Sorry, but I believe that democracy in America is "Managed Democracy", as it is described by Sheldon Wolin in a recent book by that name. And, yes, I would not only vote, but work for Kuchinich in 2012.
Boyd, my bad. I was a little slow in figuring out the abstract part but thanks. It takes more money to fund elections and the expenses increase each election. Corporate funding appears to be the easy shortcut. I'll keep that book in mind. It might help the local underfunded progressive community organizers out. Thanks.
Also, he would never have been elected if the wall st meltdown did not occur in the fall of 08 as it did..
There it all was again - the sheer decency, the intelligence, the plea for an appreciation of complexity, the call to higher purpose combined with feeble particulars, and the signature pursuit of impossible common ground.
But it's all bullshit, Komrade Kuttner . . . sheer theatrical bullshit. Obama doesn't mean a word of it and never has. If your child told you a talking dog gave him the winning lotto numbers you would no more believe that than you should believe Obama's SOTUS rubbish. The crowning moment of the SOTUS, the emperor's new clothes moment, was when Obama said America's best days lie ahead of it. It was . . . beyond belief. It's fine and even admirable to act as if you are optimistic in a crisis like this but, please, do it in its proper context. Obama acted as if the United States merely has the summer sniffles. Obama doesn't know what to do now. He shot his wad in his first twelve months. His charisma and the vapors of the '08 election couldn't get it done for him. Now what? He doesn't know. He's lost without a map. Rahm Emanuel and a legion of Democrat cynics will tell him to turn farther right and make it appear he's going left. One of Obama's most serious problems is that he is such a boy scout. When he talks about bipartisanship he means it. He tells himself, I want the same things the Republicans want, exactly the same things. They know it. So why can't they give me a break? He'll spend the next three years uselessly pondering that question while the rest of the Democrats hunker down and hope the coming Republican shitstorm blows past and somehow spares them.
We don't hear words being spoken by the most powerful of people, yet we see, wave after mighty wave, the results of their intentions.
How do you prevent waves that are already washing over you?
What is the power of knowledge when you are drowning in it?
We are millions, they are few. Will we, finally, be able to calm the waters with the force of our understanding, walk upon them, survive and prevail?
...
This is what I heard in Obama's State of the Union Address; "Holy underware! Sheriff murdered! Innocent women and children blown to bits! We've got to protect our phony baloney jobs, gentlemen. We must do something about this, immediately, immediately, immediately! Harrumph!" Thank you Mel Brooks.
Watch Margret Flowers on YouTube get arrested. Listen to her plaintive plea for Obama to live up to his words and at least read her letter. That is what we are up against. Barack going on an errant mission to ingratiate himself to Republicans, to show them what a reasonable good guy he is to them, turns a deaf ear on those who in the past have supported him, on those who only ask to be recognized, to be heard. Barack, your true colors are shining through even if some of your apologists are still color blind. They sound less and less convincing when they try to portray you as an honest or decent person.