EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- 'Beyond Orwellian': Outrage Follows Revelations of Vast Domestic Spying Program
- The Bill of Rights Exists: An Open Letter to Dianne Feinstein
- Major Loss to Organic Farmers as Court Rules in Favor of Monsanto
- Naomi Klein: 'Anti-Shock Doctrines' Show the Way to Resist
- NSA Whistleblower Revealed: Q&A with Edward Snowden
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Complete Idiot’s Guide To Governing
It would be a gigantic mistake to believe that Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid or anyone else of prominence in today's Democratic Party actually gives a damn about the fate of the American people.
But it's not such a stretch to imagine that they might care about their own political careers. I think the Founders of the American republic had this in mind when they wrote their blueprint for representative government, in which a politician's fate would be tied to their popularity with voters.
Of course, it doesn't entirely work that way so much anymore because of the influence of big-monied players, but if it did we'd still be left with another big problem: These idiots don't even know how to save their own skins by governing well. Few things have amazed me more over the last year than how incompetent President Obama has been, given the exemplary skills of Candidate Obama, who ran a near-perfect, textbook campaign.
So, Barack Baby, I know you couldn't care less about the American public, but just in case you might still care about your own legacy and perhaps even winning a second term, might I be of some assistance?
Here, for your reading pleasure and educational benefit is The Complete Idiot's Guide To Governing (and you are a complete idiot when it comes to governing). I've laid it all out for you. You don't even have to take notes.
FIRST, PICK AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT. Is the American health care system a problem for this country, especially in the long term? You betcha. But most people are not very focused on health care right now. They are, on the other hand, really, really focused and fearful about their jobs. Such economic insecurity is not just "this year's issue", like say the war was in 2006. This is existential. People are staring out over the edge of a cliff and down into their own personal abyss. You cannot address ANY other issue under circumstances like that. Even in normal times, people "vote their pocketbook", let alone during the Great Recession. Nobody gets out of a Poli Sci 101 class without learning that simple fact. So how did the president of the United States get all the way to the White House without doing so? Barack Obama has spent virtually all of his political capital, and that of his comrades in Congress too, on an issue way down in priority for most Americans right now, while almost entirely ignoring the single thing they are obsessed about. This would be like, say, invading Iraq in response to an attack launched at you from Afghanistan. I wonder how that would work out for a president?
SECOND, STAKE OUT THE HIGH MORAL GROUND. If you're trying to do something as president - and especially if you're trying to do something big - you have to be bold and you have to sell it bold. There needs to be a big problem to be solved. You need to be offering a big solution to the problem. Your position has to be the only morally defensible one. It doesn't hurt if you can identify some sort of enemy, too. You have to get people excited, motivated, passionate and afraid to not get on board with your solution. That will not happen if you offer them half-measures backed by a wimpy lack of conviction. Imagine if Roosevelt had gone to Congress on December 8th, 1941 and said, "Golly, those darn Japanese can be mean sometimes! I urge your support for sending them a telegram strongly protesting their attack on Pearl Harbor." Would that have motivated a nation to the sacrifices necessary to win World War II? Would that have mobilized America? What if LBJ had said that institutionalized racism is unfortunate, and what we must do about it is make discrimination illegal. On Tuesday afternoons and all day Sunday, that is. Would that have given him the wind necessary to fill his legislative sails and better the country in ways that few presidents have ever matched? Call me crazy, but I'm guessing not.
THIRD, KEEP IT SIMPLE AND PRINCIPLED. Legislating properly involves attention to detail, and I certainly don't subscribe to the latest regressive appeal to the stupidity of their tea party mobs that slams Obama's health care bill for being 2000 pages long. Just because people who get their politics from Limbaugh and Beck need stuff dumbed down in order to assuage their own wholesale inadequacies, I sure don't want my government governing on that principle. That said, sometimes complexity in legislation means that one is tying oneself in knots, trying to avoid the simple and obvious solution to a problem. And it is always the case, even when bills must legitimately include boatloads of detail, that they should nevertheless be rooted in simple, easily-extractable, foundational first principles, and that these should form the narrative core of how the legislation is marketed to the public. At the end of the day, if you can get across to people that your bill will accomplish one, two or three really important, basic and necessary objectives, they won't care how many pages it runs. If you can't do that, on the other hand, they also won't care how many pages it runs. They're not going to support your crummy law, regardless.
FOURTH, USE THE BULLY PULPIT. One of the things that astonishes me about the Obama team is how little they understand the modern presidency. It seems so clear what you need to do, because we've seen it done so many times, and we've seen it not done. FDR, LBJ, Reagan and Lil' Bush all more or less got what they wanted as president because they understood these simple principles, while Clinton and Carter and Poppy Bush and Ford were Potemkin presidents because they didn't. One of the key aspects of the formula is using the president's most important single power, the bully pulpit. This means that you have to talk about your bill incessantly. You have to talk about it with great gravitas. You have to persuade. You have to go over the heads of Congress, to the people, and get them to lean all over Congress like your cousin Eddy with the big coke habit who is constantly hitting you up for money. You have to put the fear in the bellies of members about what it will cost them to be on the wrong side of public opinion. You have to be incessant. The model is not only crystal clear, but entirely proximate in time. Think of the obsessive full-court-press campaign that the Bush administration ran to sell the Iraq war just back in 2002 and 2003. Big speeches. Loads of public appearances. Top administration officials on every broadcast, every day. Relentless beating of the same drum. No distractions with other issues. Message coordination with sympathetic pundits, public intellectuals and activists from outside the administration. Total media domination. Strident, urgent exhortations. Intimidation and delegitimation of anyone who dared oppose the policy. And so on. Ironically, Obama has never come close to mounting a public campaign for solutions that people actually desire that would equal one-tenth of the intensity that Bush brought to the party when he took policies the public didn't want and jammed them down their throats until they begged for more.
FIFTH, LEAN ON YOUR OWN PARTY. Some of my favorite photos from recent history are of LBJ applying "The Johnson Treatment" to members of Congress and others who needed a bit of course correction. This hulking president would get right up in their faces, towering over them, and causing political figures normally otherwise possessed of quite healthy egos to arch themselves over backwards in obeisance, and presumably also to minimize the amount of LBJ's spittle that ended up on their foreheads. The guy knew how to intimidate you. He knew how to stroke you. He knew how to threaten you. He knew what you cared about. He knew your pressure points. He knew how to appeal to your sense of history. He knew how to take advantage of your pettiness. He knew how to twist your arm. And, if you were dumb enough to make it necessary for him to do so, he knew how to rip it right out of its socket. Mostly, he just knew how to pocket your vote. And so that's what he did. Over and over again. Barack Obama, on the other hand, is the polar opposite of LBJ. He is not only being dictated to by Congress, rather than the other way around, but he actually set it up that way. He's getting the LBJ treatment from punks on Capitol Hill, rather than giving to them. He has stood for nothing in his negotiations on major bills, and that is precisely what he has in his pocket so far as he slinks back home, beat and bruised, wobbling down Pennsylvania Avenue. You wanna win? You gotta discipline your own troops first.
SIXTH, MAKE THE OPPOSITION PAY. Right now, regressives are taking the most outrageous pot-shots at Barack Obama, Democrats in Congress, and all of their legislative initiatives. And why shouldn't they? No one ever calls them on it. No one ever makes them pay for it. No one ever fires back. No one ever ridicules them when they say ridiculous things. No one ever shames them. No one ever puts them on the wrong side of history. This is a real bad governing posture, made all the worse because of who we're dealing with here. Regressives tend to have the worst instincts imaginable, just on their own. They're the most frightened people in the world, and they're therefore capable of anything, including lies, smears, dirty tricks, cheap attacks, personal destruction and ruining the country they claim incessantly to be so patriotic toward. They look at thugs like Limbaugh or Rove as role models, rather than as the escaped felons that they actually are. They are more than a problem, just left to their own devices. You cannot add to the problem by incentivizing their criminal behavior. Anybody who wants to govern effectively needs to make opponents pay for their opposition. Obama and the Democrats in Congress, on the other hand, have made opposition to them pay off for their opponents. A year ago, the Great-big Old Pigs party was so smashed to bits from its own insane politics, it looked like the thing could seriously be toast. Now, they are right back in contention, and poised for smashing victories in the next two election cycles. All because they called Democrats socialists, fascists and granny-killers, and no one ever made them eat their scorched earth destructive lies.
SEVENTH, BET THE FARM. If you're pushing some big legislative package, you might as well act like you're betting the farm, ‘cause you are. Look at the Democrats today. They've hardly made the slightest case for the urgency of their stimulus or bail-out or health care legislation. They've hardly telegraphed to anyone that these are all-in questions, for which they're willing to risk a lot, and punish a lot. And yet they are, in fact, high-stakes gambles, regardless of how Democrats treat them, because their opponents have made them that. The Dumb Dems have therefore managed to realize the worst of all worlds. Whether they like it or not, they live or die on the hill of these bills. But mostly die. Their legislative agenda has been so badly botched that it is hard to say now which will cause them more damage with voters, passing a health care bill or failing to. The worst possible approach here is to take half-measures and let your opponents turn them into full ones. It's lose-lose scenario, well fit for chumps like those in today's Democratic Party. Instead, someone who really understands how all this works would've raised the stakes, right from the get-go.
And that's it, folks. That's how you govern in Washington. That's how you win.
On the other hand, if being a crash-test dummy is more to your liking, there's a formula for that too. What you do is pick the wrong issue, take some mealy-mouthed embarrassingly nothingburger position on it, make your pitch incredibly complex so the public neither understands it nor can rally behind any core moral principles, fail to use the bully pulpit to sell it, don't lean on your own party to fall into line, don't make it expensive for your opponents to trash you and your bill, and let them define the stakes.
Maybe you've seen that approach before, eh? Like every morning of this last year, when you open your newspaper, perhaps?
All evidence suggests that Barack Obama is a pretty smart guy. And, unless he's some sort of alien pod-growth creature, he's lived through the same epoch of American history I have.
You just wouldn't know it, though, watching him in action.
He's an awfully nice guy. He seems like a good father. Maybe he's even a swell dancer, too. I dunno.
He just doesn't know squat about how to govern.
- Posted in
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...
73 Comments so far
Show AllNice piece, but don't hold your breath. Rahm is the antithesis of this model and so far he is the guy whispering in Barak's ear on all matters of importance.
Bah he only says one thing "Do it our way or you'll be taking the convertible ride thru Dallas"
Well, I'm glad to know what the problem with Obama is, as before reading this article, I thought Obama was doing exactly what he and his handlers wanted to do.
It sure is hard to fathom why else intelligent and educated people such as Rahm Emanuel, Hillary Clinton, Arne Duncan, Nancy Pelosi, etc., managed to not know these great facts that the author calls to our/their attention.
Upon being elected or appointed to high federal office, Aipak takes a syringe and eviserates the innards of the politician
replacing the once living matter with ---
___________________?
You fill in the blank.
Exactly 4thefuture
It's nice to think they are merely incompetent, incompetence absolves them from evil intent.
But they aren't incompetent nor unknowing.
It's just too much of a co-incidence for all of them to "fail" at everything.
A perfect description of the Obama "persona" and why healthcare reform and his presidency is doomed to failure!
I suggest anyone interested in extremely plausible reasons for how and why our social and economic and political theaters function the way they do ... READ ... DAVID DEGRAW's articles at Amped Status dot com.
All we have to do is open our eyes and we will understand the method in the madness.
Good call it's MIC and banksters stupid, Obama was never going to stand up to his corporate/bankster/militarist funders.
knowing why they act as they do won't help us understand what we must do. On the contrary, such knowledge continues to foster the sense that "they" are in control and we mere pawns, and that we're victims. We're not. There's lots we can do. For example: http://www.radicalrelocalization.com/actions.php
Knowledge does not foster any 'sense that they are in control'. Knowledge is power and that is exactly why there has been and continues to be a concerted effort in the dumbing down of the American mind, right-wing/neo-conservative/neo-liberal efforts at re-writing history, their trickster/slight-of-hand/double-dealing/scams/con-jobs within political/economic/military/corporate systems and the brainwashing of citizens. We are 'mere pawns'. We are 'victims'. We the people have been pawns and victims since the founding of the country. We have allowed the wealthy, the powerful, the elite to control every facet of our lives.
'Radical Relocalization' is wonderful. It's premise is an ideal. Until our long standing form of capitalism is more highly regulated, significant social safety nets reinstated, economic and social justice upheld within our judicial system(including SCOTUS), the 'commons' restored, a progressive tax system ... where those who have more and those who make more pay more with NO LOOPHOLES and NO CREATIVE ACCOUNTING, reinstitution of tariffs on imports, term limits, no revolving door for government<->lobbyists<->private sector, reduction of retirement & benefits for all elected politicians and appointees, overturn corporate 'personhood' rights, and on and on and on ...
Acknowledge the facts. Pretending the facts don't exist will not make us any wiser. Not speaking the facts as they are will not give us the control we need. Acknowledgment of the true reality is the first step, and it's a huge one, considering how many citizens either don't care, don't have the time(?), or have been so thoroughly brainwashed that they will never even get to that first step.
So many unemployed, so few jobs for so many people, affordable health insurance tied to jobs, the hourly wage-earners under constant stress for greater productivity(working harder, getting more done, within same or shorter work hours for same hourly wage) and constant threat of job loss ergo affordable health insurance loss, constant increases in costs of available benefits ... including health insurance ... for the hourly wage-earner meaning less take-home pay, increased reliance upon debt to make ends meet, and I could go on and on ...
All these things add up to modern day slavery. That's why we will never see meaningful healthcare/health insurance reform or meaningful reform in banking, or taxation, or U.S. jobs outsourcing, or reform from war-making to peace-making, or reform from fossil fuels dependence (and nuclear) to renewable and sustainable energy sources, or reform in corporate welfare/corporate subsidies, or reform of our own corrupt political system. That's why we will never see the private health insurance/NO INSURANCE corporations out of the game. We are slaves ... owned lock, stock and barrel by the corporations, the political system, the government(local, state, federal), the military. We the people are a held-captive audience. We are there ripe for the picking. The powers that be know they have we the people over the barrel and they're going to continue their same old schemes until we the people actually rise up and actually do something ... something more than plant gardens, something more than relocalization. Unless change happens, unless big change happens very soon, all is lost ... and that is simply my opinion.
I still have to read the whole thing, but as far as the bully pulpit, when Obama uses it, it is to basically disparage real progressive ideals.
Obama and Rahm both twist arms -- not LBJ or FDR style, of course -- and they, again, use it to demonize and/or threaten progressives. Note what is happening to Kucinich -- this isn't just the Markos, the Kos idiot, leading this charge. Some of this is coming from Congress.
Massa, regardless of what he did or did not do wrong, was beaten to a bloody pulp, convicted and found guilty before any kind of trial. The timing was perfect. Again, this didn't come from the outside. As a few commenters on HuffPo said -- yes, that rag -- this is very sad to watch what happened to Massa -- and, yes, he does seem to have melted down, as a result. It's very sad. An immolation this complete could only come from bullies like Obama and Rahm.
As far as jobs Obama is incompetent. As far as the financial sector, I believe it's deliberate. As far as health care, we know it was deliberate. Obama is responsible for Medicare for All being taken off the table, and he is responsible for the slow kill-off of the public option.
Obama appears weak to many, but that depends on what side he's fighting for. If you take the position that he's fighting for neocon principles, I'd say he's doing a pretty good job right now.
At the end of the day Obama and his "progressive" shills are all dumb ----- like a fox. They do nothing that is not totally planned and executed, and follows the corporate agenda to the letter. Otherwise, why would we still have Geithner, Summers, Bernanke, Rahm and the other bandits carried over from Clinton's "Liberal Republican" contingent that decimated our financial system -- and continue on their rapacious march to destruction of our economy and, indeed, our country?
While there are plenty of things to not like about the people you mention, do remember that we actually had a budget surplus for a short time and an economy that provided quite a few jobs and reasonable prosperity under Clinton. I've always wondered whether Clinton might have accomplished a bit more decent progressive policy if the Republicans had not hounded him relentlessly with his secret 'murders,' financial allegations, womanizing,... Certainly, the Republicans have been virulently anti-everything since at least the last half of Clinton's Presidency and Obama's. I don't remember how they acted when Carter was President. Anybody else have a better memory of the Carter years?
Greg, I remember Carter. The Republicans were not as noticeably nasty on Carter but nasty they were. They are in the same manner that they were in the late 1970s. In 1980, things were bad enough that Carter had lost support even within the Republican base while the Republicans and some conservative Democrats were out there campaigning for Ronald Reagan like mad. I voted for Carter in 1976 but Anderson in 1980 after losing confidence in Carter. I went back to voting Democrat in 1984 and after but I am considering voting for a progressive third party thanks to Obama and his team.
I used to admire Clinton during his presidency but the more enthusiasm I lose of Obama, the more I am forced to rethink Clinton's presidency. While I do not share the same anger against Clinton as others here do, I understand and respect their anger and I am in fact concerned that the party has systematically declined in the past two decades. I noticed the nasty behavior of the Republicans ever since Clinton ran for president in 1992 but what concerns me and probably a lot of us in the Democratic Party is that the Democrats are fruitlessly trying to appease the Republican Party even as the Republican Party will give them no credit for such fruitless efforts. I would rather see the Democrats pushing for socialism and putting a 10 year moratorium on capitalism rather than keeping it alive and I would rather the Democrats stop compromising on everything as I am getting tired of it and am ready to leave the party. Even after Bill Clinton was done with his presidency, he saw to it that the Democrats and Tony Blair had went along with Bush on the Iraq War. Why Clinton would do such a thing is beyond me but I am starting to lose respect in him especially since his wife plans to do nothing to stop Obama's wars. And if Carter calls Obama a "peace" president, well I don't even want to think about it !
Stanley, I also remember the Carter years. Actually, the Democrats in Congress did far more damage to him, obstructing him at every turn and succeeding in redefining him as an impotent leader. A Mr. Nice Guy who couldn't get anything done.
When the people fear their government there is tyranny,
when the government fears the people there is liberty.
~ Thomas Jefferson
Carter's push, albeit weak, for solving climate change and SALT II compared to Obama's catering to the Republicans on virtually everything and still getting no credit similar to Clinton reminded me of an earlier comment where you said that Obama could get reelected in theory. I could see where the conservative Democrats, many of whom made it to Washington in 1974 due to Nixon's scandal or those quiet conservative Dems of the 1960s, did the GOP's dirty work and gave them more time and money to boost Ronald Reagan. I have had a haunted feeling after voting for Anderson which is why I stayed away from third parties since 1980 but revisiting Obama's record and reading the deep thinking and analysis on this and other progressive sites on the Internet along with applying it to his actions are giving me second thoughts. I could see a scenario in 2008 where Obama looks "tough enough" for the GOP to accept him and like Clinton, they might let him have a second term. The neutral minded voters in the meantime will be convinced that somehow voting for third party still isn't worth anything despite the damage Obama will have done by 2012 and we don't know how bad that will be. I take it that is what you meant when you said that a Mr. Nice Guy couldn't get anything done, correct?
I'm not sure David understands the dynamics of American politics. The Dems are governing exactly in accordance with their core belief--support of the corporate agenda. They extend the war in Afghanistan to gain the favor of the MIC; they require mandatory health insurance for the young and the healthy because it benefits the insurance companies; they shrug off mountain top coal mining to appease the coal industry; they proffer trillions of dollars to Wall Street to insure their support for the next election. Dems are doing what they have done in the past: sucking up to the rich and powerful. The only trouble is, they might have read history wrong. What worked before might not work this time.
Well Green does it again, dissects a problem and lays out a solution. Probably a GOOD thing Obama never will read it. He might actually start being effective for his true agenda of shilling for the corporacracy.
That's the one thing we can be thankful for, incompetence in the administration and Congress. And a pretty pathetic thing to be happy about.
Gary
“Democracy substitutes election by the incompetent many for appointment by the corrupt few.”
-- George Bernard Shaw
Not hardly. He is pushing the mem that a public option would be a victory.
This is not incompetence by Obama. It is a ruse. They used the oops bs with Bush. It is getting old.
"This would be like, say, invading Iraq in response to an attack launched at you from Afghanistan. I wonder how that would work out for a president?"
Well... it did get the previous president over 57 million votes in the '04 election. Never under estimate the effectiveness of fear mongering an under informed public.
"He just doesn't know squat about how to govern."
The Obummer isn't interested in governing, only presiding over a corporate state.
DMG, you're expecting the president to be something other than what he is - a corporatist. It's time for you to take Chris Hedge's advice. Turn away from the two party duopoly.
I don't see Obama moving too far towards the "Johnson treatment." I believe the legislators would merely be amused. Also, trying to make the opposition pay for their regressive idiocies would lead to a full-time job. Republican/tea bagger wacko-isms have been a non stop orgy of lunacy. The only hope of slowing this down is through a concerted Democratic effort and a media willing to play up the "debate."
"He's an awfully nice guy." Yes, on the outside. One of the classic signs of a abuser is they often appear like "awfully nice guys." And would somebody explain to be why every article on Barack Obama emphases how bloody brilliant he is? We've had some very intelligent people as presidents. Yeah, I know, they were white but ... they were intelligent and nobody had to constantly tell us they were intelligent. There have also been brilliant lunatics throughout history that did a lot of damage. I would be more worried about Obama's E.Q. (emotional quotient) than his I.Q.
Well, at least Professor Green is trying. Even though he has it mostly right, he still makes the typical democrats mistakes.
#'s 1 thru 5 he is right on the money.
#6 Calling people "regressives" is stupidity. For people on CD to say it is one thing, but to write it for public consumption is just stupidity. Why don't I just insult you before I ask you to help me?
And Professor Green, the conservatives are back in front, going to be back in power because the democrats will not listen to the American people, have insulted them at every term and exhibited hubris of Godzilla like proportions, violated almost every campaign promise and #'s 1 thru 5.
NOT because they called anyone called Democrats socialists, fascists and granny-killers
As to #7? Yes, they bet the farm on something that few cared about at the moment and rather than produce good policy even then, gave the people a bill that not even a mother could love. And yes, their incompetence and stupidity is amazing.
There is always the demon of rigged elections, such as Florida and then Ohio (RIP Mike Collins).
The fix is in and everything else, poitically speaking is irrelevant.
Please tell me you mean RIP Mike Connell.
Makes me want to stockup on tin-foil for hats!
Stop writing about lesser matters; time to clean house, from the top down.
Mr. Green, read up on architects/engineers for 9/11 truth, see Jesse Ventura and writings by Kean and Hamilton co-chairs as well as John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the Commission.
All pointing to the need to find the real terrorists; 60% of the Commissioners now agree the Commission failed. The terrorists are still at large.
LOL! Jesse Ventura would believe a conspiracy theory about Martians in his Cheerios. I watched one of his shows and could not stop laughing enough to get up off the floor. If he actually believes what he says, he's certifiable. It's a good thing to have an open mind. Not so good to toss out critical analysis completely.
Jesse was actually my governor for a while. Somehow we managed. A couple years ago I saw Jesse on TV with Paul Krugman. Jesse thought farmers like myself had their crop prices capped by government programs. He (wrongly!) thought this after he had been the governor of an agricultural state. Paul Krugman's comment, "I'm losing it, here!" as he tried to maintain his composure at this amazing turn of events. Jesse did get one good line in, however. When asked how Minnesotans managed before SUVs and 4-wheel drive, he said, "We got stuck."
"Few things have amazed me more over the last year than how incompetent President Obama has been, given the exemplary skills of Candidate Obama, who ran a near-perfect, textbook campaign." I believe this statement by professor green is a bit erroneous, what he should have said was a textbook con.
"SIXTH, MAKE THE OPPOSITION PAY. Right now, regressives are taking the most outrageous pot-shots at Barack Obama, Democrats in Congress, and all of their legislative initiatives. And why shouldn't they? No one ever calls them on it." Silly rabbit this is part of the good cop/bad charade both right wing parties utilize to keep the masses confused and bewildered.
"All evidence suggests that Barack Obama is a pretty smart guy. And, unless he's some sort of alien pod-growth creature, he's lived through the same epoch of American history I have." I can't tell you how smart Obama is or isn't, but I can tell you how corrupt he is, very, very corrupt.
Obama has Green's governing points under his belt but in favor of the wrong side. Let's re-review his points.
1. "FIRST, PICK AN ISSUE THAT PEOPLE CARE ABOUT." - He has already done that. Would he be allowing Congress to "debate" health care while simultaneously allowing Congress to increase war spending and bailouts to Wall Street?
2. "SECOND, STAKE OUT THE HIGH MORAL GROUND." - He talks about boldness and I used to believe that Obama wasn't bold enough but after reading the comments here and having to go back and review Obama's behavior, I have come to agree that Obama is bold but not where it counts.
3. "THIRD, KEEP IT SIMPLE AND PRINCIPLED." - He might be right when it comes to passing legislation but like Bush, he knows how to keep enough of his supporters deluded and star struck. Just read the stupid comments on Daily Kos and Huffington Post. The Obama worshipers are getting more annoying these days.
4. "FOURTH, USE THE BULLY PULPIT." - This brings us back to his second point where he talks about boldness. After careful review of all sides, I have come to agree with those who say that Obama is bold where it does not count. He uses the bully pulpit on war spending and bailouts for big corporations but on health care, he'll sign anything Congress passes and has even shown his lack of support of any public option never mind single payer.
5. "FIFTH, LEAN ON YOUR OWN PARTY." - That's funny. I thought he is already doing that by placating the Blue Dog Democrats and the centrists. He has also pulled out Bush's tricks on pretending to placate the liberal base through bait-and-switch but at the same time placating the Republicans. But then again, why worry about Obama placating the Republicans when enough of the Democratic Party is doing that already, right? No, it doesn't matter at this point as it is getting harder to tell the two apart.
6. "SIXTH, MAKE THE OPPOSITION PAY." - That depends on which opposition he is talking about but he has conservative opposition and progressive opposition. Obama has no intention of making the conservative opposition pay but he has been arm-twisting progressive dissent within the party and he's forcing them to exhaust all their money and resources when you look at this administration up close.
7. "SEVENTH, BET THE FARM." - Why do I get the feeling that they are betting the farm on losing so that something juicy and lucrative awaits them? After Dick Gephardt retired in 2004, he joined a lobbyist on a lucrative deal and I have been told of similar happenings to members of Congress who either retired or lost their seats. They lose and yet still win personally while we're left holding the bag.
I don't get what Green really wants from this article. Is he trying to play silly horse or what?
The definition of a Democrat today is "One who keeps feeding the alligators, hoping they will eat him last."
Sadly, I fell for his deceptive rhetoric and voted for the bastard in 2008. Our only hope is for a committed and informed electorate, and a third political party to wrest control of our government from the Dems and Repubs and restore integrity to our democracy. Fat chance, eh? You're probably right.
I did the same as you but it was only when I realized that deep thinking really matters these last 6-7 months that I slowly understood why most of us are neutral minded. It is often easy for people to engage in cursory and simplistic thinking than it is to take the time to look deep. I took the time to read and review people's comments on this site and other progressive sites and see who was really right vs wrong. How many self-identified progressives and liberals will do that? Depending upon their abilities and/or will power, they either can't or simply won't do it. Being forced to look deep into the issues has given me some confidence in preparing to listen to what third parties have to say. Whether I vote for any of them or not is another matter and will depend on what goes on up to 2012. Most neutral minded voters will still believe that the Democratic Party is feeding the alligators because it is afraid of being devoured and I used to be so foolish in thinking like that but after putting dozens and hundreds of points and events together and connecting the dots, I have started to think differently. I probably have a long ways to go but who knows what the future holds? For my part, I will be glad to let newcomers and others still clinging to Obama know why we have every right to be just as outraged at this administration as we were at the previous one. So far, I have noticed that some won't listen but some of them will listen and possibly acknowledge that they were looking at it all wrong all this time. We have great challenges ahead of us. Even some of us deep thinkers have a tendency not to have faith in ourselves but feel that all is lost and that we're powerless as a reason to once again go neutral and settle for the lesser of the two evils. I am still working on overcoming that residual wobbly feeling.
Keep lobbying for that unidentified third party, Stanley!
Why do people keep saying things like, "Obama ran a near-perfect, textbook campaign. I just can't understand why he seems so incompetent in governing?"
Can't they see that being given a cool brand, saying very little in a seemingly intelligent manner, appealing to the most vague and insipid "populist" fantasies while ingratiating himself into the good graces of Wall Street and the MIC is not a blueprint for "effective governing", if by effective governing we mean something other than managing the corporate state for the corporate bosses?
It seems to me that Obama's "governing" is consistent with his campaign, but the different circumstances of being president and campaigning for president naturally reveal the machinery behind the curtain. The "pathetic" nature of his governing is part and parcel with his phony campaign.
I think I can explain some of why people talk like that. There are a lot of neutral minded voters who need to be convinced that this administration is not the liberally oriented type that he appears to be on the surface. Some of them may feel that he isn't as liberal as he promised but believe that the system is too powerful for him to budge or them to force change on so they settle for the mediocre choices in despair. Short of everyone reading this site, the challenge that remains is how to bring those neutral minded voters over to our side.
Which side are you on, Stanley? Pete Seeger's asking.
WONDERFUL! It has been noted that only around 2% of the population fully understand foreign policy and I'm beginning to think that only 2% understand domestic policy as well, especially after reading the comments from center liberal/progressive websites.
Every time I ask an Obama fan what he has done, they only answer with a stutter. Yet, when you think about what he hasn't done, or what he has only done for the elite, it's amazing that anyone who does not make under 3 million a year gives two cents about Obama.
Thinking back to the Melian Dialogue, the Athenian's stated to the Melian's, hope is a virtue that only the powerful may indulge. Seems like the already powerful obtained exactly what Obama promised. Too bad for the remaining 95% of the population.
And two more things- Obama is a socialist, just a LEMON socialist. Vote republican- run the country in the ground and wake up the populace!
I can't believe that I have become this cynical, but I think I agree with this last suggestion. Voting Republican is, mathematically, twice the protest vote of voting Green or other third party. If we really believe in the conspiracy, then we should probably vote known enemy to keep false friend out of power.
DMG is wrong that Dem's can't still make a comeback. If they want to be re-elected, all they have to do is force the Republicans to vote on bank reform close the election. Of course bank reform has already gone through the bipartisan-watering-down-but-no-bipartisan-support process so even if it passes, I doubt it will reform the banks.
Protest votes to the right will be interpreted as a popular shift to the right which will push the token "left" even further right. If the intent is to collapse the system as quickly as possible and initiate chaos and insurrection; alright then. But if you think a vote to the right will be seen as a progressive protest--I don't be thinkin' so.
So protest vote may be the wrong way to look at it. But let's say I'm tired of voting for third parties who do not have a prayer. Who should I vote for, false friend or known enemy? And who furthers the agenda of the monied interests more, the obvious hack or the deceptive imposture?
I think he may know that but if he said it CD would not publish it.
WOW, Prof. Green you sure are all full of yourself;take an A for pomposity!!!
Bring America Back !!!!...........!!!...Right Simonsez, and just think of the
Students at Hofstra in NYC. Are we not just clamoring and clamboring and
clawing our way to register for one of Green's classes ???? You Betcha !!!
Bring America Back !!!!
****Listen, David Michael Green....a recent and valid poll has indicated that 83% of Americans believe that their US Government is "Broken".
**So what is it you don't understand about the US GOVERNMENT IS BROKEN===BUSTED; NOT FUNCTIONING; INCOMPETENT; DOWN FOR THE COUNT, AND DOWN FOR GOOD ??????
**Even before Prince Barak lied himself into the White House, Nancy Pelosi took 'impeachment' off the table for
King George==ensuring war criminals went free !! THAT
was when we should've awoken to Remove the Speaker of the House--supporter of the Neocon Fascists. Apparently, the common thinking is that Pelosi cannot be removed by her
San Francisco constituency==who keep re-electing her.
**The Idiot here is David Michael Green since Obama is already closely following the Idiot Method to Governing.
Green is still breathing the rarified asbestos air of
Ground Zero, NYC, poisoning his students minds, and probably still thinks 2 Jumbo Jets collapsed Three Skyscrapers at
WTC on 9/11/2001 !
**The current idiot Prez kept the Congress in session until last X-mas Eve to force their Vote on Forced Health Insurance. Do not think for a moment he won't do it again
for their Easter break forthcoming !! This idiot learned well from the last Idiot whose fav trick was called--
Recess Appointments==where King George would wait for the Congress & Senate to go on vacation, then appoint Dumbsters like the last Ambassador to the UN, who never could pass a congressional hearing for the post.===John Bolton, now a FOX TV war cheerleader !
**You see, our forefathers never envisioned that we would
be Governed by one Idiot after the Other. Or, that their system of Constitutional Government could be totally busted ! Ben, Thomas, and John never, ever thought
all three of their Branches of checks & balances could be chock full of IDIOTS !
But they are and we the Sheeple know it !
TODAY'S VOTING TIP: If David Michael Green likes a political candidate, it's a bad candidate--probably a sociopath.
This is the old version of How To Govern For Dummies.
Here's the updated version:
The Owners of The Place buy your allegiance.
Once in office, you do as The Owners tell you to do.
No matter what happens, you're guaranteed tens of millions, via a sweet do-nothing VP/lobbyist position, a couple of 'think tank' memberships, a few choice speaking engagements, at least one book deal, and a regular spot on Big News.
See Tom Daschle. Or every single Cheney/Bush war criminal/profiteer/enemy of the State.
That's how dummies govern today - for profit.
Even in normal times, people "vote their pocketbook", let alone during the Great Recession.
As much as I admire DMG, this isn't exactly true. Much of the middle class has been voting for decades to destroy itself economically.