Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama Declares Wrong Emergency
It's often said by supporters of President Obama, with some justification, that too much has been expected of him. Sure he went in with high ideals about moving the country in a more progressive direction, but the reality of money and power in the nation's capital have rendered him unable-at least in the two years he's been in office-to achieve the objectives he so glowingly promised.
Contrary to this view of the president's predicament, we would direct our fellow citizens' attention to the action taken by the president on September 10. On that day, the White House released the text of a letter sent by Mr. Obama to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi entitled "Letter from the President on the Continuation of the National Emergency with Respect to Certain Terrorist Attacks".
The letter reads in major part:
Dear Madam Speaker:
Consistent with Section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act, 50 U.S.C. 1622(d), I have sent to the Federal Register the enclosed notice, stating that the emergency declared with respect to the terrorist attacks on the United States of September 11, 2001, is to continue in effect for an additional year.
The terrorist threat that led to the declaration on September 14, 2001, of a national emergency continues. For this reason, I have determined that it is necessary to continue in effect after September 14, 2010, the national emergency with respect to the terrorist threat.
Sincerely,
BARACK OBAMA
In extending the nation's State of Emergency for a ninth consecutive year, President Obama retains the power to declare and implement a series of executive orders which enable his government to "take over all modes of transportation and control of highways, airports, and seaports" (10990, 11004), "seize and control the communication media" (10995), "relocate communities and establish new locations for populations" (11004), "develop plans to establish control over the mechanisms of production and distribution, of energy sources, wages, salaries, credit and the flow of money in U.S. financial institutions" (11921) and much more.
The country does face an emergency brought on, at least in part, by the attacks of 9/11-a fiscal emergency! Since 9/11, the nation has gone on a frantic military spending spree financed by borrowing abroad. Trillions have gone into a preemptive war against Iraq and what is shaping up as a Vietnam-style quagmire in Afghanistan. U.S. military budgets are at an all time high, with the United States spending more than the rest of the world combined. In fact, more money is spent on war-making than is spend by all fifty states together on health, education, welfare, and public safety. Eisenhower's worst fears have been realized.
The emergency we face is economic. As Joshua Holland wrote recently on AlterNet: "The Great Recession that began in 2008 wiped out $13 trillion in Americans' household wealth-in home values and stocks and bonds-stoking the kind of anger we've seen from pissed off progressives and from the Tea Partiers who dominated the news in the summer of 2009."
In the latest twist on the old James Carville aphorism, "it's the mortgages, stupid." As Robert Scheer writes, "With 11 million homeowners underwater on their mortgages and 3 million more already foreclosed, we have to assume, given the average household size, that some 40 million Americans are feeling mighty strapped."
And now, in the fall of 2010, we face the very real possibility of a 1994 redux in the midterm elections, with the Republicans retaking the House and stymieing any meaningful reforms for the balance of Obama's term.
This is not about Democrats versus Republicans. It was Bill Clinton who pushed NAFTA, leading to deindustrialization and the loss of millions of high-wage jobs. And it was Barack Obama who continued to bail out bankers while ignoring the pain caused to practically everyone else by toxic mortgages. Regarding the $700 billion bailout accorded the largest financial institutions in the country, Scheer writes, "Not surprisingly the bankers pocketed the gift and did precious little in return."
We have heard ad nauseum from the beginning of Obama's presidency that "nothing can be done without sixty votes." This requirement for a senatorial supermajority in order to do the people's business is mostly a dodge by those who really don't want that business to be done in the first place. Many scholars have shown how a focused majority, currently the Democrats, could alter Senate procedures to restore majority rule. At the very least, the majority could require that filibusters actually be carried through rather than simply "declared."
Regardless of an inept Congress, the president does have the power to make massive changes; in fact, the State of Emergency affords him near-dictatorial powers. The president actually has the authority to take the actions necessary to provide for the national security by pursuing our enemies, whether they work from Afghan caves or K Street suites.
The president has the power to force the banks to halt foreclosures by reissuing mortgages at a lower rate. He has the power to put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure of the country. He has the power not just to ferret out terrorists, but to keep American citizens in their homes and in their jobs until the economic crisis abates.
In fact, unless he does so, the economic fortunes of the vast majority of the nation's citizens will continue to crater and the negative political consequences to the president and his party will be dwarfed by the consequences to society as a whole.
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...
78 Comments so far
Show AllLet's assume for the sake of argument that Obama had any desire or inclination to promote a "progressive" agenda using the emergency powers of the Presidency.
"The president has the power to force the banks to halt foreclosures by reissuing mortgages at a lower rate. He has the power to put people to work rebuilding the infrastructure of the country. He has the power not just to ferret out terrorists, but to keep American citizens in their homes and in their jobs until the economic crisis abates."
Whatever powers may be given to the President by law can be dissolved by this Supreme Court. If Obama were to act in any of the ways listed in Seiler's paragraph, the regressive members of the SC would simply deny that he had such power regardless of what the law might say.
q
Enough of this nonsense about us having high expectations for Obama that he could never meet. Obama's generous Wall Street bailouts have exceeded our expectations and Wall Street's expectations, so we know Obama has the ability to EXCEED expectations.
Yesterday NPR reported that Chase Bank is demanding the FDIC pay off Washington Mutual's liabilities even though US taxpayers sold Washington Mutual to Chase for 5 cents on the dollar, the FDIC payed off depositors, and Chase made billions on the deal.
Even if Obama didn't provide direct mortgage relief, had he shrunk the big banks and restored New Deal financial industry regulations, money would now be channeling to purposes that benefit 98% of us rather than the current speculative environment Obama has fostered that benefits 2% of the population at the expense of 98% of the population.
Well all he has to do is go after the REAL terrorists. They run the Big Banks! their not hard to find either.. unlike Osama Bin Laudin.
>^^<
The idea that this President will do anything other than continue his insular elitist and mindless march to a drummer no one else can hear is a movie of the month plot.
Consider the talent needed to squander total control of the goverrnmen and 70% approval in less than two years. Destroy the democratic party for decades and assure the rebirth of republican control.
Its all of a sudden going to be job's first? Tad late your majesty.
So power seems to shift to the right side of the Corporatist Party. The real decisions are made in back rooms that'd make your hair stand on end...
The Corportatist Party consists of the Republician(Right side and The Democrats(Left Side) bothe are owned and run buy the World Corporate Conglomerate, consisting of
Coke
GM US
GM CHINA
GM PHILIPENES
GM FRANCE
GM GERMANY
GM AUSTRAILIA
GM CANADA
GE US
GE JAPAN
GE CHINA
GE EAST INDIES
GE FRANCE
GE RUSSIA
GE BRITON
GE SPAIN
ect
You get the idea.
>^^<
This is big news, we are not quickly evolving towards fascism this is total despotic control right now.
How could anyone consider validating this kind of power?
I do not believe the Supreme Court would do anything to limit executive power ( although they have in the Gito cases but now JP Stevens is gone) nor would OilyBomber do anything to hamper the corporate state.
Vote third party and party as OilyBomber is impeached.
Yes, Obama is the best Republican the Democrats ever had.
Next to Bill Clinton.
Yes, they are both good at what they do. It is a toss-up who is the slickest, most diningenuous, hypocritical, lying, schmooze dog, O or Bubba?
Why does a mad dog bite? Because they can and they dislike him.
He is giving the corporate state everything.
And besides it continues the charade and he has given the corporate state so much the Repugs have the spare time for the diverting drama of drawing and quartering OilyBomber for some obscure alledged crime ( you know it will never be for his great War or Constitutional Crimes).
Well, because that's just the way they roll. I mean, they did it with Clinton, why not Obama. They get these lying, sleazy idiots do to their bidding and then, when the base gets pissed and the Repubs get back in power, they start investigations and even they find something to impeach on. I mean, Clinton provided the ammo by lying. We'll see what they dish up on Obama and what course it takes. I assume the strategy will be the same. Clinton was just an easy pawn because of his weaknesses -- and the fact that he would lie about "knowing that woman" was a given (stupid but a given).
In any case the Repubs will attempt gum the works in some manner (investigations?), and Obama will keep deferring to them in attempting to prove that he is, yes, the best Dem -- er, cough Republican -- President they could ever ask for.
I think we all know to what end these powers will be used. Thanks Mr Seiler and Hamburg, I can now add another thing to the growing list of Obama (non)accomplishments (c11):
A. Economic:
1. Bank bailouts that have not addressed excesses in Wall Street
2. Mediocre financial "reform".
3. Expansion of Social-economic inequalities to all time highs
4. Expansion of general and child poverty levels to First World highs
5. No attempt made to curtail the outsourcing and off-shoring of American jobs.
6. Blocking the opening of the Fed to independent audits to follow the money
7. Failure to support reintroduction of Glass-Stiegel or Volker rule on TBT Fail
8. Failure to control and regulate the derivatives industry
9. Failure to address the foreclosure of citizens in the US
10. Failure to implement a massive highways and infrastructure policy
B. Political Administration and Corruption
1. Continuing revolving doors between Corporations and the halls of government
2. No attempt to create campaign reform
C. Foreign policy and security:
1. Patriot act still in place.
2. Guantanamo still open and no determined fight behind civil trials
3. Occupation of Iraq rebranded, but still going on.
4. War in Afghanistan escalated.
5. Increased Black-op site usage in Afghanistan
6. Drone strikes increased.
7. No attempt to force Israel to be accountable for all its incessant illegal actions
8. Expanding semi-covert warfare into Yemen, Somalia, and Pakistan
9. Failure to turnaround bloated security state
10. Call for increased budget for Nuclear Weapon technology
11.Call for the extension of US Terrorist State of Emergency maintain Obama's extra-powers (new 29/9/10)
D. Environmental
1. Failure to be honest about true damage of the Gulf Oil Spill
2. No meaningful action on Climate change
3. Clean Coal still being pushed as mountain tops are being removed
4. Support for Nuclear energy through funds for new plants
5. No movement on carbon tax
E. Social and Public Welfare
1. Health care reform bill that did not contain a public option or single payer
2. Pharma. Industries able to maintain price controls by preventing generic imports
F. Legal and Courts
1. No investigations into Bush Cheney admin. for illegal activities in Iraq War
2. No protection for Whistle blowers, in fact, the opposite
G. Civil Liberties
1. Don't ask don't tell still in place.
2. Government assassinations of US Citizens without due process
3. FBI harassment of peace protesters.
4. Government seeking easier access to all our internet communications
5. No protection of Net neutrality
6. Abuse of State Secrets to prevent abused prisoners getting a day in court
May I add Largest Military budget in World History, First Tar Sands import License, Friendly to Fracking, Overturning Court Ruling against DeepwaterHorizon being allowed to drill where they exploded.
Yes I'll add those, thanks, except what is "fracking"? I only know it a la Battle Star Galactica. :)
Hydraulic fracturing (called "frac jobs"[1] or "frac'ing" in the industry or recently "fracking" by some news media reports [2]) is a process that results in the creation of fractures in rocks, the goal of which is to increase the output of a well. The most important industrial use is in stimulating oil and gas wells, where hydraulic fracturing has been used for over 60 years in more than one million wells. On the other hand, high-volume horizontal slickwater fracturing, although used for 20 years, has in the past few years seen rapid growth in its use. The fracturing is done from a wellbore drilled into reservoir rock formations to enhance oil and natural gas recovery. from wiki
Yes, the technique that, where used, has caused the tap water of nearby residents to become so contaminated that it is literally flammable
SO put a steam generator in your garage! when your tap gives flamible gasses make your own electricty!
You can always boil the water... with the gas :)
People are so negitive.. I wish I was getting free nat'l gas, you wouldn't hear me whining.
>^^<
EXACTLY! SO important not to ever forget.
great list
AM: I applauded this list as you posted it on another thread. Great job, and welcome to this forum. (Your name is new, right?)
Siouxrose:
Thanks for your reply (I don’t get notifications on CD for replies so I missed yours on the other thread and I’m on a different time zone). I’m new to posting on CD but I’ve been a pretty avid reader of this site, Truthdig, alternet and a few other decent progressive oriented sites. I only recently started posting because it’s only now that I’m seeing a pretty solidifying attitude against this administration.
I was one of those early naysayers against the snake oil salesman and refused to vote for him. I saw him take his acceptance for democratic nominee at AIPAC and say he believed in a unified undivided Jerusalem, and I started to smell the rot. Of course, I still managed to cut him some slack and join all my friends drunkenly revel on election night about the “new hope.” I was ready to drink to him as well after listening to his very good speech (Ugh!).
Alas, it didn’t take long for this weasel to show his spinelessness again when he sat silently saying nothing while Gaza was getting pounded to shit by the Zionist monsters (no comment?!?). That was when I began to go a little off my head in rage and started digging into this ass-hole. I read Paul Street’s book about him and my single-issue irritation (ie; Palestine-Israel) suddenly morphed into a realization of just how bad he is for the US by subverting dissent and corporatizing the country even more. My friends just didn’t seem to get it, no matter how often I pointed to his growing list of political atrocities. My friends are immersed in the NYT mentality and too engrossed in their personal and family lives to give a rat’s ass. So, tired of the rolling eyes and sighs that I am some kind of radical, I started ranting to no-one on a blog I set up and continued to trawl the internet news for more reasons to highlight this insanity.
Anyway, the last thing is to get the list linked to articles that expose him then Ill likely wrap this all up.
Redwrite is on to the truth though when he essentially says we need to go even deeper into the depths of fascist hell before the other half of America wakes up, so the Democratic machine must be allowed to consume itself and the Republicans will need to see what happens when you pursue this insane course. As it is if educated well brought up middle class Americans, like my friends, who call themselves progressives, still think Obama is a good thing then, I fear the battle hasn’t even begun yet.
I too applaud your list --- a long record that overwhelms insulting arguments from the compliant "pro left" that Obama has made earnest good faith efforts toward meaningful change, but is simply powerless against a 40% minority. Por favor! We do remember clearly what Bush did with a 51% maority.
A few additions to your list and others:
* Voted (as Senator) to continue thwarting FISA and grant immunity for telecom crimes
* All appointees, Bush holdovers or Clintonistas, are Wall Street insiders, Neocon hawks, Zionist Chief of Staff, and Corporate foxes as regulators---most recently, Liz Fowler, former Wellpoint (insurance) exec who helped write the bogus HC bill, to manage sickcare.
* Appointed oil-man Ken Salazar to Interior Dept, who then appointed ex-BP exec Sylvia Baca as deputy; illegally circumvented regulations and fast-tracked BP's flawed oil plan
* Expanded arctic oil drilling permits
* Continues extraordinary rendition (and presumably torture)
* Continues saber-rattling and refuses Iran’s request for dialog (so much for diplomacy)
* Created Cat Food Commission stacked with Social Security critics
The last is most ominous, because Social Security is last large pile of loot coveted by Wall Street banksters. It supports the suspicion of many here that midterm "losses" are built-in cover (the briar patch strategy) for further destruction of the remnant middle class, while projecting the appearance of a contest that sets the stage to play messiah figure in 2012.
Thanks Doug,
I will amend with some of these and you can see the list plus the links (by the end of today hopefully) here: http://meta-global.blogspot.com/
I can put things that haven't been done under a separate section. But I think you are right, its win win for Wall street again no matter what the result come November.
A
The opening paragraph is, once again, as is so often (ad nauseum) done, presenting a lie as if it is truth because so many people were stupid enough to believe it initially.
There was ample evidence given by Obama as to what he would do as president all the way through his candidacy.
Here is a partial list of some of the more egregious examples.
He chose Biden ( a corporatist warmonger) as his running mate.
He promised to increase the pentagon budget.
He stated that he would not hesitate to strike within Pakistan.
He went out of his way to kiss Rick Warren's ass.
He voted to grant immunity for illegal spying by the telecoms AFTER stating that he was ardently opposed to doing it. This action alone was a blatant attack against the Constitution of the United States and, if this was a nation of law, should have led to demands for removal from office of all who endorsed it.
He rushed to Bush's side to pour Hundreds of Billions of taxpayer dollars into corrupt banks without any oversight or regulations.
He clearly avoided and denied access to his campaign to anyone who might be seen as being a significant leader in civil rights.
So, when these authors, like so many before them, say something as stupid as "Sure he went in with high ideals about moving the country in a more progressive direction..." I can only think that they are dimwitted fools (like the majority of people who voted for this blatantly corrupt administration and the party which distributed the rose-colored glasses).
Call it an act of desperation if you need to, but that doesn't change the fact that it was, is, and will continue to prove to be just plain stupid to ignore the consistency of Obama's (and the majority of democrats) actions and still try to believe his lies.
Yes, I agree there was ample evidence that Obama, would be an abomination in our nation, but Barry would make a great snake oil salesman, as he had soooo many people believing his silver tongued, specious, rhetoric. Like any crooked salesman, he told the people what they wanted to hear and sold them his snake oil!
BIRD: I have occasionally done freelance work for newspapers. A freelance writer is given an assignment and the tone of it may not be uttered in overt terms, but the writer intuitively understands the allowable parameters.
Many of the writers that CD features know that their paycheck depends upon certain evident loyalties. Even if they see through Obama's act, if they are tasked with writing something FAVORABLE TO THE PRESIDENT, then it becomes something akin to a chess game to arrive at the "winning" strategy.
If one needed to, s/he could find something flattering to say about a serial killer. "He was good with dogs. He took care of stray pigeons," or that type of thing.
I really don't think these writers are stupid. They are expected to articulate arguments that make the president look good. THAT'S what their paychecks depend upon; and in this economy, maintaining a paycheck means a lot more than selling a soul to a great many intelligent persons. I used to make $30,000 a year as a writer, and now I make $7000. Between the consolidation of media, and the Internet's banquet of free content, good writing jobs are plums that most will not risk losing.
"Siouxrose"
Per haps and per se,
we are indeed,
all fools.
Thanks.
Sioux Rose: You are correct as my sister is a publisher of a medium size town newspaper. " Good writing jobs are plums that most will not risk losing ". She has to keep her advertisers happy and her employees are very intelligent, but they have to keep her happy. Like someone once said: the only free press; is if you own one.
Hi Siouxrose,
Do you really think CD pays their writers? I've never received a cent.
Dan
Birdbrain, I take offense at being called a dimwit. Would accept your apology though. The Green Part had No chance. I could have voted for the witch Hillary, or the pair of real dimwits. I DID buy into the hope and change. I will admit I was decieved. But insulting those of us that voted for the Betrayor in Chief but that doesn't make me stupid.
"joecool9"
So, you are telling me that not one of the things that I listed which Obama did while a candidate bothered you then and do not bother you now.
Obama did not betray those of us who saw him for what he is. The people who refused to see him for what he is and tried to silence those of us who made an effort to wake people up are the ones who need to apologize.
Your expectation of an apology is your problem, not mine.
Hell yes they bothered me then as they do now. My problem with you is the name calling. Did you read my post? Who did you want me to waste my vote on?
I went on to degrade him as much as I could without the SS showing up. He betrayed those of us who had 'hope thst he would turn this shitty country around. I have no problem with you explanations. Like I said, it is the name calling. My biggest wish now for this creature is for his daughters to see what a creepy self coniving sellout he really is and turn their backs on him.
During his campaign I repeatedly emailed his campaign offices and asked why any politician, much less one of color, would suggest that a "separate but equal" strategy - like what he proposed in his campaign in reference to Marriage Equality - was a valid path to civil rights.
I never received even a form letter response.
Also, don't forget that he was caught on tape conspiring with Hillary to keep Dennis out of the debates.
A real FDR could have made quick work of this eco-crisis (nomic/logical)with those kind of emergency powers. He wouldn't even need 100 days. Of course, that would be tantamount to a "shot heard 'round the world", and the real war with the unlawful owner/rulers of the world would be on. We would have engaged the enemy for real (and I happen to think they would fold like the bankrupt house-of-cards that they are).
What poses a greater threat to American lives _
_ The possibility of an al Qaeda attack _
_ or the certainty, for millions of folks, of _
_ Bankruptcy
_ Unemployment
_ Homelessness
_ Illness without access to treatment.
Exactly, but that is thinking rationally. 40,000 people die every year on the road and 15,000 or so are MURDERED by fellow Americans.
Al-Quaeda (Mujahadeen) was created by the CIA in Afghanistan to fight the Russkies. Now they have been fictitiously morphed into a ridiculously exaggerated bogeyman. After all, with those bad ol Soviets gone, we need a fictitious enemy to enable the Emperor, Senate and the MIC to funnel trillions of taxpayer dollars into the hands of corporate cronies. They are doing a hell of a job, one must give them credit.
There is no such thing as Al-Quada boys and girls, it is just a phony bogeyman to cudgel you into submission. Boo! Terror Terror Terror Terror Terror...
Good one Miggy! and this was even reported in a Rupert Murdoch owned publication. Even the Murdoch press in the UK is better than the US versions it seems.
ZELL: That's exactly the issue, and I think Alan Grayson of Florida gets it!
If the whole PREMISE of NATIONAL SECURITY was presented as a graphic equation with the costs of militarism on one side, and the net loss to actual personal security (here in the Homeland Security State) on the other... a lot more people might get it. Old Ross Perot (is he still alive?) could host it, a kind of nostalgia TV special... "The State of The Nation: Then and Now."
The truth can be displayed as a simple binary equation!
I guess Hollywood isn't speaking out on this because the times are ripe for a new set of hearings on anti-American activities. We're reliving the McCarthy phase right now, only the trials have not yet begun. Meanwhile, LOTS of data is being collected under the proverbial radar thanks to the ruse of "fighting terrorists."
If any of us read this exact scenario back in l984 (for our own nation), would we believe it? It would no doubt be filed under sci-fi or fiction! Someone in the forum compared the American public with a soldier suffering from post traumatic stress disorder. I think that's an apt depiction.
We're taught to be afraid of:
foreign enemies
illegal aliens
bad breath
death
sickness
going bankrupt
losing our jobs
getting arrested at a peace march (or similar rally)
not carrying enough auto insurance/having a car accident
losing our home to a wild weather event
directly experiencing global warming
losing a spouse or loved one
Did I leave anything out?
In this climate of so much to fear, we're instructed to "don't worry, be happy." And therefore it's not surprising that millions are stocking up on anti-depressants to favor that cause!
Hey SiouxRose -------- The old time favorite fear, the annual " Flu Strain XXX"
SR, you left out the heartbreak of psoriasis.
OS: Thanks. Now asked , in a John Malkovich voice, "Are you mocking me?" (You did make me laugh, a plus!)
GLENN: Yeah, they do have to get that annual flu-shot $, don't they?
I should have added the fear of contaminated food, too...thanks to deregulation there are more cases of Mad cow, E coli outbreaks, and salmonella poisoning from things like spinach, etc.
Makes me think of that song, "Everything gives you cancer..."
I remember back in 1984 in the US, I was just a pre-teen.
I had read 1984 at that young age, and also read some comment about it (I do not recall the source, knowing myself it was probably some interview with some musician) That the only thing Orwell got wrong is that Big Brother didn't watch us, we watched him.(TV) The effect was the same.
your kids murdering you as you sleep
"The Alaskan facility is a massive mental health facility and can hold approximately 2 million people."
Like the former Soviet Union, the USA will brand nearly all opponents of the emerging fascist state as mentally ill and confine them to federally run snake pits where they will either be liquidated or kept comatose until they can be "reeducated".
They might be need for food, or transplant materials. Once you arrive your a non-citizen and any thing can happen.
And has just look at the last 500yrs of history.
>^^<
Miggy, here's a tip: It's kinda counter-productive to post these huge multi-paragraph rants. Even the ones who are receptive to your message are put off by these tomes. Do you like to get 1000 word emails? Me neither. Try to make your point(s) with fewer words. Don't be one of those people who only stop talking long enough to take a deep breath. Less is more.
Thank you for this information, which is none to popular among the liberals.
I don't think it's a rant at all. It contains a lot of factual information in a very small amount of space.
i agree. Miggy was being very economical , in fact. simply giving us INFORMATION.
now...if I was the one being described for longwindedness (although I can't help it, hehe) ...I PLEAD GUILTY...but not Miggy. we should be grateful, Shoe Thrower, alth ough I am sure you meant well :-)
It is nice that the writers at least address the popular mythology that somehow the Democrats are not passing a cornucopia of progressive legislation because they cannot reach the divine 60 vote supermajority.
Apologists for the Democrats continually raise this as a justification for how little of worth is ever accomplished in the Senate.
Why not force the Republicans to actually filibuster a progressive bill and then use the spectacle to educate the public as to what stupidity and obstructionism looks like in action?
The truth is that the Democrats are rarely interested in investing effort in passing anything progressive (I define progressive as something that would be beneficial to the public good as opposed to corporations and the plutocracy). This is especially true in the Senate where multimillionaires work at the behest of billionaires.
And of course there is the always the option of putting an end to this nonsense once and for all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_option
It is interesting to note that one of the few powers the Constitution offers to the vice-President is the power to vote if there is a tie in the Senate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tie-breaking_votes_cast_by_Vice_Presidents_of_the_United_States
If a Senate minority of 41 can simply veto any legislation that they don't like then we can see why this is rarely an option for the VP. (Biden has zero tie-breaks; Cheney 8; Al Gore 4)
The Senate is already a remarkably anti-democratic institution since it allows states such as Wyoming with its tiny population of half a million to exercise 2 votes -- the same as California with 37 million people. So essentially California with 70 times as many people has the same power in the Senate as Wyoming.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
If you then allow a minority of Senators to kill all beneficial legislation then you compound the anti-democratic nature of the Senate even further.
As to whether the Supreme Court would overturn Obama's executive actions (as the first poster suggested) --force them to do it. His justice department is constantly pushing to extend his powers to kill across the world, to spy on and even assassinate U.S. citizens--while burying any and all calls for judicial review in the shroud of State Secrets & Executive privilege.
Glenn Greenwald is an absolute marvel on covering this material:
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/index.html
The Obama justice department could certainly fight for his right to use executive powers to help home owners, etc. (as the authors suggest). Maybe he could declare that Citibank and the monster mortgage companies were engaged in acts of terrorism against U.S. citizens.
Of course, this is a fantasy -- Obama is not going to use these powers to help beleaguered average Americans.
The response of the White House to progressives has been pretty consistent: they have done a hell of a job, and we are idiots and whiny malcontents, and we better get out there and vote for the Democrats or else.
http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2010/08/12/grayson-blasts-gibbs-he-knows-fox-talking-points-and-little-else/
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100928/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_obama_interview
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/03/18/progressives
Randy, you've better articulated what I put in my post.