Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Obama Pulls a Clinton
Here we go again. When Bill Clinton
suffered an electoral reversal after his first two years in office, he
abruptly embraced the corporate money guys who had financed his
congressional opposition in an effort to purchase a second term. On
Tuesday in his Wall Street Journal Op-Ed piece, Barack Obama veered
sharply down that same course, trumpeting his executive order " ... to
remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our
economy less competitive. ..." 
He employed the same "creating a 21st-century regulatory system" rationalization used by Clinton when he signed off on the sweeping deregulation legislation that unleashed the Wall Street greed that ended up being the biggest job-killer since the Great Depression. "Over the (past) seven years, we have tried to modernize the economy," Clinton enthused as he signed the Financial Services Modernization Act that repealed key New Deal legislation, adding, "And today what we are doing is modernizing the financial services industry, tearing down those antiquated laws and granting banks significant new authority." Modernizing was the propaganda constant, as in the Commodity Futures Modernization Act that Clinton signed, thus shielding financial derivatives from any government regulation.
That deregulation, as Obama concedes in his WSJ column, led to "a lack of proper oversight and transparency (that) nearly led to the collapse of the financial markets and a full-scale depression." But Obama now promises that his deregulation efforts will be more sensibly targeted and will "bring order to regulations that have become a patchwork of overlapping rules, the result of tinkering by administrations and legislatures of both parties and influence of special interests in Washington over decades."
When he wrote that he intends to accomplish this revamp "with more input from experts, businesses and ordinary citizens," did he have in mind his two new key White House advisers who were the most effective advocates for those special interests? Tom Donilon, Obama's national security adviser, was the Washington lobbyist for the housing behemoth Fannie Mae, which will cost taxpayers $700 billion because of its marketing of toxic derivatives. Obama's new Chief of Staff William Daley was the lead Washington representative for a similarly afflicted JPMorgan Chase. These are the folks, along with many other Wall Street alums in this administration, who will oversee the latest update of already weakened regulations.
The first target will be the administration's puny efforts to protect consumers: "The move is the latest effort by the White House to repair relations with corporate America," the Wall Street Journal's report on Obama's column stated, "Business leaders say an explosion in new regulations stemming from the president's health-care and financial regulatory overhauls has, along with the sluggish economy, made them reluctant to spend on expansion and hiring. Companies are sitting on nearly $2 trillion in cash and liquid assets, the most since World War II."
This is a case of corporate blackmail pure and simple. The economy is sluggish because of a housing crisis that shows no sign of improvement. It stands history on its head to blame government financial regulations that had worked splendidly for six decades for the meltdown or the failure to fix a housing market that is the key to improved consumer spending.
Fixing housing would require efforts to keep the 50 million Americans whose mortgages are underwater in their homes. But the government bailouts under both George W. Bush and Obama have not required any significant cramp-down or reappraisal of mortgages by banks to enable people to stay in their homes. Instead the Fed and Treasury have flooded the banks and top corporations with cheap money and bailouts but, in the classic problem of pushing on a string, the corporate ingrates are hoarding that money.
Obama, and the party he heads, failed to provide a progressive narrative during November's election holding the financial elite that created this mess responsible. The key issue is not big government or onerous regulation but rather transparency and fraud prevention. When you are evicted, it is a government agent, a marshal or sheriff, who will force you out, so shouldn't the government also be involved in assuring that the consumer is protected by a properly vetted contract? Instead the U.S. Chamber of Commerce spearheaded the marketing of an alternative narrative, as successful as it was devious, by Republican candidates that held regulation-rather than deregulation-responsible for the mess. Now Obama seems poised to join their ranks. As the WSJ reported:
"On Feb. 7, Mr. Obama will visit the U.S. Chamber of Commerce-a chief opponent to his administration's regulatory approach-for a discussion on how the White House can work with the group to create jobs. The efforts are designed to give companies more confidence in the president's stewardship of the economy, and bolster his re-election prospects among a wealthy constituency not traditionally allied with Democrats."
A constituency that Daley, Obama's new chief of staff, can faithfully represent, having received $5 million a year from JPMorgan Chase. And so ends the season of hope for the less wealthy constituency traditionally allied with Democrats.
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...
90 Comments so far
Show All"When Bill Clinton suffered an electoral reversal after his first two years in office, he abruptly embraced the corporate money guys who had financed his congressional opposition in an effort to purchase a second term."
Obama has not 'abruptly embraced' the Corporate Money guys... he was always their servant.
He's just showing his true colors.
Non Serviam - I will not serve.
So sir sheer, it is how Obama got elected--
bringing in all the clintonistas, putting
Hillary on the gravy train==asking Bill C
to campaign for him--unlike al gore who
made the crucial mistake of not asking.
If it got Barak in Office then easy to see
how he'll do it again to get re-elected--
could be his best shot bringing in the
whole economics bunch to offer false hopes
of clinton reforms to the now crisis.
but clinton dereg of banks and big oil are
major pains hurting us all badly still in
this day of==er haroomff==change to coin a
word.
If it takes making Hil VP or sec/def we all
now know Team Obama would do it in a heartbeat,
to keep those demmy votes in line.
so we are in for two years of old clintonista
names and faces, and politics from BO. and
should rhambo not get in as mayor, look for a
cushy job opening again for him.
"The move is the latest effort by the White House to repair relations with corporate America,"
No one even tries to hide their allegiance to corporate America anymore.
Down with the Repo-Demo party!
Obama will do the bidding of these vandals now and cut SSI and Medicare under the banner of "saving them." He's already cut the deal behind closed doors with the GOP back in Dec. What's next is another "kabuki theater" like the last over health care. In this one the GOP will threaten to crash the Gov't if they don't get the cuts in all New Deal entitlements and Obama will sigh and tll us the best deal he could get was some cuts and raising the retirement age or God forbid the big bad GOP will huff and puff and blow the whole house of cards down. he's counting on his legions of Omambots to nod in agreement and move on.
Obama, like Clinton, were groomed to become Wall Street's agents. A reminder that most pimps are white and have a respectable public appearance. Reagan, unlike Clinton and Obama, had his existing self-delusion underwritten and promoted by GE whose interests aligned.
You'll notice in the photo, that's Mr. & Mrs. Junior Bush sitting behind Billary Clinton and Obomba.
Kinda speaks volumes don't it?
Clinton and Obomba routinely appear with right-wingers; police forces, Army and Navy academy students, "surprise" visits to "The Troops" in Af-Pak-Iraq.
But you NEVER see Obomba or Clinton with any liberal/left/progressive people.
"Tell me who your friends are and I'll tell you who you are."
---Spanish proverb
obama has open distain for liberals....
but just like a battered wife liberals stick with these SOB's......
and then express surprise when we get beaten down again..... and again..... and again......
Money rules
Obama is real esay to figure out. He does the opposite of what he says/said he'll do on virtually every subject except for his promise to escalate the wars, which he's done.
Let's just admit it in plain english - we DO NOT have a democracy anymore-
the government is controlled and run by corporate interests......
They've enriched the Communists in China (remember when fighting the communists was worth blowing up the entire world over?) at the expense of the poor and middle class in America....
And we're told if we don't accept it when the dem's play corporate loving repub's then we're being naive or selfish!
For wanting JUSTICE and PEACE we're naive!
as it is, the USA and the rest of the world has been captured by the global banking cartel - who are basically vampires who will blow up the system thru their unending greed -
there will be no change until things get a hell of a lot worse than they are now -
we had a chance w/ the dem elections of 2008 but all that has given us is a clear window into the FACT that there is no representation for the average American - only for millionaires and billionaires - that the dem's are just as corrupt as the repub's are -
During our other depressions of the 1880's and 1890's and 1930's in large part people stood up for each other - NOW that ideal is in large part dead..... we've followed the GREED IS GOD mantra of that devil reagan - now when the next collapse comes we'll fight each other instead of banding together......
IF we do end up banding together I'd make a bet it is the immigrants that show us the way -
What will cause the next crash? how about:
1. food prices shooting up
2. gas at $5 a gal
3. state and local gov's bankrupted
4. cuts to Social Security- the only thing that kept this crisis from being a full blown depression - kids live w/ parents now- in the depression parents lived w/ kids....
5.interest rates up 3% - then the fed , state and local gov's will be bankrupted
any of these could do it - my guess is a perfect storm of ALL of these may just hit this fall!
the oligarch's have already decided that CHINA is the new way to rule- that DEMOCRACY thingy is just too messy, and it allows the working stiff to think he actually has a say in how things run!
How naive!
hold cash, grow a garden, learn to can food, and pay down your mortgage, and stay close to your SUPPORT GROUP whether it be family or close friends.......
or put your hands on your ankles and kiss your ass goodbye!
mtdon, your pessimistic assessment is accurate, well argued, and would appear to be inescapable.
Yes, the "government is now fully controlled and run by corporate interests" which only use the completely interchangeable Republican and Democrat stooges as a facade to excite and distract the majority of the audience --- which in turn is about as well informed and serious as the audience of any WWF, NFL, NASCAR, or American Idol grudge match final.
In fact, don, it's a bit worse than that, in that those bland sounding "corporate interests" are actually the most modern and sophisticated ruling-elite global corporate/financial/militarist Empire that ever walked the face of this earth, and they will use any means, that is 'whatever it takes', to prevail for their empire and crush us.
But as bad as that seems, and as Bill Murray might say, "we got that going for us".
You see, an Empire, any empire, is a really hated thing by Americans --- and once this thing is more broadly known as an Empire (and not our government), its maneuverability and tactics, which have previously been greatly advantaged by its camouflage, its secrecy, will be useless --- and it will be directly confronted by a popular force which out-weighs it by over 100 to 1. All Empires face this reality in the final chaos before they collapse --- which is why empires all tend to collapse very very quickly (and with great surprise for those very few inside the Empire). It was this way for the Roman Empire, the Spanish Empire, the French Empire, the British Empire, the Nazi Empire, the Japanese Empire, the South African Empire, and the next to the last empire, the Soviet Empire --- all very fast and chaotic at the end.
The 100:1 or 1000:1 numerical superiority of those outside the empire, and the metastasizing cancer of corruption, hubris, unsustainability, and financial rot within the empire always make the end a great surprise, shock, and chaotic rush --- much like the messy US rooftop exit by copters from the embassy in Saigon. Retreat is not a maneuver that Empires ever expect or practice.
Thus, when the Empire is broadly recognized as an empire, and when the inevitable insurrection comes, the end will be quick.
Now this is not to say that the confrontation won't be ugly, since the empire will surely flail in inchoate madness -- but a madness which will only accelerate its doomed fate.
Just to bring this train of thought back to the issue of Obama's apparent edict strength in 'ordering', by executive fiat, that all regulations be reviewed on a basis of 'cost / benefit analysis' for the preemptive benefit of the corporatist (fascist, as Mussolini would say) Empire. This apparent 'show of empire power', which the faux emperor assumes is beyond the realm of the masses to reverse, will quite likely shine a bright light of economic analysis precisely on the area of deceit and fraud for which the Empire will have no defense --- once the populace becomes aware of just what the real costs and benefits of corporate imperial actions have really cost them.
For example, something that everyone will become aware of and really understand in such a review is that Empire is financially fueled exclusively by the guileful creation of false profits through a process of 'dumping negative externality costs' on everyone else --- both "at home" and "abroad".
The true scale of today's 'negative externality cost dumping' is the biggest, ugliest, and most destructive secret of this secret Empire --- far beyond anything that anyone can imagine.
In the late 19th century it was said that it took "half the world's resources to support the British Empire", and today it takes many times the whole world's resources to support the ruling-elite's global corporate/financial/militarist Empire which is nominally (and temporarily) head-quartered in the US.
Essentially, "Rogue Economics" (as Loretta Napoleoni calls it), "looting economics" (as American economics Nobel laureate, George Akerloff, called it), and 'Empire economics' (as I call it), or criminally unequal economics are all hidden by the whole cloth of negative externality fraud.
The scale of negative externality 'gaming' of our economic (and political-economic) globalist world today is vastly underestimated. Even Alan Greenspan might gasp, and say "I'm shocking" (as he did in Congressional testimony), for its planned gaming of a known 'market failure' and deceit.
Basically, the entire FIRE industry (Finance, Insurance, Real Estate), FIRE 2 (the coal, oil and gas burning fire of energy), and FIRE 3 (the global weapons industry) are all as close to completely negative externality cost dumping sectors of our fraudulent economy as one can imagine --- and their massive 'negative externality cost dumping' are the singularly largest contributors to economic inequality, economic immorality, and the driving force toward austerity, if not peonage, for everyone else.
It can be easily proven that the public negative externality costs of this corporatist Empire are not merely greater than the entire private profit benefits of all Fortune 500 corporations which cause these costs, but that the costs are greater even than the gross revenues of all the corporations and banks in the Empire together.
It can also easily and compellingly be proven that the costs of the financial looting scheme of 2007 to 2011 (and continuing) are not based on those supposedly "toxic assets", but are literally 'fraudulent assets' that have NO real estate behind them, and that are greater than the entire GDP of the US.
Yes, faux-Emperor Obama, let's bring on those cost/benefit analyses --- so that we may learn and begin the demise of your whole rotten Empire!
We only need to stop ankle-biting at the cuffs of this criminal Empire of economics, and start to rip off the bark of its disguise.
Alan MacDonald
Sanford, Maine
"Democracy over Empire" party headquarters
I cannot forget what the mood was like back in 1996 when the Telecom Act was passed. There was a mixture of those who opposed it, those who supported it, and people like me who remained neutral about it. The years went on by and eventually, there were no more small telephone companies to work for. Now here comes Obama saying "wait your turn" to us little guys yet again. It is no different when giving the big banks too many handouts while telling the homeowners to "wait their turn". There is no point in holding one's breath and expecting miracles from Obama/Clinton.
George Carlin was spot on the myth of democracy and the American Dream:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIraCchPDhk&feature=related
Scheer is right on the money but this is an old story-- one party of the rich in this country--it has two branches, though--Dems and Repubs.
"...will pull a Clinton"?
He's long surpassed Clinton, and maybe even Dubya.
How does Obama expect to get the support of the right wing for his re-election, if nothing remains for him to give up? His cupboard of capitulations is already looking bare.
Bush Sr./Clinton/Bush Jr./Obama
I see some vague superficial differences, but that's about it.
Hail to the Kleptocracy!
Let's see! Senator Obama voted FOR the Military Commissions Act, which eliminated Habeous Corpus, and voted FOR giving AT&T retroactive immunity for providing a means for the Bush administration to spy on American's phone calls and e-mails. Whoever thought he was a "progressive" was a "fool".
Despite some of the bad Clinton did, saying Obama is pulling a Clinton seems like tacit approval.
I wonder if Bill has seduced Obama with his "sage" advice. The problems are far worse now and there isn't an exploding internet boom to save Obama like it did Clinton.
Do we end the rule of the money-power with another corruptible representative government?
Here we go again, another article whos premise is that these Democratic Presidents embrace corporatism in response to some sort of electoral defeat instead of acknowledging that these policies that are so detrimental to the nation and its working people are what they have always wanted. The two largest aspects of Presidential power are the ability to appoint the top level governmental managers and the executive order which can be used to direct these government agencies. Just taking a look at who both these president's choose to appoint to positions of power, from day one, not after some electoral loss a couple of years latter, should tell anyone just whos side they are on. And I'll give Mr. Sheer a hint, its not the working people of this country.
"This is a case of corporate blackmail pure and simple. The economy is sluggish because of a housing crisis that shows no sign of improvement. It stands history on its head to blame government financial regulations that had worked splendidly for six decades for the meltdown or the failure to fix a housing market that is the key to improved consumer spending. "
Where do I start. First, the economy isn't "sluggish", its broken. Second, the economic collapse wasn't caused by the housing market - the housing market was simply a symptom of a diseased and broken economy. The collapse was caused by banks lending too much money for housing, much of it in non-traditional or predatory loans because banks no longer felt they had a stake in whether the loans were sound. Lend the money, take the fees, and dump the mortgage onto the secondary market. Then we have Wall Street and its entirely unregulated derivatives market, one which is even larger today than during its collapse. Once this easy money dried up, housing prices HAD to collapse. Average working families could no longer get loans for the amounts needed for the overpriced housing and so housing prices had to come down to what people could actually afford. Anyone who thinks that houses should appreciate 10% or more per year, each and every year while worker pay remains flat or declines, and then doesn't see an eventual collapse in home buyers probably shouldn't be playing with that much money.
A second larger reason the economy remains broken is that corporations and businesses of all sizes and in all sectors, and even government, have come to see this economic collapse as an excuse to further squeeze labor. Reductions in salaries, hours worked, and benefits - we see it all even as corporate profits, and executive pay and bonuses are back up to obscene levels. Our governments, both State and Federal are even in on the act. As the economy stays in the toilet (more like the sewer by now), governments at all levels are refusing to impose taxes on either corporations or the wealthy, in fact they are doing quite the opposite and are busy cutting taxes for these two groups. All the while, they scream about deficits and budget shortfalls and then slash only those government programs and spending that provide benefit to the working families of this country. Any government spending that benefits the military, corporations, or the wealthy is virtually untouchable.
PART TWO
"Fixing housing would require efforts to keep the 50 million Americans whose mortgages are underwater in their homes. But the government bailouts under both George W. Bush and Obama have not required any significant cramp-down or reappraisal of mortgages by banks to enable people to stay in their homes. Instead the Fed and Treasury have flooded the banks and top corporations with cheap money and bailouts but, in the classic problem of pushing on a string, the corporate ingrates are hoarding that money."
Several things wrong with this statement. First, for those who are underwater, what we should have done at the start of the collapse, when we knew this was going to be a widespread problem, is offer them 30 year fixed rate mortgages at the low prevailing rates instead of the high interest rate loans that they had. These refinance loans should have been done without any points or fees, and without any prepayment penalty on the original loans. This entire housing default wave started when adjustable rate mortgages which had low initial interest rates reset to what I would call predatory interest rates. Doing this alone would have cut many of these mortgage payments in half or more without even having to worry about what the loan amount was or whether the homeowner was even underwater on the loan.
A larger problem with the second statement of the author is that he assumes that everyone who is upside down should be made to not be. In other words, if you bought a house at or near the height of the bubble somewhere around 2005, then we should just let you write off the amount you owe based on the fall in value. He's wrong on this one. The reason for this is that a home's market value is meaningless unless you want to either buy or sell it. It has no bearing whatsoever for people who just want to live in their homes. The only ones really effected by the collapse in real estate prices are those who bought a house which cost more than they could afford on their income and were either hoping to sell at a profit or refinance at a lower interest rate based on increased home value. In short, for many of these people a house wasn't a home to live in, it was an investment they thought was liquid.
Our real economy started to come apart back in the 1970's, Ronald Reagan during the 1980's accelerated the process with his attacks on government, unions, and his tearing apart of any regulation and oversight of corporations that he could get away with. Bill Clinton helped put this into overdrive when he pushed for and signed NAFTA, The Telecommunications Modernization Act (Deregulation), and the repeal of Glass-Steagall. George Bush Jr, in a class by himself, really put the peddle to the metal with his supreme court appointments, continuing business deregulation, and militarization and wars of aggression. Barack Obama is simple following the path laid out since the late 1970's with his expanding of the wars, so called health care reform - which is really an insurance bill, continuing deregulation, and all the rest.
An excellent essay, I believe the height of the housing bubble was nearer at the end of 2006. Cable programs "Flip the House" had encouraged speculations. Congress should have imposed a capital tax gain for houses owned for less than five years. This would immediately cut off the speculators and allowed genuine buyers to own a home. I remember a house, miles from the City with part of the roof fallen and walls almost collapsing going for $250K to the highest bidders in Northern CA. I even came across one Ph.D gave up her profession to be a realtor. Subprime predators were everywhere.
No one takes responsibility and no one was punished for the crimes. The banks continue to rack in billions with tax payers and future generations footing the bills. It’s cruel to see so many go homeless and millions of lives’ ruin. The WH and Congress still inaction even as more home will be foreclosure than 2010.
sivasm,
I live down on the Central Coast and it was pretty much the same here. If you remember, at one point housing was over a third of California's economy when you factor in realators, mortgage brokers, construction, title companies, refinance companies, remodeling and home improvement, and all the rest. No wonder we're hurting so bad here in California. Why anyone would ever think that housing could make up a third of any economy. Pretty screwy and scary.
We have so much wrong here in California and its hard to say whats worse, but the big thing I would watch out for now are the public employee pension funds which have been grossly underfunded. Think about what is going to happen when these pension funds, especially CALPERS, have to start finally liquidating all these large portfolios of stocks and bonds in order to meet the large obligations from the retiring baby boomers. This is going to happen at the same time that every other state and city will have to do the same thing. When everyone's selling, who's going to be buying - and thus keeping prices up.
The retiring baby boomers are what is going to bring the whole thing crashing down. Not because they're bad people, but because all the so called money for them to retire on, whether a traditional pension or an IRA or 401K, is actually locked away in stocks and bonds and they are all going to have to liquidate them at the same time - a point in time when the younger workers because of falling wages and lowered standards of living will not be able to buy up these assets as they are sold. So once again, we're probably going to see collapsing prices and the ultra wealthy buying up assets at pennies on the dollar.
You have factors in retirement in greater depth than I envision. It's in my mind all the time and I warned my wife and kid pretend that it may not be there, when the time. My wife kept on telling me the SS to be wiped out under this regime. We kept on remind each other keeping our expenses to the barest minimum. Then the student loan currently exceeds credits’ cards debts and will just as devastating as the Subprime. Finally, what do you think of Jerry Brown? He's from the seventies (a hippy) and not many people understand CA problems. He just might pull it off.
Central Cost in Costa Mesa right? I used to live in LA in the sixties and drove to Newport once in a while. Love LA than but not today. Too congested. Did you know the houses in Rolling Hill estate sold for $45K and they are million today?
Much better said than Scheer.
I wasn't as aware of slick willie's loyalties in 1992 as I was with o's from watching him campaign in 2008. But on hindsight, both were about the same as both of their actions clearly demonstrate the hard to detect political bent from that 'other' party. But for slick willie's part, it is hard to out do the harm his signing all the deregulatory legislation 'right and left' all over the place. And of course, we can see o's daily compliance to the corporate sector, the obvious contradictory appointments of people who created the dire state of affair this country is in first place, and the izraeli public affairs committee.
But all in all, it isn't so much of o pulling a slick willie, it is the political scene having been gamed and 'both' clubs ass licking the aristocracy for such things as another term as terror-in-chief of a political position bereft of anything to do with real governing except totalitarianism. Welcome to the largest banana republic on earth.
So for what it is worth for those of us who still want the electoral process to work, close scrutiny of what happens on vote day November 2012 will expose maybe tricks that the department of voter fraud will use to get the 'chosen' elected. It will prove to be as ugly an election as anything of the 2000 and 2004 elections combined. What would be nice would be to go back to pure paper ballots or at least leaving paper trails for all votes.
Barack "The Cameleon" is at it again! Keep a close eye on him and keep your back to the wall. Even at that, he will manage to stick it to Middle Class America yet again.
Watch the "new" giant in mainstream media fawn all over him when he pulls this one off.
The New York Times is complicit in the situation that we find ourselves in as they have refused to air any comments designed to discredit the Clinton Circus. They supported the Iraq War and by going along to get along with Obomber they have failed as a newspaper reporting to the people. The Obama failures are no longer in question, he is guilty of the doublecross to the working classes.
The so called progressives should retire out
of politics as they have allowed the sell-out of this country to the detriment of the population, by going along to get along with Obama. Nader tried to tell us during the last presidential election that Obama was a product of Corporate America.
Interesting but completely expected.
" ... to remove outdated regulations that stifle job creation and make our economy less competitive. ..."
this is such an odd and absurd statement when the Clinton bubble was the result of similar kowtowing (to CEOs who don't give a rat's behind what happens to the workforce and the cities they have abandoned) and an anomaly that benefited only a few of his chosen buddies, gofers and designated sponsors and was the pipe dream that the current crash was molded out of: a shell of a casting that cracked in the furnace.
From any stats I have read the numbers of jobs, their worth in wages and benefits, even from the jobs superficially thrown together to bump up the spin statistics, went on a downward trajectory from the moment Clinton took office. I realize from his perspective, and maybe Obama's, and from the people they rub elbows with everyday, that to them it's all good news, but most people have been on the permanent income reduction plan since the eighties. I guess it's hard to understand the suffering your programs cause when all the people you party with are telling you how great everything is.
Obama badly needs to face a progressive challenger in the 2012 Democratic primaries. He misled and betrayed us and needs to pay an electoral price. Failing that, I hope the Greens name a good strong progressive candidate.
If Mr. Obama's actions are wise, I can't feel it. If his actions are not wise, he will have a short-lived political career ranking right down there with his predecessor. What I feel is an 'empty suit'.
Considering that Obama has been pulling a Bush since 2009, isn't it refreshing for him to pull a Clinton every once in a while?
Bingo!
LOL!
mtdon @ 12:47, George Carlin really cut through all the bullshit on that one. Thanks
More "change" we can't believe in.
Obama certainly pulls more than "A Clinton",
he pulls Shrubs and Cheneys on a daily basis.
Obama pulls a Clinton?
Geez the last person to do that was Lewinsky.