EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- As Death Toll Rises Beyond 500, Garment Factory Disaster 'Worst in World History'
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Move Over, Koch Brothers: A Bigger, Darker Rightwing Funder Is Out to Destroy Public Education
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Politics of Lowered Expectations
Ezra Klein, the bright, young, economic policy columnist for the "Washington Post" believes that Obama came out ahead last year in the "administration's bitter, high-stakes negotiations with the Republicans in Congress."
He cites four major negotiations in 2011 with the Republicans that Obama won. Obama won the game of chicken played in February by the House Speaker John Boehner and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell to avoid a government shutdown. He won the battle to raise the customarily supported debt ceiling on government borrowing. He avoided an embarrassment after he had to concur in the formation of a "Supercommittee" on deficit reduction when Congress couldn't come to an agreement. And he won all of a two-month extension of the social security payroll tax cut and extension of unemployment compensation benefits.
If those were "high stakes," I wonder what microscopic instrument would detect any lower stakes. Obama keeps "winning battles" that he could have avoided. But what about taking the offensive on some really significant matters? For example, when he caved in December 2010 to the minority Republicans and agreed to extend the deficit-producing Bush tax cuts on the rich, he didn't demand in return a continuation of the regular bi-partisan approval of lifting the debt limit. So over weeks in 2011, he had to mud-wrestle the Republicans on the debt limit - to the dismay of finance ministers across the world - and won only after conceding the bizarre creation of a Supercommittee to order its own Congress to enact budget cuts. That Supercommittee gridlocked and closed down.
Finally, if he does nothing, the $4 trillion over 10 years that are the Bush tax cuts expire automatically on January 1, 2013 - after the election. On the same day, the spending trigger automatically kicks in which cuts over ten years $500 billion from the bloated Defense budget and another $500 billion from other departments, but not from social security and Medicare/Medicaid beneficiaries.
This is an Obama victory? What makes Mr. Klein so sure Obama won't cave again? He has all this year to do so. His own Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has often said that there's now way he would go for any further defense cuts. Also, Obama was ready in 2011 to raise the Medicare eligibility age in return for the deal on debt ceiling. He was saved from this folly only by the stubbornness of Boehner and his clenched-teeth sidekick, Virginian Eric Cantor from the arguably most passive Congressional district in the U.S. Boehner and Cantor wanted more.
Here are some high stakes fights where the Republicans defeated the White House and blocked major substantive advances. They stopped the wide-ranging energy bill, and stifled Uncle Sam's authority to bargain for drug discounts that taxpayers are paying to the gouging drug companies for the drug benefit program for the elderly. They kept the coal industry King Coal on Capitol Hill, preserved crass corporate welfare and tax loophole programs, and blocked the able nominee to head the new agency to protect against consumer finance abuses. They also cut budgets for small but crucial safety programs in food, auto safety, and children's hunger.
Republicans preserved the notorious nuclear power loan guarantee boondoggles, a bevy of Soviet-era weapons systems nestled in the arms of the military-industrial complex and mercilessly beat up on the work and budget of the cancer-preventing, illness-reducing Environmental Protection Agency. That's just for starters.
Obama and the majority Democrats in the Senate dug this hole for themselves when they failed to curtail the filibuster in January 2009 and 2011 by majority vote. They doomed themselves to the numerically impossible hurdle of needing 60 votes to pass any measure and avoid filibusters.
Putting themselves on the defensive, while dialing business lobbyists for the same campaign dollars as the Republicans, the Obama crowd, of course, could not advance what they promised the American people. They went silent on raising the federal minimum wage to $9.50, promised by candidate Obama in 2008 for 2011. At $9.50, it would still have been less than the federal minimum wage in 1968, adjusted for inflation. Hardly a radical proposal.
Obama went silent on the card check, promised unorganized American workers in their losing struggle with multinational corporate employers. While bailing out the criminal gamblers on Wall Street, he could have pressed for a stock transaction sales tax that could have raised big revenue and helped dampen speculation with other peoples' money such as pension funds and mutual fund savings.
He could have pushed seriously for a visible public works program producing domestic jobs in thousands of communities for improved public services. He could have directly challenged the Tea Partiers with cuts in corporate welfare, but he did not, except for ending an ethanol subsidy. He could have made a big deal of cracking down on corporate fraud on Medicare and Medicaid that totals tens of billions of dollars a year. However, once on the defensive from his own self-inflicted weak hand, he was always on the defensive.
Obama may be in a superior tactical position vis-a-vis the Congressional Republicans, as Mr. Klein posits, but is this all there is left of the touted movement for hope and change in 2008?
President Obama is deemed by his fellow Democrats to have won the financial battles, but the Republicans won the rest. How can the expectation levels of this two party duopoly sink any lower?
Let's face it, if today's Republicans are the most craven, greedy, ignorant, anti-worker, anti-patient, anti-consumer, anti-environment and coddlers of corporate crime in the party's history, why aren't the Democrats landsliding them?
For two answers try reading John F. Kennedy's best-selling Profiles of Courage, 1955, or if you favor the ancients, Plutarch's Lives (circa 100 A.D.).
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...


17 Comments so far
Show AllThose scientists that recently determined that rodents' brains are affected by high fat diets need only look at who US voters elect to determine the results of high fat diets among those voters.
Right. Globalization. Citizens United. We were citizens. We became consumers. Then we became nothing to them. They are all immoral liars.
We’ve been packaged.
For two answers try reading John F. Kennedy's best-selling Profiles of Courage, 1955, or if you favor the ancients, Plutarch's Lives (circa 100 A.D.).
I have little time to read these,
I have to learn about keeping bees.
Can I have the synopsis please?
May I suggest more books, Stephen Pimpare's "People's History of Poverty in America"
and Michael Parenti's "The Assassination of Julius Caesar"?
All four may say the same thing
Although I have voted for Nader in the past four presidential elections I am disappointed that Nader spins Obama's first three years as miscalculation and bad strategy.
Anybody not afflicted with denial syndrome has observed Obama's serial regressive actions starting with his zealous support of an unconditional TARP, and filling his cabinet and advisor ranks with Wall Street insiders during 2008, to further weakening due process when he signed his NDAA on January 1, 2012.
Rather than miscalculations and bad strategy, Obama's first three years have been characterized by sharp calculations, and strategy as precise as a Swiss watch that will assure that Obama will be the first politician in history to amass a corporate funded billion dollar campaign war chest this year.
"I am disappointed that Nader spins Obama's first three years as miscalculation and bad strategy."
Looks like Nader is doing precisely what he accuses Klein of doing.
The question is WHY Nader--and the million other lawyers and Constitutional experts--patently mis-characterize the situation. Why are they all in "denial?"
Have they all gone wimpy like Obama?
Or is it that none of them (including Obama) are politically independent of the current system?
The word denial is exactly the word I came up with. The completeness and swiftness with which the final structural tools of fascism are being put in place is overwhelming us. In the advertising world of Obama, Romney, and the 70% of the congress who support indefinite detention as a military or executive privilege, there is no global warming, no depression, no peak oil, no mass murder in Iraq, no problem with drone wars, no land-theft or apartheid killings in Israel, no financial fraud, no feudal shift of wealth and power, no starvation. In this world products and beautiful people abound, tear jerking stories of triumph over personal difficulties assure, memories disappear in a matter of weeks, days, or hours. In this world Americans need to prepare for the jobs of the future and America's best days are just around the corner. This is the world of denial in which mainstream politics plays out.
Give it up Ralph, you aren't in that world and you have no influence in that world. The only electorally viable candidate for president not in complete denial about everything is Ron Paul. We need to shift tactics . The most promising front is state and local politics. The left has traditionally been wary of that kind of shift; now it is the mainstream Republicans who are fighting it. But the 900 pound gorilla in the room is the war machine and its unstated but intimate connection to speculative capital which is now entirely derived from Federal tax revenues. Ron Paul is the only currently viable candidate who opposed/s bank bailouts and is firmly opposed to wars of aggression and and to our empire of military bases. The day we stop feeding militarism is the day we have a prayer of ending the blight of world wide military fascist regimes dependent on us , and the day we begin to rebuild a sane sustainable economy. A mass defection by democrats is Paul's best chance and the best chance of getting him to see reason on global warming. He has worked with the most progressive people in the Congress. Show me a better option.
Well said. It is our way out. We’ve got to stop this madness in our world.
President elect Obama's first act was to demobilize the tens-of-thousands of enthusiastic volunteers left over from the 2008 campaign. Obama could have told the blue-dogs and some Republicans how to vote, threatening to use these volunteers in congressional districts/states against those in congress who defied him.
Once again Nader is on target. And so is raydelcamino. But we should ask ourselves how much better off would our country be if Nader rather than Obama were president.
Yes...so what is to be done about this? People have been protesting across the nation without much influence on what the politicos continue to do to rip them off. The alternatives to another Obama reign don't look any better. Not vote?
Write in a candidate? Vote anyway for anybody who's not Obama?
For all his other demonstrated virtues, Nader has always shown that he's not inclined to think too far outside the US System's basic box.
He seems to lately define The Box as simply: a duopoly enabling money corrupted democracy, when, in fact, said box is more truthfully definable as 'a corporate capitalist enabled corruption of mass perceptual norms-- of everything from money, political parties, mass media and public epistemology, to the human understanding of the meaning of democracy itself..
Nader's a smart and valuable advocate for progressive values within the most immediate box, but he's no Thorstein Veblen, C.J. Douglas, Norman Thomas, or David Korten, for example.
I think he's well aware that there's a bigger, however less visible, normative Box that encapsulates and feeds the contradictions of the more immediate one that he focuses on.. But Nader has made it a point to never' go there', and I think he never will.
ATT.: Ralph Nader
I recently published a book entitled, " Don't Do It Like They Did It - in Washington!" I have sumitted many solutions to today's problems, including how to win the 2012 Elections. This does not mean voting for either Republican for Democrats. Please visit my web site www.boldthoughts.org where you will see my articles on WHY and HOW we can Save America and win the 2012 elections. I also refer to you, Ralph as part of the solution. We must all have a party to vote FOR. I have addressed my book not only to the US audience but also to all the people around the world wishing to have clean govt' that will represent their needs. My book is now for sale at Amazon.com for only $5.99 ebook and only $ 10.99 paperback. Howard M Greenebaum, author
Ralph, please read my book and let me know what you think of it. Please advise me by email howard.greenebaum@xtra.co.nz
As of today, President Obama also chose NOT to use his authority to appoint Richard Cordray to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. After all, why should consumers care about someone being in charge at the CONSUMER FINANCIAL PROTECTION Bureau??
Ralph Nader does and has always supported Real Democracy where We. the People, make the decisions that affect our lives. This is why I have supported his runs for public office all these years. <
You can nitpick him - as anyone can nitpick anyone who doesn't address every single thing in one brief opinion piece. But this tone is exactly right for the populace who need to be informed.
Ralph is basically a teacher. He knows the best way of getting people moving towards Real Democracy is to tell them the facts. Once people understand what's going on, then we can discuss possible solutions and actions to get those solutions in place.
Impatience does not win the long race, which is what we're in right now.
"Let's face it, if today's Republicans are the most craven, greedy, ignorant, anti-worker, anti-patient, anti-consumer, anti-environment and coddlers of corporate crime in the party's history, why aren't the Democrats landsliding them?"????????????????????????????????????????????????
Could it be because the Democrats are racing like hell to compete for the status of most craven, greedy, ignorant, anti-worker, anti-patient, anti-consumer, anti-environment coddler of corporate crime in America.
So far the wall street .1% are casting their "votes" for Obama.
I agree 100% with you, Ralph! Just had time to read this.