Wednesday, November 23, 2011

New York Magazine asks "When Did Liberals Become So Unreasonable?" In my opinion this is a MUST read!

Photo courtesy of The Obama Diary.
Courtesy of New York Magazine:

There are any number of arguments about things Obama did wrong. Some of them are completely misplaced, like blaming Obama for compromises that senators forced him to make. Many of them demand Obama do something he can’t do, like Maddow’s urging the administration to pass an energy bill through a special process called budget reconciliation—a great-sounding idea except for the fact that it’s against the rules of the Senate. Others castigate Obama for doing something he did not actually do at all (i.e., Drew Westen’s attention-grabbing, anguished New York Times essay assailing Obama for signing a budget deal with cuts to Medicare, Social Security, and Medicaid that were not actually in the budget in question). 

I spend a lot of time rebutting these arguments, and their proponents spend a lot of time calling me an Obama apologist. 

Some of the complaints are right, and despite being an Obama apologist, I’ve made quite a few of them myself. (The debt-ceiling hostage negotiations drove me to distraction.) But I don’t think any of the complaints—right, wrong, or ­otherwise—really explain why liberals are so depressed. 

Here is my explanation: Liberals are dissatisfied with Obama because liberals, on the whole, are incapable of feeling satisfied with a Democratic president. They can be happy with the idea of a Democratic president—indeed, dancing-in-the-streets delirious—but not with the real thing. The various theories of disconsolate liberals all suffer from a failure to compare Obama with any plausible baseline. Instead they compare Obama with an imaginary president—either an imaginary Obama or a fantasy version of a past president.

Much like the author of this piece, I to have found myself trying to defend this President against a tide of liberal dissatisfaction. It is, to be honest, exhausting.

However in this piece the reporter, Jonathon Chait, does the herculean task of explaining that liberals have a history of pining for a true progressive President, bitching about how non-liberal they are while in office, and then mythologizing their presidency years after they have left the White House.

Take a moment to read it and see if it helps to adequately explain WHY we are seeing so many progressives angrily turning their back on THIS President.

36 comments:

  1. Anonymous4:17 AM

    HERE HERE! Most of the liberals I know -- the young ones especially seem to think that Obama is the Jeanie from I Dream of Jeanie and that he should be able to nod his head and turn America into a liberal utopia with free health care, free pot, and jobs for all the basket weaving majors. It gets annoying.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Caroline Jumper in San Jose, CA4:22 AM

    When did the term "liberals" come to describe what used to be centerist Republicans?

    Sad.

    We don't got no more liberal politicians.

    Clinton's platform was to the right of right of Nixon's. And Obama is right of Clinton.

    whimper

    ReplyDelete
  3. Gasman4:45 AM

    Gryphen,
    Let me see if this progressive can explain. First of all, the premise of the article is bullshit. Progressives do push Democratic presidents to move to the left, but it's not because they are unreasonable, it's because so few of those D presidents are anything other than ever so SLIGHTLY left of center, if even that. Too often, like Clinton and Obama, they seem to spend more time ingratiating themselves to the GOP rather than the people that actually put them in office. It's also not the progressives that are lionizing JFK, it's the moderates. Progressives are quick to point out JFK's cowardice in the face of Jim Crow racial oppression and his willingness to ramp up in Viet Nam. It's the vacillating moderates who shared JFK's lack of resolve that pine for Camelot.

    I am a social justice progressive which is why I am so impatient with Obama. He is content to drag his feet when it comes to social justice. DADT, DOMA, and healthcare are all issues in which Obama seemed less concerned with justice than political accommodation. I am an unapologetic social justice absolutist who asks for a certain date on the calendar when social justice is worth fighting for. I'll compromise on anything OTHER than justice. If it had not been for the cranky prodding of progressives, President Obama would not have championed dismantling DADT. He is simply NOT a social justice crusader.

    I am a Democrat by necessity only. If there ever arose a viable party that would be more committed to social justice then I'd give the Democratic Party the middle finger. The moderates love to celebrate the social justice victories after the fact, but it is the progressives who are in the trenches fighting those battles.

    I will proudly and FORCEFULLY prod President Obama to be more supportive of social justice issues. I will also vote for him. That vote, however, does most definitely NOT bind me to silent, subservient, sycophancy.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous4:48 AM

    The real culprits in my mind are the self-styled "progressives" who consider "liberal" to be too often a synonym for "Democratic" so they disassociate themselves from it and who like to hover "above" party politics.

    I'm a liberal Democrat, daughter of a proud union worker and two ardent Roosevelt supporters, and I fully support President Obama. He came into office faced with a nightmarish economic situation and a failed foreign policy brought to us by President Bush and with a Republican minority that was determined never to cooperate. He's achieved a lot including restoring our position in the world.

    If the "progressives" do not support and work for President Obama's reelection and for big Democratic majorities in both the House and Senate, they will go down in history for having worked hand-in-hand with the Republicans to completely destroy the country.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Sally in MI4:57 AM

    I disagree. I loved Clinton. I love Obama. A democratic President is the only hope this country has of ever becoming what we all say we want: a compassionate, thriving nation that respects everyone. It will never happen under a GOP administration. I do not believe that progressives will ever vote Republican. They are angry at the budget process; angry that Gitmo is still open; angry at many things. But, bottom line, they will not vote for a Newt or a Mitt or even a Huntsman. And they their consciences will not let them sit it out. So, flawed as he may be, Obama will win a second term. And, if we are truly progressives who want change, we will elect every progressive, sort of progressive, wants to be progressive candidate out there to help him....we've seen what happens when we give the right a coil of rope. They hang us with it.

    ReplyDelete
  6. While some liberals might not be happy with the president at times, in the final analysis, the stark differences between Obama and the GOP rodeo clowns will convince any "unhappy" liberals to vote for the president next year.

    The GOP does one thing right and that is they stick together through thick and thin and they do a great job of keeping everyone in their party on message, and when it comes to compromise, they double down.

    Dems always acquesce, which gets them nowhere. THAT is the real problem.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I actually agree with this assessment. Liberals need to do more living in the moment and put at least as much effort into spreading the word about what Obama has done right as we do about what he has done wrong. I find myself having to bring up the good points over and over with liberal friends who can't seem to remember the good stuff. People also have trouble keeping straight what the president actually CAN do.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anonymous5:17 AM

    Sorry but I can't take any more time worrying about "progressives" who are disillusioned because Pres. Obama isn't "liberal" enough. To those who complain: Grow up and stop being selfish. Your pursuit of "ideological purism" is a false, ego-based fantasy. You care more about your own sense of identity as a "true lprogressive" than you do about what is POSSIBLE to achieve for the nation as a whole. It is ego-inflation.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anonymous6:00 AM

    Or how wistfully Bill Clinton's years are talked of. The balanced budget, the surplus, the great job with great benefits, etc.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Anonymous6:01 AM

    People who sat out the midterm elections (or voted Republican) because they were mad at the Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for what they see as Pres. Obama's lack of action. If he had gotten a fillibuster proof majority in both houses it would be a very different political landscape and the economy would be much better off. Higher taxes for the rich, less protection for wall street and more social justice initiatives. Blame yourselves.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Anonymous6:11 AM

    I'm a liberal and I'm not disappointed in him. I guess I have a long memory, I remember the Bush administration. I remember the multiple wars Bush started, the budget surplus he blew, 9/11, the way Bush's America felt, the smugness of the Freedom Fries-era, the attack on The Dixie Chicks, and on and on. As a matter of fact, I'm so not disappointed in President Obama that when I made my last donation to his campaign I signed up to have it donated monthly. I am better off than I was 4 years ago. Glory be.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Anonymous6:16 AM

    I would like to add that there are supposed progressive web sites that, if I believed that the right was capable of such decit, work more for the right wing agenda than the left's.

    They certainly seem to make people disgusted and apathetic which leads them not to vote. Who does that serve?

    ReplyDelete
  13. I appreciate this blog but I do disagree with you about Obama. He has been a huge disappointment from his escalated DEA raids on medical marijuana to his "disappearing" U.S. citizens abroad, to his cowardly appeasement of a mad dog Congress, Obama has failed to govern as a moderate, let alone a liberal.

    Frankly, he's pushed me right out of the Democratic party, and for the second time in my life I may end up voting for a third party candidate for president. And, just to be petty, it's the stepped up marijuana enforcement that angers me most. That was the stab in the back that pushed me off Obama's bandwagon. "Free pot"? No, just the freedom to smoke it without going to prison. He didn't have to change the law, but he most certainly didn't have to increase enforcement of it.

    He's not a liberal.

    He's not progressive.

    He's not even a moderate.

    Welcome to the Republican party of my youth. This Obama reminds me more of Nelson Rockefeller and George Romney than he does LBJ, JFK or FDR.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Anonymous7:01 AM

    To Gasman,
    be still my heart. I think I love you.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Anonymous7:20 AM

    The Constitutional LAW professor to uphold the Constitution. Like let's start with the First Amendment. He doesn't need Congress to uphold those rights. The Mayors coordinating with DHS and the sudden NYC "caught some bad guy" just like when GWB used to manipulate the Terror Threat Level.

    Our basic human rights are being violated by LAW ENFORCEMENT. Is it clearer now?

    It's not a progressive, liberal, left, right, East, West, red, blue issue. Those human rights are for every BODY, not just the super wealthy, or too big to fail banks doing many illegal acts.

    Holder is abdicating his responsibilities in going after the bank fraud that has stolen the future of your kids and grand kids. (I have none, so I'm fighting for YOURS.)

    Why would you keep a tax cheat in charge of the US Treasury, which collects taxes? I could go on and on.

    Which countries are we bombing without declaring war? Is that for the benefit of Blackwater? Which other cronies?

    nswfm

    ReplyDelete
  16. Anonymous7:20 AM

    OT, but you might want to pursue this story: http://news.yahoo.com/four-us-men-arrested-over-terror-ricin-plots-234315249.html

    On the morning show I was watching, it appears these old guys were talking about the need to protect the constitution. Militia? or Tea Party?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Anonymous7:22 AM

    Another link for the "old guy" terrorists: http://news.yahoo.com/judge-denies-bond-4-ga-militia-members-221637258.html

    ReplyDelete
  18. Anonymous7:29 AM

    One more link: http://www.11alive.com/news/article/211347/3/Feds-bust-alleged-Atlanta-terror-plot

    This has more of the "old guys" quotes about taking out "anti-American" people, "saving the country," "saving the constitution," "making the country right again." Sound familiar? Hmmm. Who was it again who whipped up that rhetoric?

    ReplyDelete
  19. hedgewytch7:30 AM

    wow, that last paragraph of your's Gryph sure describes Phil Munger to a t!

    I consider myself a progressive, but a realistic one.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Beldar Squirmish Conehead7:41 AM

    Interesting hypothesis.

    A huge difference between the right and the left is that a conservative president is considered a success - by his base - if he does nothing more than lower a few taxes, mindlessly increase defense spending and nominate hardline conservative judges.

    Whereas a "liberal" president comes to office with a far-ranging action oriented agenda including education, environment, human rights, housing, health care, infrastructure, etc. Successful or not in making those changes, the president with an intent to solve problems is going to make a lot of people squirmish about change.

    Remember, Americans only like change 5 years after the change is implemented. Before the changes, they/we are like whiny little babies.

    Yeah, it's a good thing conservatives AREN'T unreasonable and DON'T mythologize THEIR former presidents. (cough cough reagan cough)

    In any case, we need to compare President Obama not to a fantasy progressive ideal that doesnt exist but to the reality of the GOP clown car of dipshit candidates intent on destroying this country. (I don't support Jon Huntsman but he appears to be somewhat less ideologocial than the other hopelessly inadequate GOP presidential wannabes) And in a reality-based comparison it's clear that his re-election is of paramount importance to the survival of our country.

    Obama2012

    ReplyDelete
  21. Anonymous8:14 AM

    My problem with Obama is I haven't seen him push to get rid of the damage Bush did to individual liberty and freedom (the Patriot Act and others) And he continued Bush's bail out of those "too big to fail" institutions.

    I despise the government spying on citizens. It should be the other way around, the citizens should be watching every minute move the government makes.

    Under Obama's watch, corporations have been given citizen status and more power to control elections. And wealth has been consolidated into even fewer elites. With their power over how government operates, they will slowly crush any resistance from the lowly rest of us.

    In the above sense, Obama isn't really any different than George Bush except he's smarter.

    Rick

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous8:14 AM

    Finally!!! Somebody has said the honest to God truth. It's a never ending cycle dealing with people that want something, and more of that something, and more of that something without realizing charity, compromise and fighting for what's right comes at a cost...TIME!

    I run a non-profit and people think those words mean it's not a real business. I am a life-long Democrat and have served through the military (8 years Army Hoo-ah!!!), through very nice-paying corporate administrative service jobs for Fortune 500 companies, have two beautiful children, have been a car and home-owner two and three times over (even purchasing a house for my mother that recently went into foreclosure), and a circle of family and friends that haven't been the most supportive business-wise but are there when I need them most.

    I have definitely had my fun in living the "American Dream." Now that my dream has come across a dark spot -- my cushy real estate job has turned into four years of unemployment -- I see how the current markets have evened the playing field for some, been a breakthrough for others and have become a nightmare for the rest.
    I'm in a constant flux between all three levels myself.

    I used my unemployment benefits to secure my Bachelor's Degree (which today seems like the equivalent of a high school diploma), but I got it done. I fully launched my non-profit business with nothing but the benefits I received from Food Stamps and my unemployment benefits before they ran out (2010). Then I used my God-given talents to secure a land lease of an abandoned property filled with poison ivy, snakes and dead, fallen trees from a church for $1 a month to start (of all things) an urban farm in the middle of the freakin' ghetto.

    Folks, I'm here to tell you. I didn't wake up on any day of my long 40 years of life to say, "I want to be a farmer!" The opportunity presented itself and I jumped on it -- strictly because I'm in survival mode for my family. Following the lead of this phenomenal President, I have conducted myself to the letter in his manner. I have resisted the urge to give up and blame others. I took the negativity, my opposition's blockage of getting things done, to rise above all the noise and trappings that supported and encouraged my failure. was spending time and energy against me, I just quietly, behind the scenes did what I could to secure slow, moderate baby steps towards success.

    I was supposed to fail a long time ago and people can't seem to understand why good things are still coming my way. For those of us who are dreamers, visionaries or just hard-working regular folk that don't have time for the drama (and you know who you are -- high five to you!), keep going just like our President. Obviously, his strategy for winning involves making the most out of very nasty situation that, in the end -- when all the smoke clears and the drama queens get to a point where they have to either put up or shut up -- that's when it's your time to shine and show ALL the successful and impactful WORK YOU'VE DONE while everyone else was WATCHING the trainwreck circus that PASSED BY (ie.wasting time).

    Me & Obama 2012

    ReplyDelete
  23. The American Dream is still alive8:38 AM

    8:14am....BRAVO! I love your comment...I saw the Bush years as turning into a nightmare back in 2001! I told my husband then...he worked a union job...it's time to start your own business...he did in 2007..right when his employer lowered his pay dramatically and made him work longer hours! Then in Feb of 08...husband quit his union job to run his business full time...and it's been rough to say the least but liberating at the same time....we are much better off now than we were 4 years ago I tell you...

    You can still have the so called American dream whether there is a Republican in office or a Democrat...just make sure you vote.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous8:45 AM

    I knew there was going to be trouble, when the President first got elected.

    Everyone at once seemed to forget everything they learned from high school civics classes--expecting the office of the President to endow SUPER POWERS to the guy holding it.

    What he's been expected to do, and what he's been blamed for, are mostly things the Constitution does not allow him to even attempt.

    I said out loud back on the day Obama took office, "Oh, man, he's going to be thought of as the KING, or a DICTATOR--and everyone is going to be disappointed."

    Maybe that is what we NEED! When I heard that a majority of people in Baghdad long for the days of Saddam Hussein, it hit me that most folks do NOT like the parliamentary system, and want a dictatorial leader to tell them what to do.

    If we did have such a person in charge, I can't think of anyone I'd trust, more than Obama, right now. Can you just IMAGINE how insane the world would become, IMMEDIATELY, under the thumb of any of the silly little boys and girls from the right wing?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous8:59 AM

    As a specials teacher who works with primary grade children, one of the most important lessons I've learned is to 'pick my battles'. I only visit my classes once a week so I must work within the rules previously established by parents (for those who actually HAVE rules) and the classroom teachers. I work very hard, from the first day of school, to work within those confines to make my lessons successful and enjoyable.

    Would I like to have all my students well-groomed, polite, sitting quietly, listening with rapt attention while I teach? Of course I would. Does that actually happen every day? Not likely!

    I realize that I'm fighting against many factors over which I have absolutely no control. I'm not in the students' homes to get them up on time, dressed appropriately and fed. I'm not on the bus, insuring that they all sit politely and safely. I'm not in the cafeteria for morning breakfast for those whose parents can't afford to feed them. I can't prevent them from being sick, upset, tired, frightened, sad or angry when those emotions are generated from outside my temporary classroom world. I'm not there when they go back to a dysfunctional home that often includes poverty, chronic hunger, crime, substance abuse, domestic violence, homelessness...

    All of these things are beyond my control, and yet they have an enormous impact on what happens during my lesson. So I do the best I can within the circumstances I am given and hope that, by all working together, my colleagues and I can give our students the best possible opportunity to learn and improve themselves.

    President Obama is dealing with much the same situation. He has been forced to deal with economic and political circumstances that no previous President has had to face. Has he accomplished everything I would have liked, as rapidly as I would have liked? Not really. But I know that he also needs to 'pick his battles'. He has been fighting members of Congress whose sole purpose has been to insure his failure, and who have been more than willing to sacrifice the stability and safety of the entire country in order to regain power.

    I trust President Obama to have more of the answers we need to turn our nation around than anyone in Washington today. Yes, he makes mistakes, Yes, he doesn't always do things I'd like him to do. But he's by far the best we've got in these frightening times and I am happy and proud to give him another four years, hopefully with a Congress that will work WITH him instead of AGAINST him.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anonymous9:05 AM

    To 4:45 -

    Great post.

    The Democratic party has moved so far right that I haven't recognized it for a long time.

    And now I'm reading that President Obama is thinking about caving in to the CATHOLIC CHURCH'S demands that birth control not be covered by health insurance.

    THIS liberal will feel free to criticize President Obama all she wants for his many un-Democratic waffles, wiggles, and cave-ins....and no amount of wrist slapping by pundits, journalists, bloggers, etc., will silence me.

    I have certain standards for politicians I vote for - and if President Obama gives an inch to the Catholic Church in their anti-woman zeal, he will not get my vote again.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Rick 8:14 - "Under Obama's watch, corporations have been given citizen status and more power to control elections."

    Corporate personhood status has nothing to do with Pres. Obama. This is all the Supreme Court's doing. And they will do worse if Obama isn't re-elected and a successor GOP president gets to appoint new SC judges.

    Help fight corporate personhood here:

    http://movetoamend.org/

    ReplyDelete
  28. Thank you my friends.

    Now I finally understand what
    Monday morning quarterbacking means!!

    ReplyDelete
  29. Anonymous9:51 AM

    Here is a compelling post addressed to liberals disappointed with Obama from a reader of Andrew Sullivan's blog:

    "I'm a black attorney in my mid-20s and I'm very gainfully employed at a big law firm. My parents grew up in poverty, raised themselves to the middle class and then sacrificed so that I could go to elite schools for my entire life with the hopes that I will do better than them one day. Things are good for me mostly, but times are tough for a majority of my friends. My minority friends and I are very happy with the president and take attacks on him very personally. To the first point, we are happy because it seems that minorities, unlike the liberal white students I went to school with, had reasonable expectations. We knew that Obama could only do but so much in the face of the opposition he has to deal with and we are happy with what he has achieved.

    And not to be too racial about this, but myself and a lot of my minority friends sense that white liberals' disappointment from Obama comes from a sense of entitlement.

    Unlike affluent white liberals, minorities in this country seem to have a better grasp of a key truth in life: you don't always get everything you want. We know, if not firsthand then from the stories of our parents, that America isn't always a nice place, and all you can hope for is incremental change. Unlike a lot of our affluent white liberal friends, we are used to not getting it all and have learned to live with it.

    To the second point, the way Obama is attacked hurts us personally because so many of us see ourselves in the president. We are middle-class black and Hispanic kids who did all the right things. Worked hard. Went to elite schools. Got the right jobs. We did what conservatives often accuse blacks of not doing. We pulled ourselves up.

    And then what? We are torn down, doubted by our white coworkers and called affirmative action phonies by our white supervisors. We see it in the workplace in a thousand different subtle ways. We are held to a different standard. So when we see the best of us, a man who has independently climbed to the top of the American meritocracy, be attacked in such unreasonable and personal ways, we take it hard. If the editor of the Harvard Law Review can't be accepted as competent in this country, then how can we?

    But again, we still 'know hope' because we know how the world works. We know how America is. We hold onto incremental progress and don't fixate on what hasn't been achieved. We've done it for 400 years. We'll keep doing it because this is home and we don't have any other choice."

    http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/why-obama-still-matters-ctd.html

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous11:09 AM

    Anyone who expected a party Democrat to upset the boat on capitalism really is living in lala land. And that's what it would take to satisfy many of us.

    Still, I admire Pres Obama and realize that in order to change anything, he must work within a system that has become more corrupt, less equitable, over time.

    He really has accomplished a lot, considering who and what he's had to work with. So that means yes, I'll vote for him next year, just as I did in 2008.

    ReplyDelete
  31. grammy9711:24 AM

    CRASH! That unpleasant sound was my cane smacking down on the desk. Will all you young people please just shut up?

    President Obama is just the president. He's not the Savior of the world. He's not the Emperor of the Free World. His powers are limited, by law. Yes, if he wanted to be a jerk, he could stretch into areas that are not rightfully his: George Bush did that. Please stop expecting Barack Obama to play fast and loose with political power: that's what his/our opponents do.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Gasman3:25 PM

    I feel compelled to speak up again for progressives. Name ANY major advancement in liberty and social justice in our nation's history and I can point to a solution that was first championed by liberals. Slavery, child labor, labor reform, women's suffrage, and Jim Crow all ultimately were solved via a progressive solution that moderates originally hailed as being too radical.

    President Obama has shown ZERO leadership on ANY social justice issue. He has been timid to the point of being inert. If it had not been for the prodding of GLBT activists, DADT would still be flourishing. The president was shamed into action. If it had not been for the cranky prodding of progressives, nothing would have changed.

    I find it especially ironic that President Obama's very position was made possible by people who pushed LBJ to signing the Civil Rights Act and driving a final stake through the heart of Jim Crow. Jim Crow wasn't killed via timidity and accommodation, but by people pushing, prodding, and demanding that a vacillating Democratic president take social justice seriously. LBJ would not have done it on his own. Neither does President Obama take action on issues of justice on his own initiative.

    THAT is why progressives push President Obama. That doesn't mean we don't realize he is infinitely better than any of the GOP buffoons. But neither does it mean he should get a pass when he fails to lead on issues of social injustice. Simply passively accepting that he is better than GOP morons is setting the bar remarkably low.

    I'm not the one advocating a dualistic position of marching lockstep in unison. I'll praise him when he leads, I'll bitch when he doesn't. I just haven't seen that much true leadership on his part. A charitable B- in this progressive's grade book.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anonymous4:32 PM

    I agree with the last post. Regardless of the limitations the presidential power, if you look at Obama's appointees after he won the presidency, it is clear that he exiled progressives (and used Paul Voelker for PR) and appointed the usual suspects. Obama lost a major portion of his base quickly (and thus lost the house in 2010) because he did not follow through on the rhetoric he used during his election. (Do I need to remind folks of his anti-Patriot Act stance, his support for unions, and so?) I wouldn't care so deeply about the lack of change if he had maintained consistency. (And although I do NOT agree with Ron Paul on much, I will say that he is consistent, one of the few who does not seem to be a hypocrite.)

    ReplyDelete
  34. Anonymous4:48 PM

    To Gasman and other complaining progressives:

    Amazing how progressives and liberals expect the President to lead when he is forced to run the business of the US with all of the wealth holders, decision makers and check writers of the US (i.e. the 1%). Most times addressing social issues come at a cost (regardless of whether they can afford it or not) so at the end of the day, it's still THEIR money. It's like telling someone you don't know and who doesn't know you how to spend the money that's in their pocket just so you can feel better. You're not taking into consideration President Obama cannot make Congress (who represents business owners, funders, sponsors, wealthy people) do anything outside the limitations of his authority. He can only influence. I have learned that his style is to work quietly to develop solutions that satisfy the majority of people -- regardless of who thinks their "prodding" was most beneficial. On the flip side, as voters, we can develop solutions that will offset the need to force the 1% to "have a heart" by changing the way we support their businesses. The OWS Movement has already forced banks to reconsider the $5 use my own money fee and have influenced over 600k people to switch banks.

    So NOTE TO TEMPERAMENTAL PROGRESSIVES AND LIBERALS: Stop sending people to Congress that do not support your social issues and stop supporting businesses that do not agree with your belief system. That's when you can expect different results. It's called voting during every single election, understanding that the government is a business in itself, and acting on the platform you place your convictions.

    It's your right to complain but it's your responsibility to make clear you understand what the President is dealing with on all fronts. The one-sided "it's my way or no way" attitude completely undermines the sincerity of your argument.

    Here's an idea. To put your money where your mouth is, you could work towards becoming the very thing you complain about -- a Congressman or President of the US that has to make a decision about finding the balance between the social issues and capital interests (how we pay for social issues) of this country that can actually be enacted that satisfies the needs of the majority of US citizens.

    Good luck with that.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Anonymous6:21 PM

    I think he's doing the best he can in a most difficult time in our country's history. I have issues with him, but considering what he's been able to accomplish in less than one term leads me to believe he's the best and only choice ANY democrat has, liberal, centrist and otherwise.
    8:14 More power to you, my hat's off for your thinking outside the box. My family works for a non profit company that feeds the poor, elderly, and shut ins while working with others who provide services they may need and not know exist. The only time we see politicians is when they need a photo op, and it's those times I run out the back door screaming like a banshee, especially when it was President Bush. And as much as I support Obama, I'd probably do the same.

    That being said, Polictics is best looked at through the prism of time, much like SNL. It was at it's best when the original "not ready for prime time players" were at the helm, now- meh. But years from now, people will be raving over how wonderful SNL was when Tina Fey, or god forbid, Victoria Jackson, was on.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Gasman8:27 PM

    Anon @ 4:48,
    You fucking patronizing arrogant prick. Why is only YOUR political philosophy valid? How come it is WE who are temperamental because we don't adhere to YOUR standards? How goddamned solipsistic and arrogant can you be?

    You blithely ignored my observation that when push comes to shove and our society finally corrects some great social injustice, inevitably it is the progressive liberal solution that we settle on. EVERY single major expansion of liberty has ultimately been solved by adopting the solution that the liberals advocated all along. However, not until the moderates have pissed and moaned about how radical and unworkable the progressive ideas are or not until their appeasement and ingratiating of the oppressors utterly fails.

    Fuck you and your "justice is expensive" argument. Injustice is NEVER right, so neither is perpetuating it, regardless of whatever chickenshit cowardly excuse you trot out to cover your sniveling ass. It is also NEVER going to be convenient to fight injustice. If we waited to solve instances of social injustice until it was convenient to do so, we would NEVER solve any of them.

    Again, in your arrogance you assume that we progressives are all inert, passive whiners. Nothing could be further from the truth. I worked diligently on a campaign for a local state rep. last year. I spent a fair bit of shoe leather on the campaign. So I AM doing my bit to get progressives elected. I have also lobbied the New Mexico legislature on behalf of a children's advocacy group. I AM in the trenches, and I'll hazard a guess than it is to a greater extent than are you.

    As for me running myself, I have been told by some that I should. However, it is not quite that simple. My current gig would not allow the time or loss of income for such a run. Like it or not, politics is an expensive proposition. I can't simply take 6 months or more off work to pursue elected office. Besides, my community is a surprisingly tiny little conservative island in a sea of relative liberals.

    Like it or not, the Democratic Party is NOT a collection of mindless drones who march lockstep in unison. If you want that, join the GOP. The Democratic Party has ALWAYS been diverse. I really don't give a shit if you approve of my views or not, but I can tell you with absolute certainty that there is no fucking way you will be successful in your attempts to silence or browbeat the progressive voices from within the party. We are here and we are staying until the party becomes so moribund and wan that it ceases to be motivated by the need to right injustice.

    ReplyDelete

Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.