Obama’s New Tone: “Inexcusable … Irresponsible”

The most important part of the new Rolling Stone interview with Barack Obama is probably what the president forgot to say. At the end of the talk with Jann Wenner and Eric Bates, after some chit chat about iPods, Jay-Z and Lil Wayne, the president got up and left the Oval Office. But then he came back, apparently because he felt he had failed to drive home the reason for granting Rolling Stone the interview in the first place–the magazine’s vast audience of younger readers:

One closing remark that I want to make: It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election. There may be complaints about us not having gotten certain things done, not fast enough, making certain legislative compromises. But right now, we’ve got a choice between a Republican Party that has moved to the right of George Bush and is looking to lock in the same policies that got us into these disasters in the first place, versus an administration that, with some admitted warts, has been the most successful administration in a generation in moving progressive agendas forward.

The idea that we’ve got a lack of enthusiasm in the Democratic base, that people are sitting on their hands complaining, is just irresponsible.

This is not the professorial Obama, all cool and detached. It is the president in full parenting mode, talking to his own base like a father talks to his 15-year-old son after three straight days of playing Halo instead of doing homework and chores. The Rolling Stone editors wrote in some description of Obama’s motions as he said these words, saying he “spoke with intensity and passion, repeatedly stabbing the air with his finger.”

This same fire was in evidence Monday, when Obama joined a conference call with college reporters. “You can’t sit it out,” Obama told the college reporters about the midterm elections. “You can’t suddenly just check in once every 10 years or so, on an exciting presidential election, and then not pay attention during big midterm elections where we’ve got a real big choice between Democrats and Republicans.” Again, not Professor Obama. Papa Obama.

For Democrats, his chiding tone could not come sooner. The great mass of first-time, unlikely, young and minority voters that changed the electorate in 2008 has been largely missing in action for the last year. Young people have not shown up in statewide elections in Virginia, Massachusetts or New Jersey, and pollsters say they are unlikely to show up in large numbers this fall. These same groups have been some of the hardest hit by the economic recession. They are once again disillusioned with politics, even as they continue to respect and admire the president.

As with any parent who tries to draw a line with his teenager, the president is taking a small risk: If young voters fail to abide the president’s castigation, he could have even less stature to ask for their help next time in 2012, when the President really needs their help. And unlike my metaphorical father, Obama doesn’t have the power to just take away the Xbox.

Related Topics: 2010 elections, rolling stone, Barack Obama
  • Latest on Swampland

    Pete Souza / The White House via Getty Images

    Political Picures of the Week, May 18-25

    TIME’s photo editors bring you the best pictures of the past week from the Beltway and beyond.

    Obama Administration Blocks Global Health Fund To Fight Disease In Developing NationsHuffPost Politics

    From left: AP; ABACAUSA

    The Phony War: Obama and Romney Are Debating Character, Not Policy

    More than five months from Election Day, the back-and-forth about Mitt Romney’s record at Bain already feels played out. Unfortunately, there’s good reason to expect the campaign continues in this vein indefinitely. Neither Barack Obama nor Mitt Romney are terribly interested in dwelling on policy platforms. Romney’s plan to slash spending and keep taxes low on the wealthy isn’t especially popular, at least not at any level of detail beyond a blithe promise to shrink the deficit. Meanwhile, Obama’s signature first-term achievements, like health care, the stimulus and Wall Street reform, are all unpopular or tricky to sell. (The Dodd-Frank bill is the most popular of these, but hyping it means offending wealthy donors.) So what we’re getting instead is a superficial duel about character–and, worse, one that’s based on the largely false premise that the better man can better “manage” the economy back to health.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Oy. That is some kind of framing MS.
    .
    I find the continuing lecturing to the base (Gibbs/Axelrod/Biden/BHO) boneheaded and counter productive but father to child is just you trying for something.
    .
    Or can’t adults be frustrated with one another?

  • gum0nshoe

    The man has a point, that being Obama. It will be a great failing of young voters if they decide to quit now. I’m one of them, and while I’m trying to balance a job and even being able to get to the poles, I still understand the importance of voting. It might be too much to expect us, though, to drop everything and go out and campaign. Most of us aren’t in a position to do that.
    .
    As far as his tone goes, its justified, but I can’t believe we’re yet again talking about delivery rather than substance. Oh wait, yes, yes I can.

  • nflfoghorn

    “It is the president in full parenting mode, talking to his own base like a father talks to his 15-year-old son after three straight days of playing Halo instead of doing homework and chores”
    .
    Which, since he has no sons, must’ve been a real stretch for him.
    I hope it’s not TL, TL.

  • teigensa

    Obama won’t take the xbox, but the Republican’s will take away your healthcare, your civil rights, your social security, your FDA, your…

  • pobo1

    Why should I care – maybe when the Republicans impeach him and measured unemployment goes to 1 in 5 we’ll have some real change.
    The fact is, even though he has gotten legislation thru congress, he has not fought, nor led the fight, for what he said he was for. He caved on the patriot act/retroactive immunity for warrentless wiretapping, he has not held ANYONE accountable for their crimes, let alone their obstruction. He is either incredibly naive, does not learn from experience (insane = doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result) or he didn’t really stand for any of the things he campaigned on.
    Michael, his chiding tone is totally inappropriate. November is his first performance review and he earns a “C”.

  • nflfoghorn

    Using your scale, how would you rate Bush?

  • gum0nshoe

    You want to live with a Republican congress? Because seriously, you’re picking worse over bad here.

  • http://www.ghostnote.com Juan Valdez

    Can 15 year-olds vote?

  • Paul-no not that one

    I’m largely with you, but you can understand how that might not be the best way to GOTV.

  • destor23

    “The magazine’s vast audience of younger readers…”

    Bwhahahahahahaha. Maybe they’re younger compared to Time’s readers, Michael but if you think Rolling Stone’s readership hasn’t grayed then I don’t think you know what’s happening in your own profession, much less in society at large.

    Next you’ll be saying that “reading Rolling Stone is what all the hep, def, fresh kids are doing these days.”

    That was really funny.

  • Paul-no not that one

    You can find anything on the interwebs!
    .
    http://www.srds.com/mediakits/rollingstone/demographics.html

  • gum0nshoe

    GOTV == Lying to your base so that you’ll be disappointing them later, anymore.
    .
    Besides, it might be an excellent strategy. Generally insulting people gets their attention when they’ve fallen asleep.

  • pobo1

    Bush was a disaster – I used to be a Republican but I never voted for him, gave money to the dems and voted for a dem for the 1st time in my life. I’m now a registered dem, just so I can vote in the primary. My point is that maybe if things get really bad, the peasants will rise up and revolt. Obama and the Dems being “less bad” just doesn’t cut it with me.
    That said, I will vote, however, my vote doesn’t really matter for Federal elections because I live in suburban NY (gotta make sure Paladino doesn’t win).

  • gum0nshoe

    Isn’t that age barrier defined at the point between which you retire and which you work? In that case, I guess its pretty accurate.

  • Paul-no not that one

    I was referring to your framing a Democratic Congress as less bad than a Republican one, while true, doesn’t exactly light a fire.

  • http://twitter.com/michaelscherer Michael Scherer

    Thanks Paul. Was about to post the same. As of 2009, RS has an audience of 7.2 million under the age of 34. Median reader age is 31.

    By contrast, the season premier of Jersey Shore on MTV drew 5.3 million viewers this year.

  • nflfoghorn

    Maybe Eddie Long wishes they could.

  • groenhagen2

    Obama is talking to his base as if they were 15 year olds? That’s the big difference between the Democrats and Republicans. Republicans know there base consists of adults and they treat them accordingly. The ironic thing here is that the man-child Obama has a great, great deal of growing up to do himself. The punk is a big, spoiled baby.

  • Ike Jakson

    And ….

    For once you’ve seen the real man ….

    So different when he forgot to wear the mask that he has worn for so long.

  • stuartzechman

    Thanks so very much for responding to commentary with additional information, Michael Scherer, it is greatly appreciated.

  • porkdumpling

    The sad truth is that Obama and Biden are exactly right. The progressive base can’t stop dishing out their whiny complaints and criticisms, some of them very valid, but can’t take the same, also valid. They will, in their tantrums, sit out this election and then become shocked! shocked! as the Republicans take over Congress and make a muck of it, as corrupt and incompetent as they are.
    .
    You morons (and I say this as a pragmatic liberal) deserve exactly what you will get. Hope you like looking at Darrell Issa’s ugly face, Boehner’s leathery skin and McConnell’s 4 chins 24/7 and know in your head that you are in part responsible. Yeah, Derek, Stuart and square1, I’m talking about your sorry a**es. Sit out the midterms and like clockwork, I’m sure you’ll be complaining the loudest when Republican leadership are bombing Iran next year.
    .
    Sick of you all.

  • gum0nshoe

    Oh I agree with you on that one.
    .
    My point is that unless you want unsubstantiated lies to be part of the platform, I don’t think much will light the fire under the base.

  • groenhagen2

    The “Republican’s” what?

  • Paul-no not that one

    I’d guess that anyone who engages as much as people here do (left/center/right) are going to vote.

  • groenhagen2

    porkdumpling:

    You just demonstrated why Democrats treat you like a 15-year old.

  • deconstructiva

    The R’s will try if they win Congress, look for lots of Obama vetoes. Do many people think the R’s are bluffing or just don’t take them seriously? Or do but fail to see that living without any safety net in a crappy economy is a really bad idea?

  • nflfoghorn

    As much as I detested the previous president (and his Commander-in-Chief), I would never stoop so low as to call them “punks.” It’s your right to do so, but it shows no respect for the presidency whatsoever.

  • afguy

    God, Jersey Shore…
    .
    Talk about the death of civilization as we know it..
    .
    I stopped on that the other night and felt like I lost a few thousand brain cells just in that short time span.

  • porkdumpling

    Oh, really? Because the “Pledge” is a bunch of old recycled cliches with absolutely no detail about what will actually be cut to balance the budget (because they have no plan) and that’s treating your base like adults? Even though the “Pledge” is a f.u. to supposed Tea Party principles? Yeah, they don’t treat you like children — children are pretty smart; they’re treating you like a halfwit cousin they can ignore. Based on your reaction, it’s working.

  • nflfoghorn

    Somebody cue up Dr. Hook!

  • jsfox

    Now this is the funniest thing I have read on this thread. If lying to your base, coming out with a pledge that has no actual plan. And what little fiscal thinking there is in it could easily cause a double dip and force the US into default is speaking to them like adults. I’ll happily take the other approach thank you very much.

  • m0mentom0ri

    When Bill Clinton was in office, he would occasionally tack left, and he would occasionally tack right.
    .
    Obama has consistently tried to split things down the middle.
    .
    The end result is that Bill Clinton gave people a reason to vote for him – even if they didn’t get everything they want, they got something. The end result for Obama is that no one gets what they want, everyone gets a half measure.
    .
    Why is the base demoralized? It’s not because they didn’t get everything they wanted. Its because they didn’t get anything they wanted. Gitmo is half closed. The Iraq-Afghanistan War is half over. HCR is half of what we need. DADT is halfway through an evaluation. Etc, etc. Halves do not count as a whole, even if you add them all up.
    .
    “The other guy is worse” is an attempt to coerce a vote via a threat. Not exactly motivational. Do something for the base, anything, and they’ll show up and vote. Blame them for not sufficiently appreciating your half measures, and they’ll blow you off. Even if it means GOP majorities, I can’t really blame them.

  • nflfoghorn

    Patience has disappeared. It shows that media have dumbed us down to the point where we’re like spoiled children, wanting everything at once. Twenty months do not a presidency make, especially given our myriad of problems. People want jobs, I understand that, but they’re not gonna fall out of the sky overnight. Republicans ain’t gonna create them any faster.

  • destor23

    That was dope, Michael Scherer.

  • porkdumpling

    Paul, Derek has said on these very boards that he will sit out and would rather watch the other side win. He’s said he’d take pleasure from watching Obama lose. Others have echoed that sentiment.

  • gum0nshoe

    31 is prime baby rearing age. That isn’t young. You have 13 years before you get to that age after the point you can start voting. And by all accounts the gap starts at 29.
    .
    As for MTV, they dropped “Music” from their name and at that point ceased to be a voice for the younger generation. I’m not sure exactly why, but less teens & 20 somethings respect or watch that channel than there used to be.
    .
    This is of course the internet generation. So finding an outlet to reach everyone isn’t exactly easy. The point being that neither MTV nor Rolling Stone are a great baseline for the “young voter” now-a-days.

  • m0mentom0ri

    Y’know what porky? Crap like what you wrote makes me hope the GOP takes over Congress. Maybe Obama will be a better President with a veto pen than he has with Congressional majorities.
    .
    But hey, go ahead and punch the hippies all you want if it makes you feel any better. The Dems will still lose, but at least you can say “Its not my fault! I punched a hippy!”

  • porkdumpling

    Face the reality: “the other guy is worse” is exactly the situation. You don’t like getting half? Well, then get used to getting nothing.

  • porkdumpling

    There you go. Momento, you will get your wish. Enjoy the results.

  • gum0nshoe

    Agree with porkdumpling.
    .
    On another note, what could have been wholly passed? Seriously, I’m curious… what?

  • freeinpa

    “but the Republican’s will take away your healthcare, your civil rights, your social security, your FDA, your…”
    .
    Since it is quite apparent that the left is losing the battle in the arena of philosophy, let’s bring out that old liberal classic—scare the crap out of them. I am sure that tried and true,” they all lie but us” will be shortly followed by one last big push “they are all racists”.

    And Repubs are accused of not having any new ideas.The left has been playing the same cards for 50 years. The difference now is the support from the the compliant MSM is not as effective

  • grape_crush

    They will, in their tantrums, sit out this election…
    .
    Funny. I don’t get the sense that people (aside from a few Dereks) will be sitting out of the midterms any more than usual.
    .
    …and then become shocked! shocked! as the Republicans take over Congress and make a muck of it, as corrupt and incompetent as they are.
    .
    If you actually read the criticism coming from the various Dereks, they won’t be shocked at how the GOP would govern. For them, it would serve as more of a wakeup call for the center and left that we need policy (and policymakers) that are more liberal, progressive, aggressive, and accountable to their constituency than some of the winners currently in office.

  • deconstructiva

    Republicans ain’t gonna create them any faster.
    .
    Good point, although the R “plan” may not create any jobs at all (that’s one helluva plan for next two years, sigh)…
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/ns/msnbc_tv-countdown_with_keith_olbermann/#39390445

  • afguy

    Hey, porkdumpling, don’t forget about me.
    .
    I don’t like what they are doing either. The choice between incompetent, spineless “D”s and corrupt “R”s isn’t exactly lighting my fire either.
    .
    Sometimes I’m hard-pressed to discern the difference between lying and abandoning hard and fast campaign positions once you have won an election, albeit for “pragmatic” reasons.
    .
    I often consider the terms “pragmatic” and “worth a bootful of warm piss” to be intechangeable.
    .
    So take your outrage toward us that feel we may have been lied to and blow it out of your a$$. Tell the Dem leadership that, just maybe, adherence to stated positions and principles just may win themselves votes and enthusiasm with their base. Us unwashed swine out in the nether regions seem to respect that, for some reason.
    .
    I don’t find a knee-jerk “D” vote to be any more admirable than a similar one for the “R”s, if tribal loyalty is the ONLY reason you’re doing it.

  • allthingsinaname

    I am with Porky.
    .
    I need to point out that after many discussions with Derek he essentially stated that he would vote, albeit with discuss, holding his nose, like many of us.
    .
    I do not like the Presidents approach in this matter.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “For them, it would serve as more of a wakeup call for the center and left that we need policy (and policymakers) that are more liberal, progressive, aggressive, and accountable to their constituency than some of the winners currently in office.”
    .
    They can believe that-Goodness knows that was the Nader supporter argument in 2000-as long as they drop the self-satisfied “Reality based community” stuff.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    Daddy hasn’t convinced the children yet, that it is all their fault that they are unhappy.

  • Paul-no not that one

    “On another note, what could have been wholly passed?”
    .
    I think the frustration, at least for me, is that BHO negotiated against himself before it ever got to the Republicans/Blue Dogs so we will never know.
    .
    On the size of the stimulus and any sort of public option being two easy examples.
    .
    These aren’t marginal tax rate issues. These are huge policy decisions that were never on the table. If you start from a compromised position you only end up worse off.

  • afguy

    momentomori,
    .
    I foresee a LOT of “olfactorily-challenged” voters for the next few cycles.
    .
    Like the election in the past in Louisiana – “vote for the crook, it’s important”, we are being asked to “vote for me – I promise I’ll work hard to do less damage than my opponent will”.
    .
    Jeez, what a pathetic mess…

  • michaelfury

    “unlike my metaphorical father, Obama doesn’t have the power to just take away the Xbox.”

    Of course he does. He’s the Commander-in-Chief, isn’t he?

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2009/09/25/first-person-sho0ter/

  • m0mentom0ri

    Clinton raised the tax rate on the highest income bracket to 39% (a very left thing to do), and signed off on NAFTA (a very right thing to do), amongst other things. Obama chose an agenda that was designed to split the middle. Obama didn’t compromise, he did exactly as he planned.
    .
    The framing of your question is off. It’s not what COULD he have passed, its that he never intended to do it in the first place. His is not a progressive agenda. It’s not even a ‘bi-partisan’ agenda involving ideas form both sides of the spectrum. It’s splitting the middle.
    .
    GITMO could’ve been closed via executive order. DADT could’ve been handled similarly. He could’ve pressed for a public option instead caving at the start. There’s a dozen things he could’ve done for his base. Any one of them would’ve secured that base. If you want people to fight for you, you occasionally need to fight for them.
    .
    But it is what it is. A half-progressive agenda that’s getting about half of its base. If you don’t like that, don’t blame the base, blame the leadership.

  • deconstructiva

    The point being that neither MTV nor Rolling Stone are a great baseline for the “young voter” now-a-days.
    …and where the hell are MTV’s videos? I miss those, esp. those that told stories…
    .

    .
    …or simply got out of the way and focused on the tunes…
    .

    .
    (better these than watching Jennifer Grey kick Bristol youknowwho’s ass on DWTS)

  • m0mentom0ri

    “Funny. I don’t get the sense that people (aside from a few Dereks) will be sitting out of the midterms any more than usual.”
    .
    Nor do I plan to, for all my kvetching.
    .
    But I do understand those who will sit this out, and bear them no ill will or blame for doing so.

  • bobell

    Oh, look. Groenhagen found a greengrocer’s apostrophe. Way to go!

  • nflfoghorn

    The kittens. Please think of the kittens.

  • grape_crush

    It is the president in full parenting mode, talking to his own base like a father talks to his 15-year-old son..

    Oh…Michael’s framing of this is really weak, by-the-way…too many shades of this throwaway non-classic where the comments have since been removed…except for a few that popped up elsewhere:

    “It’s good to see that our political reporters view the whole process through the hyper-sophisticated lens of ‘Saved by the Bell.’” – Enceladus

    “Ah, for god’s sake. What the hell is wrong with political journalists? Why are so many of you auditioning to be Maureen Dowd?” – Bentley Stanforth III

  • Paul-no not that one

    That thread was great.
    .
    Do you remember who it was (long gone now I think but a regular back then) who kept commenting “No, no. I’ve read Scherer before. He’s good, give him a chance”?

  • stuartzechman

    m0mentom0ri:

    The framing of your question is off. It’s not what COULD he have passed, its that he never intended to do it in the first place. His is not a progressive agenda.

    Very well said.
    .
    The only thing that may be ambiguous about this argument is that “progressive agenda” seems to include the “progressive” agenda of “progressive” Democratic policy institutions like the DLC’s “Progressive Policy Institute” or John Podesta’s “Center for American Progress.”
    .
    Obviously those aren’t “progressive” influences in the way that you (and many, many Democrats) mean, and yet politicians are able to say things like

    the most successful administration in a generation in moving progressive agendas forward

    , and not be technically lying, or not lying at all, depending on the meaning of the word “progressive.”
    .
    We can end that ambiguity by using a term for ourselves loathed by the hippie-punchers in the Democratic Party: “liberal.”
    .
    If you were to say “His is not a liberal agenda,” not only would you be making an accurate statement, but leadership Democrats, including the Administration, would be falling all over themselves to agree with you.
    .
    …And then their framing –that they passed “the most progressive agenda” possible– would be exposed for what it is: a decidedly, purposefully illiberal agenda, quite different from what the Democrats ran on in 2006, and what Obama ran on in 2008.
    .
    The ambiguity upon with their campaigns rely would be swept away, in other words.

  • afguy

    You don’t like getting half? Well, then get used to getting nothing.
    .
    Seriously, porkdumpling, what ARE we getting out of the Senate right now?
    .
    “D”s have a majority but the minority can stop pretty much ANYTHING because of some obscure “rules” of the Senate that have NOTHING to do with Constitutional powers.
    .
    It appears to me to be a lack of will of the Dem leadership to actually push legislation through. Dear ol’ Harry appears to be more in love with Senate “traditions” and prerogatives than in getting any legislation through. We just have base political calculation, horse-race strategy, and triangulation as the designated activity of the day.
    .
    Tell me again how returning this bunch of spineless, unprincipled weasels to power is going to improve Dem legislative possibilities. I’d agree they would improve if Harry was demoted with a size 12 in his backside and replaced with someone with a good sized pair of ‘nads. Is that a possibility? Don’t think so. It’s his turn – and he wants the job. Ability and drive have little to do with it.
    .
    Right now, I’d like to have the mop concession for the Congressional hallways, as “wetting one’s pants” and cowering in the corner seems to be the reelection tactic of choice for too many.

  • liberalmeltdown

    First they argue that young people don’t read Rolling Stone, then you show them that they do. Then they argue that 31 isn’t young.

    That’s the median. Not that I expect that you have a clue as to what that is.

    It means that half of the readers are over 31 + the other half are under 31. No wonder you need your daddy to tell you to vote.

  • afguy

    Certainly wasn’t Cincy.
    .
    His replies to Scherer ALWAYS started off with the SAME THREE WORDS.

  • grape_crush

    Do you remember who it was…
    .
    Heh. Probably me…or not. I do remember saying that Scherer’s a better writer than what he was showing here at Swampland.

  • shepherdwong

    You morons (and I say this as a pragmatic liberal) deserve exactly what you will get.
    .
    No, that’s even more irrational than what you see liberals doing, which is nothing more that pushing for the most progressive policy they can get against the massive, unrelenting and bi-partisan forces of corporate oligarchy. My prediction: they’ve vote Democratic in pretty reliable numbers. It’s the nominally or politically non-involved who voted in ’08 who Democrats have to be concerned about. Even Scherer gets it:

    The great mass of first-time, unlikely, young and minority voters that changed the electorate in 2008 has been largely missing in action for the last year. Young people have not shown up in statewide elections in Virginia, Massachusetts or New Jersey, and pollsters say they are unlikely to show up in large numbers this fall. These same groups have been some of the hardest hit by the economic recession. They are once again disillusioned with politics, even as they continue to respect and admire the president.

    And it’s not because Obama and the Dems didn’t fix everything, it’s because they didn’t sufficiently differentiate themselves from “conservatives” because they refuse the make the progressive argument. If Republicans gain control of one or more houses of Congress, centrist and Blue Dog Democrats will have gotten what they deserve and, ironically, so will the right-wing base – though, as usual, they won’t understand how they screwed themselves. The rest of us will most decidedly not deserve what “conservatives” and centrists will have wrought.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Cincy, the only one ever banned (that I know of) for simply repeating a joke.
    .
    Over. And, Over.
    .
    Apologies GC if that was you, I couldn’t remember who it was but I admired the loyalty.

  • liberalmeltdown

    Micheal, please don’t describe Obama’s tone or his motions. The progressives can’t handle it. Please give them something on Sarah Palin, her children, or how see acted on Dancing with the Stars.

    They just don’t want to know anything about Obama; or rather, they don’t want the rest of the country to know anything about Obama.

    You must keep him as ambiguous as possible. Otherwise, the peons will see that the emperor has no clothes.

  • jillib

    “One closing remark that I want to make: It is inexcusable for any Democrat or progressive right now to stand on the sidelines in this midterm election. There may be complaints about us not having gotten certain things done, not fast enough, making certain legislative compromises. But right now, we’ve got a choice between a Republican Party that has moved to the right of George Bush and is looking to lock in the same policies that got us into these disasters in the first place, versus an administration that, with some admitted warts, has been the most successful administration in a generation in moving progressive agendas forward.”

    He’s absolutely right. Apathy will be the final blow. Don’t let it happen, not now, it’s a crucial time for this country.

  • afguy

    Maybe the best that can be expected this go-around is for the real “progressives” out here to absolutely blister the centrist Admin types with criticism, leaving them hairless and a little deaf, then go ahead and vote.
    .
    Primary the worst ones (as has happened in SOME cases) and hopefully leave enough scars during the process that they’ll remember the pain.
    .
    There’s not going to be any real change, though, until all of the corporate money ceases to make any real difference in the outcome – that they’ll have to deliver nevertheless, regardless of who funded their campaigns.
    .
    Yeah, I know… I’m dreaming.

  • afguy

    jillib,
    .
    It’s the definition of “progressive” that more than a few of us question.

  • afguy

    Pay attention, meltdown.
    .
    There’s more than a little criticism of Obama going on right now.
    .
    It’s Michael’s use of “loaded” modifiers and descriptions of Obama’s supposed intent that we question. Something he’s in no position to actually know for sure.
    .
    In other words, more political horse-race crap.

  • gum0nshoe

    Median is the “middle” number. Mean, being the average, but not mentioned here. 7.2 million people under the age of 34, means that accounts for more than half the readers of the group, since 31 is the median. So lets say 6.5 million people 31 or younger read this magazine. Here’s a statistic you’ll like. There are 11 million illegal immigrants in this country. So less young people read the magazine than people who come to this country illegally. Considering there are about 60 million young adults, about 10% of the young adult population looks at the magizine. Which, is sizable, but not an accurate representation.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Sort of on topic.
    .
    For all the legitimately frustrated liberal/progressive posters-who are you supporting this cycle?
    .
    And how are you supporting them?
    .
    Minnesota has no Senate race and my Congressman Ellison couldn’t be safer so my donations are going to Dayton for Governor.

  • shepherdwong

    Again, this is a message designed for marginally-engaged or even politically-vacuous, Democratically-sympathetic ’08 voter. Real progressives know a centrist, corporatist agenda when we see one because, with slight variations of the political Kabuki, it’s the only agenda we ever see.

  • shepherdwong

    There’s not going to be any real change, though, until all of the corporate money ceases to make any real difference in the outcome…
    .
    Lets’ just say that no matter what happens November 2nd, the world will be a better place when corporate whores like Blanche Lincoln get sent back to Arkansas or whatever corporate gig her betrayal of the public interest has earned her.

  • stuartzechman

    porkdumpling:

    I say this as a pragmatic liberal

    I’m curious:
    .
    What’s a “pragmatic liberal?”
    .
    Are you sure you actually do support liberal policies?
    .
    Did you oppose the Paulson bank bailouts, and instead support economists like Dean Baker’s plan to save the economy without rescuing banks’ shareholders and executive management, for example?
    .
    Or are you using the word “liberal” the way that the Fox News right does –anything that isn’t them, in other words?
    .
    Are you sure you’re not just taking the term used by Sean Hannity almost every night to describe anyone who isn’t a movement conservative, the term “far left liberal,” and then replacing “far left” with “pragmatic?”
    .
    Is liberal policy by definition “not pragmatic,” according to you, because, if it were pragmatic, the Administration would have done it already?
    .
    Are you the kind of “liberal” that doesn’t believe liberalism is politically possible in the real world, and therefore always supports “pragmatic,” or illiberal but not right-wing policy?
    .
    Is it sort of like what Peter Beinart meant by “The New Liberal Order,” when he fantasized:

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1858771-1,00.html
    .
    On domestic economics, Democrats up and down the class ladder mostly agree. Even among Democratic Party economists, the divide that existed during the Clinton years between deficit hawks like Robert Rubin and free spenders like Robert Reich has largely evaporated

    , because he simply refuses to acknowledge the existence of the “far left liberals” for whom the difference between Rubin and them (not merely other Clinton apparatchiks) is still profound?
    .
    Are you back to that old, Beinart-DLC position of pretending that liberals like Duncan Black are either non-existent or somehow “far left?”
    .
    Does the fact that we mostly have come not to support Administration or Dem leadership policy as it exists proof of our extremity, of our lack of pragmatism?
    .
    Is that what you mean by “pragmatic liberal?”
    .
    Is it more code for “not a DFH?”
    .
    Help me understand what it means to be a “pragmatic liberal,” if it’s not Pete Beinart’s meaning of the term.

  • m0mentom0ri

    Personally, I’ve gone from sending money to Dems running for federal positions to more actively supporting local Dems in the state legislature and local races. If I can’t change the country, I might as well see what I can do locally and hope things improve on the national level after the midterm debacle.
    .
    IOW, less giving to the DNC, et al, and more contributions to local Dem candidates whose positions I support.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Minnesota has the saddest Democratic state party I can imagine -the DFL.
    .
    I only give directly to candidates and almost 100% local to statewide for the reasons you mention.
    .
    Thanks for the response.

  • afguy

    shep,
    .
    I won’t be sad to see the likes of her gone.
    .
    Too bad she couldn’t have been primaried and replaced with a decent Dem, but she’s a good indicator of the type the Admin wanted in place, given all of the effort they made to defend her seat.

  • shepherdwong

    And how are you supporting them?
    .
    I’m voting “D” this year, of course, but, unlike years past, no money to anyone other than a few bucks to ActBlue. I wonder how Obama and Rahm’s courting of the corporate coffers is going to work out.
    .
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703989304575503933125159928.html
    .
    Whoops.

  • shepherdwong

    Too bad she couldn’t have been primaried and replaced with a decent Dem…
    .
    Oh, she could have and would have been, giving us a decent shot to keep the seat. But the corporatist, centrist genius of Rahm won out instead.
    .
    http://billhalter.com/2010/6/4/new-poll-halter-leads-49-45-wins-majority-of-morrison-voters-by-10-points

  • afguy

    I’ll be voting for Conway in Ky.
    .
    Unfortunately, however, pretty much all of my monetary support will be donated to the “Send My Two Eldest Sons to Freaking College” Fund.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Thanks shep.
    .
    Who are the Ds on your ballot? Or would you rather keep that private?
    .
    I am curious who some of the (again I want to stress legitimately) frustrated Democratic voters are pulling the lever for.
    .
    No question between the economy and the lack of a compelling reason it is harder to send in the dollars.

  • Paul-no not that one

    afguy, thanks.
    .
    The only thing I have seen about Conway was his job at the BBQ a while back.
    .
    Seemed impressive.

  • afguy

    Yeah, Paul didn’t show for the event (supposed scheduling conflict for that time of day), giving Conway a “free shot” at him which, if I remember, Conway took advantage of.
    .
    Kinda bizarre, as the Fancy Farm picnic is THE big political event in this end of the state. But Paul really doesn’t know a lot about Ky culture. The east end of teh state is really unlike the west – coal mines over there and lots of poverty extremes.
    .
    I suspect that he (Paul) really didn’t want to land in an unscripted environment. Paul really doesn’t do well in that atmosphere.

  • Ivy_B

    For the fifth time in two days, I have heard Velma Hart expressing her disappointment in President Obama, surrounded by Republican strategists saying how terrible Obama and all his policies are and how well the party is going to do in spite of how unfavorable their ratings are. These have been the main features of NPR coverage. The rally in Wisconsin can’t be covered without Republican commenters saying how badly he’s doing.

    I wish he had been better at taking more liberal positions rather than centrist, but I’m not surprised. We all knew he was centrist when he was elected, although I suspect many people projected their ideas of what was needed onto what he was going to do.

    He doesn’t seem to like a fight or back room arm twisting, so he doesn’t fight with the obstructionists to try to get things done.

    As far as that campaign statement that Stuart quoted above I really think he vastly underestimated the degree to which the Republicans and some Democrats would oppose everything he wanted to accomplish. His background no doubt led him to believe that if he took steps toward compromise, he would be met more than half way. He was wrong.

    I don’t need to see a second round of impeachment hearings, been there. And these won’t even have the salacious element of the other.

  • newfreedomblog

    Wow, after reading all of these comments on this thread, I suppose my days are numbered. My goal has been achieved.

  • http://danggui.wordpress.com danggui

    welcome to our website === w w w ( ccshopping ) – u s === ..The new update, a large hot ..
    WE ACCEPT PYAPAL PAYMENT.
    YOU MUST NOT MISS IT!!!

  • afguy

    He doesn’t seem to like a fight or back room arm twisting, so he doesn’t fight with the obstructionists to try to get things done.
    .
    He doesn’t – he left the dirty stuff (and probably a few of the “details”) to operatives like Rahm Emmanuel who, I suspect, had a slight agenda of his own. He could “color” negotiations ever so slightly and steer Obama into positions that, truth be told, he didn’t really need to be in.
    .
    The devil is often in the details and I have NEVER felt Rahm to be completely neutral when passing info between two principles.
    .
    How are you going to find out someone is against a feature of legislation if you are relying on me for the input (and my opinion of the negotiations) and I personally don’t want the feature to be included?
    .
    Rahm was a Clintonista – THAT’S where his loyalties lay. There, and of course, to Rahm himself.

  • afguy

    Oh, come on in, Rusty.
    .
    You can continue to lecture us on how us “libtards” always toe the line and are unfailingly supportive of all things Democrat.
    .
    Especially Obama.

  • newfreedomblog

    Centrist? Passed and signed into law a healthcare law which by sake of standards from a liberal may not be exactly a socialist healthcare law, but a healthcare law with many many many regulations which nearly destroys the old system all together.
    .
    Financial Reform – Some of the most sweeping regulations on banking since the days right after the Great Depression which FDR passed. Still centrist?
    .
    Conservation – More land has been bought up by this Administration in the United States than in all previous 8 Administrations combined. Still centrist?
    .
    Education – Passed the most comprehensive education reform of student aide, nationalizing all of the funding for loans into one giant government conglomerate. Centrist? you must be kidding.
    .
    Housing – TARGETED ACTIONS:
    Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act. ref
    Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, helping millions avoid foreclosure . ref, ref
    Established the Making Home Affordable Plan, which will provide for the refinance or loan modification for 9 Million homeowners. Oh yes, a Centrist…..NOT
    .
    IF you can wade through all the bull-crap, you can get more here….
    .
    http://obamaachievements.org/list
    .

  • stuartzechman

    Was this always your goal, Rustydog?

  • shepherdwong

    As far as that campaign statement that Stuart quoted above I really think he vastly underestimated the degree to which the Republicans and some Democrats would oppose everything he wanted to accomplish. His background no doubt led him to believe that if he took steps toward compromise, he would be met more than half way. He was wrong.
    .
    Here’s the centrist problem as I see it. Whether it’s because they believe in corporate-centered public policy or simply believe in its political expediency (or some combination of the two), it has two electoral problems, one particularly severe for holding support from Democrats. One, it makes it extremely difficult for Democrats to differentiate themselves from Republicans, which is the key to all successful marketing, even (especially) political marketing. The relative degree of difference in tax-cutting, war-making, corporate welfare or expansion of the police state simply isn’t an effective difference. Two, it puts Democrats, along with Republicans and the plutocrats, on the wrong side of the raging class war. Is suspect that everyone, even the most partisan winger you can find, deep in the cobwebbed recesses of what’s left of his rational mind, knows that he’s on the losing side of this war being waged against him but, as of yet, no national political figure has really engaged the war on his behalf. That alone explains the political cynicism that grips this country and certainly any apathy about Democrats on the part of liberals.

  • newfreedomblog

    Oh no stuart, more like this….
    .

  • stuartzechman

    Here’s the centrist problem as I see it…
    .
    I think that a pretty darn accurate description.
    .
    It should be on a blog somewhere.
    .
    I’ll tweet it, anyway.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “..scare the crap out of them..”
    .
    The terrorists will win if you elect democrats – Republican talking point (lie)
    .
    Death Panels – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    Obama is a Muslim – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    Democrats will confiscate your guns – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    16,500 Armed IRS agents – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    Democrats are soft on defense – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    Obama is a radical follower of Black Liberation Theology – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    Your health care premiums will skyrocket with health care reform – Republican talking point (lie).
    .
    As for social security, you, Freakinpa, keep on saying how much you want to get rid of it, then you call telling the people that people like you are amongst the Republicans is a “scare tactic”.
    .
    It’s the pot calling the kettle black when you accuse Democrats of using scare tactics.

  • shepherdwong

    It should be on a blog somewhere.

    Appreciate it, Stuart. A little shameless blog-whoring then (just this once):
    .
    http://www.epluribusunumblog.com/2010/09/buck-up/

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    deconstructiva,
    .
    Great link!

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “Sick of you all.”
    .
    The feeling is mutual.

  • apr2563

    Paul, don’t you know that some reporters on this site can do mind melds. It allows them to deeply understand motives and thought processes. Sometimes this is done through third parties. It is remarkable.

  • shepherdwong

    Who are the Ds on your ballot? Or would you rather keep that private?
    .
    Yes, Paul, I’ve been told that I have a talent for pissing people off (no money in it, unfortunately). Probably best to keep my head down until the cops show up.

  • gum0nshoe

    Intentional new thread:

    “I think the frustration, at least for me, is that BHO negotiated against himself before it ever got to the Republicans/Blue Dogs so we will never know.”

    Is this really true? I mean, I would expect the president to put out feelers in his own party before pressing an issue. Is it possible he knew the support would never exist from the outset?

  • apr2563

    Having cast my first vote in a national election in 1964, I have been choosing between the worst of two evils. By choosing Johnson, we had the continuation and escalation of the Vietnam war=evil and the Civil Rights Act and the War on Poverty=good.
    .
    I’ll vote for President Obama and Democrats again because I know the history of the Republican party.
    .
    However, until the nation and in particular the traditional press takes a hard look at the oligarchs who now rule our country, not much will change.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I saw a great frontline episode about Obama and Health Care Reform.
    .
    Some documentaries and other descriptions of the actual process I find very useful to watch. At the end of the day, there are 536 agendas with 536 sets of promises to 435 districts making what turns into our legislation.
    .
    I am sure that this sounds moronically obvious, but, with 435 congressmen who are all eager to leave their fingerprints on any piece of legislation or leave their fingerprints on the lighter it is burnt with, 100 senators doing the same and the president doing something totally different, what is surprising is not how Democrats have yellow bellied blue dogs taking a big bite out of good legislation since they are afraid to be liberals. What is shocking is how Republicans march in lockstep. Even at that, there were a few times when Republicans in the house, the Senate and Dubbya had different expectations of everything.
    .
    So, except for the New Deal and, to a lesser extent, the Great Society, when Democrats write legislation, it gets altered greatly.
    .
    Eventually, however, like how social security, medicare and medicaid got changed and expanded over the years to cover more people and to improve, I have no doubt that the next few amendments to health care reform, financial reform and the overall agenda of Democrats will be improved.
    .
    Historically, except for the New Deal and the Great Society, Democrats release prototypes of good ideas. It takes a huge amount of arm twisting to get even the prototype out. Later, after a few more sessions of congress, it begins to look more and more like what was originally promised.
    .
    Unless we can get brave and incredibly articulate Liberal Democrats to win in traditionally conservative or blue Dog districts, we will always be a party who releases the flawed beta version of every campaign promise before we have the real thing out.
    .
    For now, we have HCR Beta, Financial Reform Beta, Stimulus Package Beta… etc, etc.
    .
    It’s just how our party is.

  • shepherdwong

    On domestic economics, Democrats up and down the class ladder mostly agree.
    .
    As if that makes up, somehow, for them being mostly wrong. Classic, substance-free, self-justifying centrism.

  • porkdumpling

    Yeah, Shep, Bill Halter, who was polling ahead of Lincoln, lost. Funny, that, in a Dem primary in which Obama didn’t endorse the incumbent. What happened? Liberals stayed home?
    .
    Looks like they are staying home in the Feingold race too. He’s polling behind by double digits. You gonna complain about middle of the road corporatists when liberals can’t even bother to show up for Feingold.
    .
    Why should Obama support liberal positions when liberals can’t produce at the voting booth? Say what you will about how crazy the Tea Partiers are but they show up to vote.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    “… versus an administration that, with some admitted warts, has been the most successful administration in a generation in moving progressive agendas forward”

    With all due respect, Mr. President, bullsh!t. The progressive “agendas” are tragically no closer to being achieved 20 months into your term than they were during your predecessor’s failed tenure.

    Don’t mistake your base for the GOP’s. We don’t swallow shameless doublethink so easily.

  • maverick2k9

    The grapes are sour, eh? Michael.
    -
    How can that left wing rag Rolling Stone get an interview, when a “respected” magazine like Time can’t?

  • Paul-no not that one

    Ha, I understand Shep.
    .
    Thanks for weighing in.

  • shepherdwong

    With all due respect, Mr. President, bullsh!t.“.
    .
    He’s not really talking to you, jc, but I’m sure he appreciates your pique. Anything that pisses off the DFH always plays well in the Village. That’s who it’s for.

  • Paul-no not that one

    In negotiations you stake ground at a different point then you expect to finish.
    .
    If you want 1 (and know you will settle for 30) and the other party wants 100 you don’t open at 25.

  • m0mentom0ri

    gum, I don’t think he negotiated against himself. I think he cleaved to the middle. Not because he had to, because he wanted to.

  • Paul-no not that one

    ” We don’t swallow shameless doublethink so easily.”
    .
    I’ve been curious jc, do you vote absentee?

  • michaelfury

    Maybe the problem is that the children HAVE done their homework.

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2008/10/30/the-ones-who-attacked-us/

    And 15-year-olds are quick to call you on your hypocrisy.

    http://michaelfury.wordpress.com/2010/09/22/send-in-the-drones/

  • porkdumpling

    “Bullsh?t”? Really? As you point out, we’re 20 months in. By your metric, you would be calling “bullsh?t” on FDR when after 20 months, his first New Deal wasn’t working fast enough. You wouldn’t have had the patience for his second New Deal which was much more liberal and included the National Labor Relations Act, the WPA, various housing acts, tax reform and the first incarnation of Social Security. Based on your disillusionment, FDR wouldn’t have gotten a second term, much less a third or fourth, especially when the country was still in a depression 8 years in.
    .
    Seriously, you people need to get a sense of perspective. Obama is not king or a fairy godmother. He can’t unilaterally issue directives with no regard for the mood of the country. But to say that the progressive agenda has not moved forward more than under Bush is such a deranged conclusion you must have hit your head on something hard. You have a short short memory if you don’t remember how things were just a few years ago.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Yes and no Shep. In this instance, I agree with your comment (18.2) above. However, various admin. officials and the president himself have repeatedly urinated on their base. In word and more importantly deed.
    .
    Paul, I did vote absentee in 2008. But I won’t this year, mostly for personal reasons. I registered in a state I only lived in for a year, I don’t pay state (or U.S.) taxes, and though I like the idea, I’ll probably not be returning anytime soon. If I were living in the US, however, I would vote for any liberal who appears on the ballot, whether he/she’s a D, green, or independent… A centrist, no thank you.
    .
    Not sure if I fit your “legitimately frustrated” category or not, but FWIW, in 2012, barring an unforeseen shift left from Obama, I will not vote. Unless of course, it’s for his primary opponent or a 3rd party in the general. I would strongly lean towards voting green or even libertarian over the centrist candidate.

  • http://derekg.wordpress.com/ Derek

    “We don’t swallow shameless doublethink so easily.”
    .
    It’s amazing that they think a gesture like being interviewed by Rolling Stone, and hectoring and mocking their base, is going to make any difference. Actions are what count and we already know what the actions have been. The rhetoric may be changing, because they need votes again, but smart people don’t get fooled twice.Why don’t we see them hectoring and mocking the redneck democrats, or Republicans. It is always the Left these corporate wh@res go after.

  • groenhagen2

    nflfoghorn:

    “As much as I detested the previous president (and his Commander-in-Chief), I would never stoop so low as to call them “punks.” It’s your right to do so, but it shows no respect for the presidency whatsoever.”

    Respect has to be earned. This punk Obama hasn’t earned the right to be respected.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Listen, b!tch, if you’re too obtuse to see the difference between FDR (liberal) and BHO (centrist), then far be it from me to enlighten you. It’s not that Obama’s sh!tty policies aren’t working fast enough, it’s that they’re, like, sh!tty. i.e. Not liberal.
    .
    Again, b/c his agenda is not Bush’s does not mean it’s progressive. Because you’re not black doesn’t mean you’re white, you dumb f@ck. You’re obviously looking for someone to blame. Feel free to harness it on the powerless, utterly disenfranchised and voiceless liberal base. B/C god knows the democrats’ looming disaster this November has nothing whatsoever to do with how they’ve governed. It must be the DFHs’ fault, or, well, Sarah Palin.
    .
    Seriously, I have more respect for resident conservatives than daft f’ing partisans like you.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Thanks for the response jc.
    .
    I used/stressed “legitimately frustrated” because I didn’t want to be misconstrued as dismissing peoples frustration.
    .
    I asked up thread for those commenters to weigh in on who they actually support. Having made what they are against clear I wanted to see, specifically, who they support. And how.
    .
    I appreciated shep, m0mentom0ri and afguy responding. And was curious about whether you voted and if so who you supported.
    .
    Just was wondering and understand why those commenters would rather not say.

  • maverick2k9

    When Limbaugh/Scherer aren’t accusing Obama of being a man-child, they are accusing him of being professorial/parental !!
    -
    LOL..Pundits, the joke is on you.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    ” This punk Obama hasn’t earned the right to be respected.”
    .
    Yeah, you can’t earn groinhugger’s respect until you hide from the Vietnam War AWOl while at Harvard and working on a political campaign supporting the war and the draft cheering on as other braver people die, have a DWI, run three of your father’s companies into the ground, lie about WMD, get us into an unlawful war of aggression, turn the MMS into a drug fueled whorehouse filled with bribes, sit on your hands while people drown in the streets of New Orleans and lead our country into the worst economic slowdown in 78 years.
    .
    Being the president of the Harvard Law Review, turning down the first few years to rake in big bucks to work for a non-profit, being a law professor and going from state senator to president with no family ties to politics in four years to you is just a punk.
    .
    Well, if respect is earned, Groinhugger, you should change your handle to sh!thead. But, why bring up the past?

  • newfreedomblog

    But, April2563, it is YOU my dear and your kind who are now the “oligarchs”.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Listen, b!tch, if you’re too obtuse to see the difference between FDR (liberal) and BHO (centrist), then far be it from me to enlighten you. It’s not that Obama’s sh!tty policies aren’t working fast enough, it’s that they’re, like, sh!tty. i.e. Not liberal.
    .
    Again, b/c his agenda is not Bush’s does not mean it’s progressive.”
    .
    Damn, J,
    .
    Don’t you realize that the right wing has Americans so terrified and confused that if we get anybody who does anything good for the people that we should be glad?
    .
    Like I said above, this is HCR Beta, financial reform Beta… etc, etc. Anything not conservative in this country happens at a glacial pace for the past 30 to 40 years, but conservative legislation gets passed in a heartbeat.
    .
    If FDR were alive today, he would, first, have the media showing that he could not walk at all (which they did not show) and the Republicans would have found out about Lucy Mercer, his mistress and prevented him from being elected dog catcher much less president. His ideas would be regarded as Stalinist.
    .
    J,
    .
    I haven’t seen you online that much, but, to me it looks like you expect miracles from our government.
    .
    Miracles only happen for the right wing in the US.

  • shepherdwong

    Yeah, Shep, Bill Halter, who was polling ahead of Lincoln, lost. Funny, that, in a Dem primary in which Obama didn’t endorse the incumbent. What happened? Liberals stayed home?
    .
    Don’t be stupid…if you can help it.

    So what did the Democratic Party establishment do when a Senator who allegedly impedes their agenda faced a primary challenger who would be more supportive of that agenda? They engaged in full-scale efforts to support Blanche Lincoln. Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure. Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests. The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln — a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just don’t have the votes for.
    .
    – Glenn Greenwald
    .
    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/10/lincoln

  • shepherdwong

    .
    Yeah, Shep, Bill Halter, who was polling ahead of Lincoln, lost. Funny, that, in a Dem primary in which Obama didn’t endorse the incumbent. What happened? Liberals stayed home?
    .
    Don’t be stupid…if you can help it.

    So what did the Democratic Party establishment do when a Senator who allegedly impedes their agenda faced a primary challenger who would be more supportive of that agenda? They engaged in full-scale efforts to support Blanche Lincoln. Bill Clinton traveled to Arkansas to urge loyal Democrats to vote for her, bashing liberal groups for good measure. Obama recorded an ad for Lincoln which, among other things, were used to tell African-American primary voters that they should vote for her because she works for their interests. The entire Party infrastructure lent its support and resources to Lincoln — a Senator who supposedly prevents Democrats from doing all sorts of Wonderful, Progressive Things which they so wish they could do but just don’t have the votes for.
    .
    – Glenn Greenwald
    .
    http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/06/10/lincoln

  • anon76

    @Shep- what about the rest of the comment? As much as many of us will be happy to see Lincoln go, very few of us are represented by her. Obama is not actually on the ballot in any state either.

    Are Obama’s (lack of) actions, or Lincoln’s betrayals a good enough reason to watch Feingold, Murray, Boxer, and Sestak lose? Or are they centrist/DLC members as well?

  • stuartzechman

    patricksartor:
    .
    Oregon JC, now handled JCapan, has been commenting at Swampland since 2007.
    .
    Since he moved to Japan, the time zone difference has made commenting less than opportune (as well as the birth of his first child).
    .
    We are fortunate that liberal commentary the caliber of his is still available to us here in Swampland. He is one of the finest thinkers on the left in evidence on these threads. He does not share some of my goals with respect to the maintenance of commentary as a format for discourse –or does not share my prioritizing of them– and that lack of constraint liberates his commentary to a certain degree, both intellectually and stylistically (“listen, b!tch“), in a way that you, patricksartor, would be the first to recognize its power.
    .
    If we are even more fortunate, he will explain to you why the chicken and egg argument you are making is a chicken and egg argument, and why rightists get “miracles” out of their government because they expect their party to provide them –figuratively and literally.
    .
    Maybe he will even explain to you the difference between Social Security & Medicare –flawed liberal policies, one of which became better and the other of which became worse over time, respectively– and the PPACA and FinReg, which are not liberal policies, and are very likely to made even worse then they are already in the years to come.
    .
    Or he may just agree with you, in which case you’ve just said yourself that expecting better policy to come from “FinReg Beta” or “Health Care Beta” is identical to expecting miracles out of government.
    .
    I believe I’m not being terribly inaccurate to say that JC finds the idea of our government taking power away from gigantic financial corporations tantamount to believing in the Democratic Party’s ability in 2010 to turning water into Dom Pérignon.
    .
    If we’re lucky, he’ll just agree with you…explicitly, patricksartor.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Sorry SZ,
    .
    I managed to resist Pork’s initial trollish commentary. And your rebuttal was (as usual) sufficient. But when directly challenged, as you said, suffer no fools….
    .
    Digby put it well today: “They can blame the base for their losses in November, but that won’t fly either. It’s results that matter and people don’t blame voters for not voting — they blame the politicians for failing to get them to vote. Winners get credit and losers get blame. It’s just how it works”
    .
    Listen, I can respect folks who hold their noses and vote Team-D. Many people I love and respect do so. Many commenters here and elsewhere that I have a great deal of regard for do so. But don’t insult my intelligence and say that our president/party leadership are fighting the great progressive fight of our generation. Don’t tell me Budweiser = my favorite IPA.
    .
    And don’t tell me that “Anything not conservative in this country” = liberalism.
    .
    OK, lunch break is over.

  • shepherdwong

    But when directly challenged, as you said, suffer no fools….
    .
    Most righteous and bodacious rant. My compliments, sir.

  • allthingsinaname

    I do not know why anyone would say that progressives are the base. Do you have any numbers to back that up. Are there more progressives in Congress, the Senate? Will someone name the progressives for me?
    .
    Come on lets drop this charade.
    .
    No the Party and Obama is not as liberal as I would like, so tell him.
    .
    This crap, Centrist, Third Way, etc is only something a nut can get into. How many people Identify with it? All you do is piss everyone off I would say about 70% of everyone. You do not have the numbers. want better numbers? Drop the labels.
    .
    Just my rant.

  • http://jcapan.wordpress.com jcapan

    Thanks Wonger–coming from the king of the smackdown, high praise indeed!

  • apr2563

    I admire FDR and what he did for my parents and others during the depression. I believe he was one of our greatest Presidents. He was progressive.
    .
    However, he certainly knew what was happening to the Jews and could have given them considerable more immigration access. He made no effort to integrate the military. It took Harry Truman. He interned the Japanese. He cut veterans and widows benefits. Dumped progressive Henry Wallace as his VP to placate more conservative dems for his 1944 election. He didn’t push for anti-lynching laws because he needed southern support for agenda.
    .
    Much of the above was done for political reasons during a very disturbing and chaotic time. And, he did not always have the support of Congress or the good wishes of the press.
    .
    My point is, there is yet to be a ideologically pure President.

  • liberalmeltdown

    I pay attention af.

    You just didn’t get it.

    There was absolutely no investigation of Obama’s views, background, and beliefs before the election in 2008 by the MSM. Did you see any questions about why he lied about Rev. Wright? Why he threw grandma under the bus? Redistribution? I have only seen one interview with this clown where someone asked direct, tough questions. He goes on the View. Geez.

    But, we all knew all the minutiae about Palin. It’s still that way.

  • russpoter

    When Peter is ROBBED to WELFARE Paul — Peter pushes back.

    Big time.

    Nov. 2 — STEAL-O-CRATS get theirs.

  • stuartzechman

    apr2563:
    .
    My point is, there is yet to be a ideologically pure President.
    .
    Agreed.
    .
    Reagan wasn’t a pure movement conservative, FDR certainly wasn’t a pure liberal, and Bill Clinton wasn’t a pure Third Way Dem.
    .
    Barack Obama isn’t a pure Third Way Dem, either.

  • charlieromeobravo

    Why would we expect Republicans to create jobs? There hasn’t been a net jobs gain under a Republican since Reagan and things weren’t great over all under him either. Neither Bush saw net jobs increase under either of their administrations. Al Franken used to joke that if we elected another Bush to office we’d be hunters and gathers by the end of their administration. Republicans like to talk about tax cuts all sorts of other “common sense” pro-business policy but they hate it when people point out that the economy was booming under Clinton when taxes were higher, there was more oversight, etc… I shake my head when I read polls that say more people trust Republicans over Dems to handle the economy. Why? They have no track record to back up there assertions that all taxes are bad and all deregulation is good.

  • porkdumpling

    Jcapan, amusing as it is to watch you lose your sh*t, you should, as others have pointed out, read a little history before you insist on such defining labels that only expose your own ignorance and simple-mindedness. Apr points out just a few examples (there are many more) that must blow the mind of an ideologue like yourself.
    .
    Don’t vote, that’s your choice. But then don’t complain about the results. Simple as that. As you rant about how liberals are “utterly disenfranchised,” “voiceless” and “powerless” consider it’s because like idiot you, they. don’t. vote.

  • afguy

    Don’t vote, that’s your choice. But then don’t complain about the results.
    .
    porkdumpling,
    .
    If I go into a store to buy fruit and am presented with the choice between rotten oranges and rotten apples, are you implying that I can’t complain about the quality of the fruit until I put down some money and buy it?
    .
    That is pure…unadulterated…horsesh!t.
    .
    I vote. But I understand those who don’t feel like the results will be worth the effort.
    .
    I said in a previous thread that I really have no use for knee-jerk D’s or R’s and I’m getting the idea that you are the former.
    .
    You want enthusiastic voters? Stop campaigning on issues that you ignore or drop after elected. Promise to close Gitmo? Do it. Executive order would accomplish it.
    .
    Campaign against the illegality or loss of freedoms under the Patriot Act and FISA? Stop trying to expand them and defending their provisions in court. And above all, stop doing so with legal arguments that would make a 3rd grader blush, that contradict what we publicly say to other countries. In case you haven’t been paying attention, their smirk is obvious when we try to discuss human rights.
    .
    Promise that you are against HCR that does not include a vigorous public option that your progressive voters state is one of the BIG campaign issues that motivated them? Don’t negotiate it away before you even begin.
    .
    And don’t stack the “Catfood Commission” with an overwhelming majority of hard-right idealogues like Simpson whose stated positions have ALWAYS been to cut the program they are “supposedly” studying.
    .
    In other words, if you want the Dem base to vote for you (and to do so enthusiastically), don’t govern as a Repub Lite. And stop stacking your cabinet with corporate insiders.
    .
    Want us to work hard for your election? Show us that electing you will be BETTER for the country, not just the same results but with different reasons for failure.
    .
    Right now, you’re giving us a choice between a blue or red t_rd floating in the punchbowl.
    .
    Got news for you… BOTH stink.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “But, April2563, it is YOU my dear and your kind who are now the “oligarchs”"
    .
    Retired teachers are the oligarchs?
    .
    Yeah, up is down, left is right, Goliath is David, David is Goliath and the Koch brothers are the proletariat while retired teachers are the oligarchs.
    .
    In other words”
    .
    “BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB, Hi, I’m Rusty and I believe anything any right wing information source tells me. BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB”

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “…Promise to close Gitmo? Do it. Executive order would accomplish it.
    .
    Campaign against the illegality or loss of freedoms under the Patriot Act and FISA? Stop trying to expand them and defending their provisions in court…”
    .
    In general, I prefer not feeding the right so many complaints about our centrist/centrist liberal (like North by Northwest – basically North or basically centrist) but, those are among the very obvious complaints.
    .
    If a Republican has the PATRIOT Act powers and Gitmo, Republicans are thrilled since they trust that a Republican can do no wrong with these powers. When a Democrat has these powers, Republicans get very upset and, no matter who is in office Liberals & Progressives are upset that these powers exist for government.
    .
    So, in those cases in particular continuing those things succeeds in both inspiring hatred from the right and throwing cold water on Liberal & Progressive enthusiasm at the same time. In other words, just plain dumb.
    .
    Excellent examples, Afguy.

  • shepherdwong

    Are Obama’s (lack of) actions, or Lincoln’s betrayals a good enough reason to watch Feingold, Murray, Boxer, and Sestak lose? Or are they centrist/DLC members as well?
    .
    No and no.

  • afguy

    A lot of this gets to the “moral hazard” I see of becoming too closely aligned with one party or the other. I’ve had this discussion with others at church.
    .
    My religion is NOT either the Democratic or Republican Parties. There are parts of both “real liberalism” and “real conservatism” I can support and live – not this political movement crap.
    .
    No matter who supports the law and what “interpretations” have been made about its legality, I find the belief that the president can order the killing of another citizen (actually, anyone, for that matter) even without sufficient cause to stand up in a court of law, to be morally and ethically inexcusable. Don’t bother me with your “we’re at war” rationalizations – no matter what party you claim to follow.
    .
    Americans (or, for that matter, anyone) are “exceptional” individuals only when they live up to the description – we aren’t exceptional due to the accident of where our mothers were when we “popped out”.
    .
    In religious circles, we are to be judged as individuals, not on the “group plan”. If I claim to believe what I do, then it is my responsibility to speak out against immoral policy, either when it came from a GWB spokesman or one in the present WH.
    .
    If you don’t, don’t be surprised if you find yourself “tarred” with supporting positions you actually find personally distasteful – simply because you only ever “spoke up” to affirm support. Remember, silence too often means agreement with what is being said to the casual observer
    .
    Want to be seen as principled? Be prepared to “backhand” a few BOTH with the right and left hands when comments warrant it.

  • afguy

    Will someone name the progressives for me?
    .
    allthings,
    .
    Don’t know if these fit your description but Grayson, Franken, and Sheldon Whitehouse are fairly decent.
    .
    I’m really partial to Whithouse, based on what I’ve seen of him during hearings. His questioning is VERY good.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Whitehouse is great.
    .
    I recall during his campaign the serious people worried that his winning would eliminate another “moderate” republican, Chafee.
    .
    As mild as Chafee was Whitehouse was a huge upgrade.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Did you see any questions about why he lied about Rev. Wright? ”
    .
    No, but we didn’t have any information that George W Bush believed in Dispensationalism and few people, if anybody knows where he prayed for the end of the world.
    .
    Why he threw grandma under the bus?
    .
    I don’t know what you mean by that unless you are saying that he commented that his grandmother – who he loved dearly – once admitted that she was uncomfortable around black people and had to learn to change her ways of thinking.
    .
    “Redistribution?
    .
    Unless you mean, as Freeinpa means continuing social security and welfare, or progressive taxes, he does not believe in any commonly known term of “redistribution of wealth” (which is what Marxists – nearly 100% of American Marxists, who were college students in the 1930s grew old and died). Unlike Martin Luther King Jr, he was opposed to reparations for slavery.
    .
    “I have only seen one interview with this clown where someone asked direct, tough questions.”
    .
    That would beat GWB by one. He got nothing but soft balls.

    “But, we all knew all the minutiae about Palin.”
    .
    Mostly because she keeps on forcing herself into the spotlight and making statements about herself – some of which are questioned by the media.
    .
    I wonder where you were when Bush got a free ride from 9/11 until after Katrina. If you were in the United States, you weren’t paying much attention, I guess.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “Americans (or, for that matter, anyone) are “exceptional” individuals only when they live up to the description – we aren’t exceptional due to the accident of where our mothers were when we “popped out”.”
    .
    I couldn’t agree with you more about this.
    .
    Except for the fact that I am pro-life (yes, I know very unusual for an atheist – but not totally unheard of) I can not think of any issue that I am either not in line with Democrats or more liberal than Democrats.
    .
    I do wish we had more than two parties, but, that just isn’t going to happen this year or, most likely, within the next 50 years.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    Don’t forget Bernie Sanders – the heaviest Brooklyn accent I have ever heard – representing Vermont.
    .
    He is progressive.
    .
    Dennis Kucinich is a progressive, but in an extremely impractical way as far as I am concerned.

  • allthingsinaname

    I believe all these guys voted for the Health Care Bill that everyone is so upset with.
    .
    So how is that Progressives can compromise and the rest can’t?
    .
    This all or nothing attitude on this thread is, well if the actions of these progressives is any indication, wrong.
    .
    Franken is excellent, makes me wish I still lived in MN.

  • afguy

    patrick,
    .
    You’re right about Sanders. What little I see of him, I like. He is an honest man about his beliefs.

  • afguy

    Paul-NNTO,
    .
    What I like about Whitehouse starts with his “low-key” nature. He’s not flashy, but as the questioning progresses, you see that he’s not deflected by evasive answers.
    .
    Before he’s finished, he usually exposes BS for what it is – without tooting his own horn during the process to any degree.
    .
    He’s just very effective in his job – Rhode Island is fortunate to have him.

  • afguy

    Patrick,
    .
    Based on my reading of the Constitution (and what I see about Jefferson), I can be Christian and co-exist with non-Christians and atheists on a secular level quite easily (even while disagreeing with their religious beliefs) as long as I separate the two – religion and goverrnment.
    .
    Actuall pretty easy for me to do. Doesn’t mean I might not try to convert you but on a friendly level.
    .
    It’s when either of the two takes it on themselves to tell the other how they are supposed to believe (or govern, according to religious leaders) that the fun begins.
    .
    I tell those at church to be very careful about mixing the two. They don’t really listen – but it does make the admonishment that there are going to be a LOT of supposed “followers” who don’t make the final cut because they don’t actually “walk the walk” extremely applicable.

  • Paul-no not that one

    Have you ever caught Sanders on Thomm Hartman’s radio show?
    .
    He does an hour a week taking calls. His no nonsense liberalism is great to hear.
    .
    Along with his “Move on, you’re wasting time” toned response to any praise directed to him from the host or callers.

  • Paul-no not that one

    We could use another Dayton vote.
    .
    He’s only up 11 points as of this morning.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    I completely understand.
    .
    New York especially, but the entire Northeast tends to be very private about religion. Atheists are relatively rare, but, the odds are if you talk about religion, it’s like opinions, everybody’s got one or another: Catholic, Orthodox Christian, protestant (I mean all other Christians), Jews, Muslims, Hindus and some atheists/agnostics. “Undecided” is rare.
    .
    At the end of the day, when we go to work, when we ride on the subway, shop in stores, drive (very, very aggressively in NYC – never take it personal since, to get where you need to go, you’ll be cutting in front of somebody else in thirty seconds just like somebody just cut in front of you) there is no difference among religions.
    .
    Like most atheists, as far as I am concerned if you want to spend your Sundays getting together with people and trying to find ways to be a better person, that’s great.
    .
    I, like most atheists, find how the Communist countries forbade religion at terrible abuse as bad as having somebody force any religion on you as places like Saudi Arabia do. Religion and politics should be separate.

  • stuartzechman

    As a Christian Manhattanite, I found your comments to be highly accurate, patricksartor, and (of course) agree with your ideas on separating religion and politics.

  • apr2563

    Whitehouse is one of my favorite senators. If he is speaking on the Senate floor, I always stop to listen.
    And, Franken reminds me of his hero Paul Wellstone early in his career.

  • herby002

    12.9 – patrick,
    “Historically, except for the New Deal and the Great Society, Democrats release prototypes of good ideas. It takes a huge amount of arm twisting to get even the prototype out. Later, after a few more sessions of congress, it begins to look more and more like what was originally promised.”

    I might add that the New Deal wasn’t a “done deal”:
    Roosevelt’s proposal to “pack the Court” to override the votes of the old justices who kept declaring his New Deal programs unconstitutional created such popular anger at the Court that they stopped killing his programs as a matter of course.

    As for President Johnson’s ‘War On Poverty’ and the ‘Civil Rights Act’:
    He had a number of advantages that Obama does not have…
    He was a Southerner, who had played the “race card” in more than one election, so he knew the mindset of the congressional opponents of a civil rights law, so he knew how to talk to them to get them to vote in favor of the nation’s good, not just for the next (local) election.
    He used the “sympathy factor” after Kennedy was killed to push for enactment of the “unfinished agenda” of the martyred President.
    He was a master of the Senate’s parliamentary procedures, so he could guide his congressional supporters in the best ways to get his favored bills passed… and he knew how to browbeat opponents to at least consider voting for his Great Society proposals.
    If you listen to the early “Johnson tapes” of his telephone calls, you’ll hear a master politician (and statesman) at work.
    Then there was VietNam – and it all fell apart.

  • liberalmeltdown

    Oh, oh the hand wringing on this thread. Oh, oh. Grandma is posting with many different names. Oh, oh.

    What, oh what shall we do?

    Here’s an Idea grannies. Step outside yourself. Look around at history. In the history of civilization, the American society is the ONLY place where freedom, liberty, and justice are standards of our people.

    We don’t need government. Government is the enemy. Stand up; be you own person. Stop wanting to be governed.

  • http://patricksartor.wordpress.com patricksartor

    “We don’t need government. Government is the enemy. Stand up; be you own person. Stop wanting to be governed.”
    .
    Who’s waiting for what?
    .
    So, the police are the enemy?
    .
    When the next person finds you annoying wants to smack you you around for it (and everybody can be annoying at one time or another and some, if they had their way, would smack anybody annoying around – these people often live alone and in isolated areas or have long criminal records, of course) the government is you enemy? The police to protect you are the enemy?
    .
    When the company down the street from you wants to save money on commercial waste disposal by burning garbage contaminating you air, the EPA is your enemy?
    .
    When you neighbor realizes that it is far easier than cleaning out his own septic tank letting it overflow into your well water supply, the government is your enemy?
    .
    When your house catches on fire due to an incompetent electrician, the fire department and the arson investigators are you enemy?
    .
    When there are potholes on your street ruining the front end of your car, the department of public works who fix the roads are your enemy?
    .
    When your employer wants to cut corners and neglect worker safety endangering you, OSHA is your enemy?
    .
    I could go on for pages on end.
    .
    Freedom is the ability to to do what is not harmful to others as you choose. Who makes sure that others in acting on their own will do not harm you?
    .
    Government.
    .
    If you like a world without government, Somalia has a very easy immigration policy. No gun control. No safety laws. No, tort lawsuits. If government is the one who takes away freedom rather than defends it, then Somalia is your Utopia.

  • http://gum0nshoe.wordpress.com gumOnShoe

    I always knew Canadians hated freedom and that Les Mis was all about how much the French despised freedom.
    .
    Mind if I source you in the future?

  • herby002

    Who do you think is posting under different names, and what evidence can you supply?

    [I'll answer for you: nobody; none.]

blog comments powered by Disqus