Progressives Need to Issue an Ultimatium to Obama

Post Reply New Topic

A while ago DentArthurDent started a something all too rare on WrongPlanet - a thread attacking Obama from the left.

His particular criticism was Obama's cozzying up with the financial sector. It's been well known that important people in who strongly influence Financial decisions in the Obama Administration have "conflict of interest" and "WallStreet Insider" written all over them.

-Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff, worked for a lucrative Hedge Fund.

- Timothy Geithner, arch-tax evader and Secretary of Treasury, has had a long career working with and saying nothing about the people who started the Financial meltdown as President of Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

- Larry Summers, Director of the National Economic Council, was critical in implementing the Clintonian policies of high dollar/financial deregulation that paved the way for global depression. [see also]

Rather than get worked up on some not quite stable man's chalkboard conspiracies, shouldn't people be paying attention to these crucial advisors? They have a lot more influence and have much more conflicted interests than Van Jones ever did.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=toR_AjDhKQ8[/youtube]

Healthcare

Obama's needlessly triangulated. He delegated the entire writing of a healthcare bill to one Republican! That is, Olivia Snow. Obama's toying with dropping the "Public Option" and has failed to dispel lies about his (formative) healthcare bills.

De facto President - Rahm Emanuel



Rahm Emanuel has had one of the largest roles any Chief of Staff has ever presided over. All the compromises made by Emanuel in the healthcare bill have been to the detriment of progressive organizations.

What to Do?



Progressives have numerous organizations which they should be funding and working for. Progressive Democrats of America, MoveOn.org, etc. Furthermore there is a congressional wing of the Progressive Movement - the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

Putting full weight behind these organizations progressives must antoganize and pressure the Obama administration.

Obama must include the Public Option, if he doesn't progressive must lobby members of congress to support Coyners alternative H.R. 676 bill.

If Obama fails on healthcare and continues a regressive course a Primary Challenge from someone like Feigngold in 2012 should be in order.

Conclusion

The Right never accepts compromise. They always just redefine the edge of the ground you have surrendered as "socialism" No progress comes through Clintonian triangulation and cutting deals with industry lobbyists. Progress comes through progressive leadership and spine and not through political eunuchism.

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 08 Sep 2009, 7:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.

All a puppet show.

+1

For the last 20+ years or longer, no matter who you had to choose from, they were always in the pocket of the elite power brokers who want their interests represented in government.

Why can't we all just give the man a chance. It's only been 8 months. There's a lot still on the table. We're trying to come out of a major recession and there's still a clusterf*ck in the mideast. Dubya really did a number on our country, surpassing my worst nightmares. He was arguably one of the worst presidents in US history. Obama walked into the worst case scenario and I think he's doing his best.

I'm still holding out to see how healthcare reform really goes through. At many points during Obama's campaign I thought he didn't stand a chance. He managed to pull it out in the end, and I think the same is possible now. We're just not used to having someone so calm and collected in the white house. Yes, I do think the administration should have been a lot more proactive in warding off all of the right-wing and oppositional rhetoric about socialism and such, but it ain't over yet. I think progressives (whatever happened to liberals?) are making a big mistake by getting their panties all up in a bunch this early in the game. Republicans got their goals met through unity. Democrats should be doing the same. I like the concept of "Audacity of Hope" and I don't take Obama for the kind who gives up easily - not yet anyway.

I'd call that bluff. Where else are they going to go?

Obama has met with industry lobbyists, threatened to remove the public option, failed to investigate torture under the Cheney-Bush Administration, vowed to escalate the War in Afganistan, failed to defend Van Jones, failed to come up with a detailed/public option incorporating Healthcare Reform Bill (instead delegating it to Congress/Republican Olivia Snow), passed a stimulus ladden with ineffective tax cuts/$500 Billion underfunded, and squashed auto-worker's rights.

I'm sorry but such a record of abysmal failure to push foward a progressive agenda and countless surrender to the Right gives me a feeling for how the rest of his term will go.

Obama isn't a master-strategist - he's a master appeaser of the right. Well, not so much a "master" at appeasing as no matter how much he appeases the Republicans still refuse to vote for any of his bills. He watered down the stimulus with excessive tax cuts to the point where it lost any punch.

He's surrounded himself with financial lobbyists who donated more money than anyone else to his campaign. Follow the money and you'll easily see what his agenda is. His agenda is to bail out financial CEOs/firms and pass timid/Clintonian reforms. He's very business as usual.

Right now is the ideal time to think of Primary Challengers for 2012. Some good ones would be...

- Russ Feingold
- Howard Dean
- John Conyers
- Anthony Weiner
- Lynn Woolsey

Come on, complete failure to dispell so many positively false rumours gives you an understanding to the breadth of his political eunuchism.

If Obama's hero, Ronald Reagan, could set up an entire Office of Public Diplomacy, can't Obama dispell a few unverified rumours?

The mere threat should be enough to discipline Obama. But if not they'll go (ideally) campaign for a 2012 Primary Challenger (I listed 5 optimal progressive candidates). If not, they simply won't offer time and money to an Obama campaign and instead fund good organizations like the Progressive Democrats of America that'll lobby Obama's Centrecrat administration to go in progressive direction.

One problem with a primary challenger is that it weakens the office in general. What'd be an effective strategy would be to target the legislative branch and offer more challenges there. It'd be a more effective front.


And it wouldn't risk giving Sarah Palin an "in" for 2012.

That would be an effective strategy, I'll admit. But a dozens of seperate congressional challenges don't have the unity or noticeability of a focused attack on the Democratic Party leader. Plus a Palin Presidency for 4 years - if America survives - would have the effect of inducing the whole country to vote Kucinich in 2016!

On a serious note, it would work as long as Obama felt the brunt of his supporters going out and campaigning for congressional progressives rather than giving their hard earned money to his Centrecrat re-election bid.

It allows for an attack from within that can be managed through the media outlets and through congressional demonstrations against the executive branch.

It's much more effective and much more visual overall...not to mention it may actually give rise to someone who could usurp Obama without completely killing the party's integrity in a presidential election.

What an insult to centrists. Obama is catering to the far-right by implementing moderate right solutions. It's not anywhere near center. Not even "center-right".

In the event number5 needs a touching example of a man who, for the longest time, gave Obama the "benefit of the doubt" and conceived of the Democrat as a master strategist - only to be rudely awakened to the awful reality - look no further than Cenk.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8xHD2yAWWc&feature=channel_page[/youtube]

Last edited by Master_Pedant on 08 Sep 2009, 4:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Alright, I accept your alternative proposal for progressive pressure.

Do you really think any of those guys could win though? Maybe that's not the most important aspect and that would be admirable. However, I think Obama is about as far to the left as we're going to get elected in this country but I understand your frustrations with Obama though. He's trying to be everything to everyone and pleasing no one. You can't nail down what he believes in on almost anything. Russ Feingold is one my senators actually and while I disagree with him on most things, I think he's a good guys and actually believes what he believes in not just what's politically trendy.

Where I differ from you though is that I believe you have to govern from the center or else you're disenfranchising a large(the largest portion actually) portion of America. This is a centrist country. I think if Obama faces a challenge from his own party in 2012, it'll be Hilary Clinton. I actually regret not supporting her over Obama last year because of my own personal bias. Not even my own really, my father hated Clinton and instilled that in me.(the scandals and lying more so than policies)

Last edited by Jacoby on 08 Sep 2009, 4:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I watch politics closely. A big part of Bush becoming president included all the noise that the Republican-controlled legislative branch made during the Clinton years. Republicans make very effective use of their legislative seat-holders and their ability to get airtime.

The progressives need to do the same if they want to stand a chance.

Which also means being willing to have your boot to the neck and being willing to stomp down when needed.