Is Greenwald Right About Obama?

Post Reply New Topic

Glenn Greenwald is Salon's resident civil libertarian. He's hammered on Obama for Obama's handling of Wikileaks and the detention of Pfc. Manning, national-security policy and the "war on terror," etc. In the article "Reports: Obama pushing for cuts to Social Security, Medicare", Greenwald diagnoses President Obama as engaging in a cool-headed realpolitik to win his re-election and advance a corporate agenda. In Greenwald's analysis, the White House sees Congressional Democrats as acquiescing to Obama's "concessions" in the name of party unity (progressives will begrudgingly vote for Obama in 2012 rather than a Bachmann or Palin). The Obama campaign receives significant funding from Wall Street, so he is beholden to their interests. Also, Obama gains with independents by compromising with the Republicans and thus creating a "bipartisan" image. Greenwald concludes that Barack Obama is a neoliberal corporatist whose real constituencies are Wall Street and the military-industrial complex.

Is Glenn Greenwald right about Obama?

That does, unfortunately, seem to be the case.

But, the Republican Party is even more profoundly evil.

In other words, Obama is a progressive Democrat. Not a surprise.

Greenwald didn't even address the tip of the iceberg of everything wrong with the Obama administration.

On the other hand, we can hope that President Obama is bluffing.

Do the Republicans really want to cut social security and medicare?

Well, of course, in their heart of hearts that would love nothing better. On the other hand, they really, really, really do want to be re-elected.

Yes, he certainly is right about Obama being a pro-war, beholden to Wall Street corporatist. The bailouts will never stop, the perpetual war will never be ended. Neocons and the most democrats are essentially completely the same. Maybe the dems like gays and Mexicans a lil more(like their votes to be more accurate) but there really is no difference between the two besides rhetoric. We essentially live in a one party dictatorship.

Ron Paul is the only one candidate that is really serious about ending the wars and corporate handouts. 'And those are his priorities too, we should cut those before we cut the programs that actually help people as flawed as they are.

You seem to have republicans and Chicago school libertarians mixed up.

I very much doubt that will happen without taxes going up.

It's not a deal until both sides are unhappy.

The gap between the two is narrowing, especially in the house.

Really, anyone who does the math can see that medicare and medicaid need to be "cut" - meaning, increased at something close to the rate of inflation, rather than way above the rate of inflation.


House Republicans have indicated a willingness to remove various tax breaks, which counts as a tax "increase", in the same sense that increasing medicare slower counts as a "cut". The senate is lining up to defend agricultural subsidies, though.

Not even close. Howard Dean is a progressive Democrat; Obama is a moderate Republican.

That's why republicans hate him so much.

Republicans watch Fox News too much.

Democratic party unity. That's funny.

Like "business ethics" and "military intelligence".

ruveyn

Doctors, hospitals and nursing homes that accept medicare and medicaid are already reimbursed at much lower rates than patients who self-pay or who have other insurance. Further cuts would lead to fewer doctors, hospitals, etc. accepting medicare and medicaid patients.



Our government is extraordinarily generous to corporate farms.

Have you considered that conservatives hate Obama because he is against everything they believe in, that some watch Fox News because it resonates with them, and not all watch Fox News or watch Fox News exclusively?