David Sirota: Obama Sells Us Out to Political Terrorist Glenn Beck & His Lynch Mob

[OhioChick]

Mon Sep 07, 2009 at 11:13

Per my post and announcement last night, here's the clip of my CNN debate with David Frum about the Van Jones affair this morning. Notice that Frum has no answer for the obvious double standards. Somehow, nobody gets fired for lying us into Iraq, Tim Geithner keeps his job after tax evasion and gift scandals, Republican congresspeople remain credible while championing the "birther" lunacy - but Van Jones must be fired for carelessly signing a petition years ago, which he later apologized for.

As I said on CNN, the hypocrisy uncovers the real truth of this whole affair: Van Jones was targeted by the political terrorist known as Glenn Beck - the man who leads a 21st century lynch mob looking to hunt down anyone (and especially anyone black) who has ever been a part of progressive movement politics. I don't use that term "political terrorist" lightly. According to the dictionary, a terrorist is "a person who terrorizes or frightens others" - and usually does so with an ideological objective. There are, of course, many different kinds of terrorists, and I'd say Beck - with his fearmongering, paranoia and hate - fits the letter and spirit of the dictionary definition of a political terrorist quite well. Indeed, just listen to this clip or look at this not-so-veiled threat and then try to claim with a straight face that Beck isn't explicitly using the mass media to scare and terrorize people.

In placating the demands of this terrorist and his lynch mob, the Obama administration has simultaneously empowered that terrorist and that lynch mob, while abandoning its own progressive base (And yes, yes - I know saying that makes the sycophants upset. I know it means I'll get a lot of irritating and hsterical email saying "I guess you wanted McCain!" or "you're going to get us President Romney in 2012!" - as if the progressive movement exists solely to worship at the feet of politicians with a "D" behind their name. That's fine - that kind of cultism is everywhere in the American Idiocracy, and I've got my "delete" key fired up and ready to go).

I am at once loathe to help fuel this media-manufactured controversy and eager to use this as a kind of "teachable moment" that Obama talks about, but rarely delivers on. If we as a movement cannot stand up for a genuine progressive hero like Van Jones - a guy with a towering record of real-world accomplishment on behalf of issues and grassroots communities - then we will not be able to stand up for anything, much less major legislative initiatives.

The multi-million-dollar Washington-based "progressive" organizations that previously used Van Jones to stress their environmental and racial progressivism haven't strongly spoken out about Jones and about the White House's failure to back him. Indeed, most of those organizations have issued mealy-mouthed statements praising Jones but giving their friends in the White House a pass. This is par for the course, unfortunately. As I wrote in my newspaper column this week, and as Jane Hamsher has so effectively shown, these institutions are still too concerned with their White House access than in building a real movement.

So if I can do my own little part to take up the slack through the media, I will - even if it means I will inevitably be targeted by that same right-wing lynch mob.

Of course, perhaps the Jones affair is the canary in the coal mine. Maybe the White House's refusal to stand by Jones and willingness to accept the demands of right-wing political terrorists is a symptom of the bigger disease whereby the Obama is already selling out progressives on every major priority. Perhaps, in short, Jones isn't the issue - and what his firing represents is.

I fear that is the case - certainly the Obama administration's behavior on everything from health care to climate change to war suggests that's what's going on. And if that's true, then we've got a huge problem on our hands.

http://www.openleft.com/diary/14966/cnn-debate-on-van-jones-obama-sells-us-out-to-political-terrorist-glenn-beck-his-lynch-mob

[polichick]

1. I think it's pretty clear that "we've got a huge problem on our hands." k&r

[Aramchek]

3. it's always clear what you think,

Obama is a big problem for you for some reason.

[polichick]

4. "for some reason" LOL...

Yeah, I didn't work my butt off for this party for 30+ years ~ including one year for Obama ~ to watch him piss away the best opportunity Dems have had in decades.

[Aramchek]

7. I guess you know someone who would be doing a better job, huh?

[polichick]

10. Sure, lots - Democrats who put democratic principles before...

...enabling corporate interests and sucking up to Republican bullies.

Obama has time to pull it together ~ not much time; he's losing credibility every day ~ and I hope he does it.

(In case you're new to all this, the job of Dem activists is to hold the prez' feet to the fire, not to pin up his photo in their bedrooms.)

[Aramchek]

11. I'm not new to all this.

I know the difference between 'holding feet to the fire' and 'bashing at every available instance'.

Tell the truth. You thought Obama had lost his credibility the day he took office.

[polichick]

12. Obviously you are new enough not to know the rules of this board. nt

[Aramchek]

13. enlighten me, please

did I miss a tasty edit?

[polichick]

14. Not unless you call changing the word "forum" to "board" tasty...

You can read the rules yourself.

[Skittles]

39. hey Aramchek

do I have to teach you how to put assholes on IGNORE or should I just kick your ass?

[HughMoran]

18. She fucking despises him

I hate her.

[polichick]

36. "I hate her." Your post clearly identifies the hater...

If you weren't as confused and close-minded as the teabaggers, you would know that I worked endless hours for Obama over the course of a year. I've met him, spoken with him and like him very much ~ enough to want him to succeed in bringing progressive change to this country.

If you weren't such a "moran," you'd know that disagreeing with personnel choices and tactics has nothing to do with "despising" someone.

[nashville_brook]

2. wish i could rec this twice -- Sirota, Hamsher and Greenwald have emerged as the voice of the

party that could have been. should have been. solid, fearless and spot-on.

[bkozumplik]

5. we're watching the end of our party

Its unfolding in the last month or so. The dems wil end and the progressives will rise.

[polichick]

6. "the progressives will rise" - that is my great hope! nt

[Aramchek]

9. are you a member of the GOP? because that's the Party that is going down in flames

in 20 years, the demographics of this country will have changed such that the GOP will be in permanent minority status
if it even exists at all

[paulsby]

20. your hubris is hilarious

and there were plenty of silly people on the right who made similar predictions when the "republican revolution" occurred back not too long ago.

iow, you fail to learn from history and are doomed to repeat it.

arrogance and belief that the repubs are done and over with is EXACTLY the attitude that leads to poor decision making and helps repubs REGAIN a majority.

iow, it's stupid to believe this.

[babylonsister]

17. Don't you wish. nt

[chknltl]

21. If that's the case, then what's your view on the GOP?

[bkozumplik]

28. thanks for asking

I think we're stuck with the stupids. The GOP wont ever really go away. Where do those people have to go?

[chknltl]

30. It IS their choice.

The GOP will wither and die without supporters, as will any political party obviously. Democracy requires an enlightened electorate. It makes sense that those who love democracy would want to enlighten the unenlightened-regardless of how enlightened the teacher may be.

This then is how I perceive supporters of the GOP. For the most part, they have a passion for our democracy, many want to try and save our democracy by explaining their views to those of us who do not share their views.

We have had 8 years of seeing their views fail, (arguably more than 8 years), but those failures are without question. The examples are so numerous. Wasted lives and money in a fiasco war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Trickle Down Economics sending the wealth of our nation into the hands of the ultra rich. A government that should/still could be 'OF' 'BY' and 'FOR' the people being bought out from us by corporate fascists many of whom are not even American citizens and etc. and etc and etc.
These things are supported by those who support the GOP.

Instead of recognizing the failures, they make excuses for them. When told that a million Iraqi citizens or more have died because of the (fiasco) war, they tell me "Well war IS hell!" When I point out that an incredible budget surplus created under Clinton was turned into an even more incredible deficit, they tell me "We are broke because our nation is at war!" or worse "We had to fight 'them' over there so we wouldn't have had to fight 'them' over here!" (yes, I HAVE heard that one and the moron was quite pleased that America didn't suffer those million casualties).

It isn't until their wallets are impacted that they come to Jesus on the fact that the GOP whom they supported has not supported them. Then they come to 'our' side, which explains why so many supporters of the GOP voted for Senator Obama to be our President.

You ask; "Where do those people have to go?" My answer comes from the notion that one can not gain enlightenment by shouting or by being shouted at. Perhaps, for the sake of the GOP, surely for the sake of the nation and yes even for the sake of this planet, those who wish to remain supporters of the GOP need to sit down, shut up and hang on. If they can do that, we can all gain enlightenment and just perhaps, (no promises), We The People may save democracy along the way.

[bkozumplik]

34. I dont think they have a passion for democracy

You said, "This then is how I perceive supporters of the GOP. For the most part, they have a passion for our democracy, many want to try and save our democracy by explaining their views to those of us who do not share their views."

I grew up in a bunch of small towns, and its a different world entirely. They aren't passionate about being in a democracy where everyone has their say and it affects their life. They're interested in themselves and to a smaller extent, their family, their community, and their church. And that's really it. And they don't like you. In fact, they loathe you. Anyone who isn't part of their little tribe is subtly undesirable.

These people aren't going away. They are a part of the landscape, and theres a lot of them-- and they are all republicans.

[chknltl]

38. There are groups like that

Just as there are Holly Rollers under the larger umbrella known as Christianity, there are groups of folks under the umbrella known as Republicanism. I do not accept that these groups represent the majority remnants of the GOP supporters. A faction yes, maybe even a significant faction but surely not the largest one. Even within that faction, there are going to be those who wind up going bankrupt due to health needs. Those communities are not immune to what the insurance industry is doing to all of us. That community then has the choice to ostracize them or help them. (Ignore 'em or socialism....what would their churches advise?)

Here in the city of Tacoma, the supporters of the Republican Party are actually quite large, I would not be surprised to find out that 20-25% of my town still supports the GOP. I've yet to encounter even one of them who didn't support America's democracy. Every one of them who chose to debate me had the same passion I had for our democracy. Misguided, yes but the passion was there and it was the dominate factor propelling them to debate me.

Fewer and fewer GOP supporters who debate with me try to suggest that we needed to fight the fiasco in Iraq so we would not have to fight them over here, fewer and fewer of them still believe that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with 9-11 and etc. Now it's a fear that President Obama will not support our Constitution. Now more than ever I am being told how our founding fathers would roll over in their graves if they knew....well you get the idea. (As I said, misguided, I do NOT share their views, nor does history for that matter).

It is this very passion for our democracy that has worked to their disadvantage when they hear the propaganda that they hear from limbaugh and hannity and faux noise and etc. For instance, hearing (and believing) that President Obama is gonna turn this nation into a socialist nation, or a fascist nation or a Communist nation strikes deep to their patriotism. There is nothing wrong with patriotism of course unless it is used against it's citizenry as it is being used here. (As you know, Hitler's Minister Goebels used it against the citizens of Germany with great successes.)

There are other motivations being used against the supporters of the GOP, religion comes to mind as well as the abortion issue and the global warming issue. All these other wedge potential issues imo are not being currently pushed as strongly by those propagandizing the base of the GOP supporters. When the time is right they will trot them out. For now, imo patriotism for our democracy is what motivates the bulk of the GOP supporters right now and that is the chord those who propagandize them are pulling on the strongest.

[pleah]

8. K&R

[BREMPRO]

15. Sirota has his facts wrong. Jones resigned on his own- he was NOT fired

I usually agree with Sirota and respect his opinion but I think this is an overreaction. We automatically assume someone if "fired" now when they resign.

"While there is suspicion that he was asked to resign, White House officials say it was his own decision.

"Absolutely not -- this was Van Jones' own decision," David Axelrod told NBC's
"Meet the Press" when asked if the president had ordered the resignation."


I believe that this was Jones's decision- he didn't want to be a distraction at such a critical time and is an honorable man who recognized the controversy was hindering Obama and sacrificed himself for the greater good of the president's agenda.

This is sad, but Sirota misses the many examples of where conservatives political careers are ruined by bad press. Think of George Allen (R) - on the presidential fast track before his "macaca moment" killed his political career. Or Trent Lott pressured into resigning for his comment about Strom Thurman. Political media assassination is an equal opportunity event.

[ihavenobias]

19. Wow...you honestly believe that? And you're quoting White House officials as proof?

While we're at it let's ask Cheney if he thinks his administration kept us safe, or ask our moms if they think we're the best looking, smartest and most successful people in the world.

:)

[BREMPRO]

22. sarcastic snark and is not evidence.

I was stating my opinion based on what i've heard from all sides, my knowledge of the Obama and Jones character, and the circumstances.
In addition to the WH statement that he was not fired-Here are Jones's words:

"On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me," Jones said in the statement. "They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide."

Adding that he came to Washington to "fight for others, not for myself," Jones said in the statement, "I cannot in good conscience ask my colleagues to expend precious time and energy defending or explaining my past. We need all hands on deck, fighting for the future."

Now- i'm sure he had a discussion with Obama and the members of the administration- but I believe it was ultimately his choice and was not pressured to leave.

This is not the Bush administration who would lie to their grandmother on her deathbed and sell her to the soylent green factory.

Now, when you have evidence that he was fired- let me know.

[ihavenobias]

23. Why is the burden of proof on me when these 'resignations' generally come from the top?

And even if it didn't come from the top, it shouldn't have been accepted (imagine this happening in a Republican administration?). This was also a terrible political decision, because as we already see the right wing is not satisfied, but rather emboldened and already salivating over the prospect of creating more "resignations".

[BREMPRO]

26. the word "generally" doesn't address the particular circumstances.

Just because "generally" resignations come from the top, doesn't mean that's the case here. My point is that Sirota is making a leap and generalizations that don't take into account the actual circumstances, but just reinforcing his view of the dems as spineless. I wouldn't call Barney Frank, Rep. Weiner, The late Edward Kennedy, or Sen. franken spineless. The blue-dogs- that's another story. Also, refusing to accept resignations is not always a wise political move. The Bush administration refused to accept Rumsfeld's resignation until after the midterm elections and this was a political disaster for the Republicans. Now, I'm not comparing the devil Rumsfeld with the Jones, but the political consequences could be the same. If the circumstances were different, Obama might have encouraged Jones to fight and stay on. I just think that the stakes are too high to risk the distraction and Jones sacrificed his position for a greater good.

I also pointed out that there have been many examples where media scrutiny spurred by the left that has brought down Republicans- Sirota does not acknowledge this.

[ihavenobias]

27. True, because *these* circumstances are worse.

There was no liberal media attack dog waiting to go after Bush administration officials and (successfully) create "resignations". Amazingly there IS a right wing media nut (Glenn Beck and his entire network, and now others I'm sure) licking his chops over the next liberals to bring down. I'm too lazy to link to it, but I'm going to assume you've seen the media reports on what I'm talking about, so this is not just speculation.

The lions have seem the limping Gazelle, or if you prefer, the sharks now smell blood in the water. IMO it's much better to to at least give the appearance of strength.

[BREMPRO]

29. Am i living in an alternative universe?

Air America, MSNBC, Keith Olberman, The young turks, TPM media, Bill Moyers, NOW, all the liberal blogs like DU, Huffington post, Daily-kos, Brad-Blog? - you don't consider these liberal media that went after Bush and CO? I think there was a record number of resignations in the Bush administration, in part because of the rise of liberal media.

42 bush administrations officials resigned or were forced to resign

http://thedcshuffle.com/2009/02/11/complete-bush-appointee-resignation-scorecard/


The right is relentless and will always dig and try to create trouble and "resignations" and yes i've read the reports that the Jones resignation has emboldened them, but i think they are going to have a lot harder time finding legitimate targets than the Bush years- where incompetent cronyism and corruption was the norm. It's also true that Beck's show (and mental health) is at risk from boycotting advertisers who don't want to be associated with his kind of conspiracy nonsense. The fight goes on.

Here is an alternative view from Arianna Huffington about Jones who she considers a friend and has worked with. She believes he will be more effective working outside the administration than within:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/thank-you-glenn-beck_b_278839.html

[ihavenobias]

31. Don't get me wrong, progressive media has made great strides.

Especially on the internet.

But Outside of MSNBC's primetime lineup, who are the progressive on major network TV? Contrast that with an entire right wing network (Fox) and watered down corporate media (read: CNN and major network nightly news and Sunday talk shows) along with the fact that there is something like a 10 to 1 ratio of conservative vs progressive talk radio shows (which may not include religious right shows).

[BREMPRO]

32. i agree with your characterization of the Media landscape.

definitely stacked for the corporate/right wing. I'm still amazed that commentators like Beck and Limbaugh have any credibility given their long history of verifiable misinformation, flip flops, hypocrisy and blatant lies.

Oh and on the liberal/truth bias side, I forgot about Frontline, Glenn Greenwald and Michael Moore!- Fahrenheit 911 and sicko, can't wait to see his new film about corporate America.

[ihavenobias]

33. I was going to mention PBS.

Unfortunately not nearly enough people watch it. And yes, I'm excited about Moore's movie. I expect it to slam both parties and win over some of the people on the fence with Moore, but we'll see.

[KoKo]

24. Let's be clear...if he was a Bush Appointee he would have still been there...Sirota points out that

Obama is Caving like our Spineless Dems have done since the STOLEN ELECTION 2000! I think Sirota has a right to express his point of view on this one. Dontcha Think? :shrug:

[BREMPRO]

25. Of course he has a right to his point of view

but i think he's using too much hyperbole and over-generalization about dem's with the Jones resignation. The progressive wing has been fighting all along- it's the Blue-Dogs that are the problem. And refusing to accept resignations is not always a wise political move. The Bush administration refused to accept Rumsfeld's resignation until after the midterm elections and this was a political disaster for the Republicans. Now, I'm not comparing the devil Rumsfeld with the Jones, but the political consequences could be the same. I also pointed out that there have been many examples where media scrutiny spurred by the left that has brought down Republicans- Sirota does not acknowledge this.

I believe Jones realized that fighting the smear campaign and the subsequent videos and 911 petition was not worth risking being a distraction at such a critical moment when we have a rare majority and so many issues that need full attention. I believe he submitted his resignation and Obama accepted it. I don't know for sure- this is just my opinion based on what i've read and observed, and intuition. I think it's too easy to jump to conclusions based on the history of dem's caving without really examining the particular circumstances.

[populistdriven]

16. sorry i disagree with this

[yurbud]

35. he shouldn't have had to apologize for signing that petition

But the reason he did is not to avoid offending Republicans but to avoid offending their business patrons that the Democrats are trying to woo instead of neuter.

[polichick]

37. I really wish he hadn't apologized for it. nt