Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bob Herbert nails it right here

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:26 PM
Original message
Bob Herbert nails it right here
Pretty obvious really to anyone paying attention- and many of us having been telling you this all along.

...voters do not feel that the administration and Congress have delivered the fundamental change they were seeking when they swept President Obama and huge Democratic majorities into office nearly two years ago. Forget about the crazies in the Tea Party for the moment. Forget about the ugly Republican obstructionism that is based on the idea that the failure not just of President Obama but of American society itself is the G.O.P.’s quickest ticket back to power.

Forget about that for a moment. The Democrats are in deep, deep trouble because they have not effectively addressed the overwhelming concern of working men and women: an economy that is too weak to provide the jobs they need to support themselves and their families. And that failure is rooted in the Democrats’ continued fascination with the self-serving conservative belief that the way to help ordinary people is to shower money on the rich and wait for the blessings to trickle down to the great unwashed below.

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/11/opinion/11herbert.html?_r=2&ref=bobherbert


This is why so many people see "tweedledum" and "tweedledee."

And yet, instead at least trying to create the perception that the Democrats and administration are fighting for ordinary American's interests- and drawing a stark populist contrast, even at this late date, we end up with quotes like this:

...will wavering Democrats get on board with extending tax cuts just for the middle class? On "This Week," Goolsbee said they likely would.

"I'm not a political expert, but I believe there is a broad consensus, a middle ground if you will, that Democrats and Republicans, business people and workers can agree on, to get this economy growing faster, getting people back to work," he said. "We ought to come together."


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. I suppose if Capitan Smith had kept the Titanic afloat...
The passengers would have thrown him and the crew overboard.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. No...and that's probably the stupidest analogy of the week
n/t.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
liberal N proud Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:48 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. Oh but of course
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
10. The issue is NOT people being ungrateful
To frame it that way is insulting to most of those the OP speaks of and forfeits any chance of winning those people over.

And no, nobody would have thrown the captain of the Titanic overboard if he'd avoided the sinking, so the FIRST part of the analogy doesn't work, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skittles Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #5
11. there's stupid, and then there is outright nitwittery
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
girl gone mad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-13-10 03:53 AM
Response to Reply #1
25. Let's say Captain Smith had an unlimited number of lifeboats at his disposal..
and he gave every person in first class their own luxury lifeboat, and then he gave everyone in steerage a couple of small, leaky lifeboats to fight over.

Yeah, I think the drowning people might not be so appreciative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
2. "Forget about the ugly Republican obstructionism "
But voters do not feel that the administration and Congress have delivered the fundamental change they were seeking when they swept President Obama and huge Democratic majorities into office nearly two years ago. Forget about the crazies in the Tea Party for the moment. Forget about the ugly Republican obstructionism that is based on the idea that the failure not just of President Obama but of American society itself is the G.O.P.’s quickest ticket back to power.

Forget about that for a moment. The Democrats are in deep, deep trouble because they have not effectively addressed the overwhelming concern of working men and women: an economy that is too weak to provide the jobs they need to support themselves and their families. And that failure is rooted in the Democrats’ continued fascination with the self-serving conservative belief that the way to help ordinary people is to shower money on the rich and wait for the blessings to trickle down to the great unwashed below.

It was a bogus concept when George H.W. Bush denounced it as “voodoo economics” in 1980, and it remains bogus today, no matter how hard the Democrats try to dress it up in a donkey costume.


No, let's not forget.

Krugman: Redo That Voodoo

Herbert may want to forget or overlook that the Obama administration brought the economy back from the brink of a depression and that the stimulus is also responsible for sustaining many Americans who found themselves in dire straits as a result of the economic policies of the previous administration, but I will not. And there is no reason to as we're creeping closer to an important election.

Domestic Spending Increased A Record 16%



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:37 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Response from the electorate? Yawn.
or the middle finger- take your pick.

Things could have been worse is always a tough sell -and "Republicans are worse" hasn't sold at all over the years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 09:49 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:02 PM
Response to Reply #7
8. Here's a theme:
Republicans suck, now, yesterday and tomorrow.

Broad enough for you?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Worked really well in past elections, didn't it?
How long did Republicans control Congress?

And even after multiple Bush disasters, did the man find his way to the Presidency again?

While it's undoubtedly true- it's not a winning theme.

And hasn't been for 30 years.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:06 PM
Original message
Worked like a charm in 2006 and 2008.
I don't give a damn about when last they controlled Congress. They don't now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:07 PM
Response to Original message
15. We won in 2006 and 2008 because we were clearly to the left of the GOP
NEITHER of those were "lesser evil" campaigns.

What part of "we need to be FOR something, not just denounce the other party" do you object to?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:15 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. We won in 2006
because people weren't spending all their time trying to prove that Democrats were actually Republicans in disguise. Rahm was at the DCCC. Claire McCaskill was running in MO. Jim Webb was running in VA. Casey was running in PA.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 11:39 PM
Response to Original message
22. LOL- that wasn't the major theme at all!
Edited on Sun Sep-12-10 11:40 PM by depakid
Democrats offered and campaigned explicitly on their won positive alternative agenda- a new (or better) direction- as opposed to the past elections since at least 1994 (with the exception of 1998- when Democrats also offered a positive alternative agenda- and attacked the right).

The theme of "but, but... we're not Republicans" "Republicans are worse" has historically been a loser.

It'll be a loser this time too- even with this crazy bunch- because people don't have confidence that the Dems are either all that much better (thanks to a few panderers at the top) or offer or at least stand up and fight for much if anything different. That's what happened when you repeatedly enable and legitimize the opposition- adopt many of their arguments, frames and policies- then try to sell people on "how bad they are."

And yes, we're aware that you don't give a damn about such analysis, which is why your posts consist of little more than whatever hollow talking points of the day are- even when those are inconsistent with (or even diametrically opposed) to posts you've made only months before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 11:47 PM
Response to Reply #22
23. " 'Republicans are worse' has historically been a loser."
I know it's hard for you to grasp, but Republicans are worse, and they suffered historic losses in 2006 and 2008.

Right now you're high on speculation that Republicans will win, but you may be in for a shock.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-13-10 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #23
24. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:06 PM
Response to Reply #8
13. Agreed. But that isn't enough as an electoral strategy, and there's no reason
we should depend on it.

After all, that approach NEVER beat Reagan(nor did having the Democrats who stood against him run as "centrists", perpetually tacking further and further while telling progressives "it's enough that I'm NOT as bad as he is").

What the OP is saying is that we need a positive message, and a message that includes working-class voters by promising them clear gains. Do you actually object to that idea?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. "What the OP is saying is that we need a positive message"
The President has been pretty vocal in recent weeks to create a very positive message. He has a strong one that is confusing the hell out of the GOP.

What we have are pundits trying to step all over it. Herbert:

But voters do not feel that the administration and Congress have delivered the fundamental change they were seeking when they swept President Obama and huge Democratic majorities into office nearly two years ago. Forget about the crazies in the Tea Party for the moment. Forget about the ugly Republican obstructionism that is based on the idea that the failure not just of President Obama but of American society itself is the G.O.P.’s quickest ticket back to power.

Forget about that for a moment. The Democrats are in deep, deep trouble because they have not effectively addressed the overwhelming concern of working men and women: an economy that is too weak to provide the jobs they need to support themselves and their families. And that failure is rooted in the Democrats’ continued fascination with the self-serving conservative belief that the way to help ordinary people is to shower money on the rich and wait for the blessings to trickle down to the great unwashed below.



One of the curious things about these arguments is the emphasis on Republican obstructionism. What does that mean? If it the "ugly" exists, does Herbert consider that it has had some impact?

If not, why mention it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ken Burch Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:51 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. And I'm glad that the president is creating that message
If he'd listened to people like YOU, he wouldn't have done that and would have focused solely on saying "the other side is worse". And that would have GUARANTEED us a big defeat. Lesser-evil campaigns don't work and aren't worth trying. President Obama gets that. Why don't YOU?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 11:01 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. "If he'd listened to people like YOU..."
Edited on Sun Sep-12-10 11:03 PM by ProSense
If people actually paid attention, they wouldn't spend all their time trying to claim the President never said things he actually has been saying all along:

Jonathan Chait:

<...>

Before taking office, here's Obama's speech outlining his stimulus plan on January 8th, 2009:

That is why we need to act boldly and act now to reverse these cycles. That's why we need to put money in the pockets of the American people, create new jobs, and invest in our future. That's why we need to re-start the flow of credit and restore the rules of the road that will ensure a crisis like this never happens again.

That work begins with this plan – a plan I am confident will save or create at least three million jobs over the next few years. It is not just another public works program. It's a plan that recognizes both the paradox and the promise of this moment – the fact that there are millions of Americans trying to find work, even as, all around the country, there is so much work to be done. That's why we'll invest in priorities like energy and education; health care and a new infrastructure that are necessary to keep us strong and competitive in the 21st century. That's why the overwhelming majority of the jobs created will be in the private sector, while our plan will save the public sector jobs of teachers, cops, firefighters and others who provide vital services…

(four paragraphs later)

To build an economy that can lead this future, we will begin to rebuild America. Yes, we'll put people to work repairing crumbling roads, bridges, and schools by eliminating the backlog of well-planned, worthy and needed infrastructure projects. But we'll also do more to retrofit America for a global economy. That means updating the way we get our electricity by starting to build a new smart grid that will save us money, protect our power sources from blackout or attack, and deliver clean, alternative forms of energy to every corner of our nation. It means expanding broadband lines across America, so that a small business in a rural town can connect and compete with their counterparts anywhere in the world. And it means investing in the science, research, and technology that will lead to new medical breakthroughs, new discoveries, and entire new industries.

And in his inaugural speech:

For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of our economy calls for action, bold and swift. And we will act, not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We'll restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology's wonders to raise health care's quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. All this we will do.

His remarks at the signing of the stimulus bill:

I don't want to pretend that today marks the end of our economic problems. Nor does it constitute all of what we're going to have to do to turn our economy around. But today does mark the beginning of the end -- the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans scrambling in the wake of layoffs; the beginning of what we need to do to provide relief for families worried they won't be able to pay next month's bills; the beginning of the first steps to set our economy on a firmer foundation, paving the way to long-term growth and prosperity.

Finally, Obama's first State of the Union, earlier this year:

From the day I took office, I've been told that addressing our larger challenges is too ambitious; such an effort would be too contentious. I've been told that our political system is too gridlocked, and that we should just put things on hold for a while.

For those who make these claims, I have one simple question: How long should we wait? How long should America put its future on hold?

You see, Washington has been telling us to wait for decades, even as the problems have grown worse. Meanwhile, China is not waiting to revamp its economy. Germany is not waiting. India is not waiting. These nations -- they're not standing still. These nations aren't playing for second place. They're putting more emphasis on math and science. They're rebuilding their infrastructure. They're making serious investments in clean energy because they want those jobs. Well, I do not accept second place for the United States of America.

As hard as it may be, as uncomfortable and contentious as the debates may become, it's time to get serious about fixing the problems that are hampering our growth.



May commencement speech

<...>

Obama drew repeated cheers in Michigan Stadium from a friendly crowd that aides called the biggest audience of his presidency since the inauguration. The venue has a capacity of 106,201, and university officials distributed 80,000 tickets before they ran out.

In his 31-minute speech, Obama didn't mention either Palin or the tea party movement that's captured headlines with its fierce attacks on his policies. But he took direct aim at the anti-government language so prevalent today.

"What troubles me is when I hear people say that all of government is inherently bad," Obama said after receiving an honorary doctor of laws degree. "When our government is spoken of as some menacing, threatening foreign entity, it ignores the fact that in our democracy, government is us."

Government, he said, is the roads we drive on and the speed limits that keep us safe. It's the men and women in the military, the inspectors in our mines, the pioneering researchers in public universities.

The financial meltdown dramatically showed the dangers of too little government, he said, "when a lack of accountability on Wall Street nearly led to the collapse of our entire economy."


The dynamic playing out in politics has nothing to do with what the President hasn't said. Selective hearing is the problem.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 11:25 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 11:31 PM
Response to Reply #20
21. "Obama and his DNC cronies keep bailing out the super rich corporations"
What the hell does the DNC have to do with bailouts?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Steely_Dan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-13-10 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #19
26. Sometimes I Feel That...
President Obama just got in over his head. It feels like they are playing everything by ear.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:02 PM
Response to Original message
9. If only the MSM tv would pick up on Herbert's point below:
"Forget about the ugly Republican obstructionism that is based on the idea that the failure not just of President Obama but of American society itself is the G.O.P.’s quickest ticket back to power."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
depakid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Sep-12-10 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #9
14. The reality is that they won't (at least, not on their own or without considerable resistance)
Edited on Sun Sep-12-10 10:07 PM by depakid
and since media divestment and re-regulations is "off the table" -that's just going to be the way it is in America.

That's the part of the landscape or "playing field."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Sep-13-10 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
27. In Order For Obama To Do What Herbert Wanted Him To Do
He would have had to outright declare war on conservative members of his own party, and the impending historic mid-term results would have still come to pass.

The problem is with the people of America. There are 28% to 30% of the electorate that believes in voodoo economics as if it were the gospel truth. No one and no facts can convince them otherwise.

We're a stupid, ignorant nation that votes against our economic interests time and time again. We're just going to have to go through another decade or two of economic pain and wait for the demographics to shift before the kind of change that Herbert wants is realized.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 10th 2024, 02:28 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC