Cheerleaders and whiners unite

[jpgray]

We need a historically superlative president. We have a contemporary good one. The gap between these two facts, and how people express it, seems to me the nucleus of every single debate here on Obama. Judged by the standard of Clinton, Obama holds up well. Judged by the standard of what needs to be done to address the manifold disasters of the last few decades, Obama holds up poorly. If you want to defend Obama, you focus on practical politics--what is possible in a benighted corporate technocracy and what is not. If you want to attack him, you focus on the gulf between the policies we need and the policies Obama proposes or supports.

Both of these are valid lines of argument. Obama is doing a pretty good job and is an abject failure. He is the best president we've had in some time, and at the same time is woefully ill-equipped to address the crises we face.

When you read a thread of criticism, remember that it is feeling the inability to do what is needed; not only of Obama but of our party, of Congress, and indeed of the entire country. When you read a thread of praise, remember that it is feeling the advantages of Obama over likely alternatives in terms of electability as well as policy--considering him the only practical choice of support not only over unelectable liberal lights, but over the potential nightmare of another GOP presidency.

I don't see how anyone can find either view invalid. Obama is indeed pretty good considering what is currently possible, and is pretty awful considering what is currently necessary.

[hfojvt]

1. you mean we have nothing to lose

but our frames?

[FrenchieCat]

2. That actually makes sense!

Since politics is the art of the possible,
I'm glad to be one who judges this President's efforts based
on the reality at hand to get done the truly possible,
as opposed to judging him against an impossible ideal,
in order to remain scornful, and depressed.

I like where I stand; somewhere real and tangible.

I almost feel like a parent who raises a son who badly wants to play professional football,
but is short and small in stature, while being unusually academically intelligent.
While he hopes he will grow and one day make the team, I work on making sure
he does well in school so he can prepare for an actual career for which he is best suited for
in order to succeed.

[rhett o rick]

5. Maybe if you were homeless, or losing your home to foreclosure, or getting laid off at age 50,

or a high school graduate that cant find a job or cant afford college or one of the millions unemployed, or a soldier fighting a war that cant be won and no one cares, maybe you'd have a different perspective. The fact that it could be worse doesnt make any of those feel better.

We need jobs, we need to stop the hundreds of billions the rich are bleeding from us and future generations, we need to save Social Security and personal pensions.

I find it insulting to call those that want more for America, whiners.

[Pholus]

6. Amen! Agree with the OP, but won't stand for framing of the disagreement assigning "reality."

"The art of the possible" far from being a statement of "reality" is a big old rhetorical cop out covering for inaction and fear of loss.

When we proudly tout the accomplishments of liberals through U.S. history we have to realize that ALL of them could have been stopped halfway to the goal if a leader said "You know, that's all we're going to get here. Let's be realistic about this cause we're not going to do any better."

[rhett o rick]

10. Thank you. I feel it's like the boiling the frog analogy. The DLC Democrats are more

dangerous because they only turn the heat up slightly and we frogs shouldnt notice. The far right like Bush turn the heat up to high and we frogs want to jump out. Many so-called centrists are ok as long as the heat is turned up slowly.

There are really only two sides, the lower or working class and the upper or ruling class. There is no center.

[treestar]

22. Maybe if you were a millionaire, you'd be happy

We're talking about politics here, overall policies. It is not that simplistic.

[hlthe2b]

3. You've written a good post...

I just wish you'd use a less "loaded" word for those who criticize Obama. I don't find them to be "whiners," necessarily. The word "critic" would seem to cover the range of those who point out their disagreements with Obama, whether rarely, frequently, or continuously... Just sayin...

[ClassWarrior]

4. Well said. Thanks for the perspective.

NGU.

[Armstead]

7. As a "whiner" I say good post -- With one caveat

(I'm assuming you had tongue in cheek using that word.)

You are correct.

However, I think a fatal, and unnecessary, achilles heel on our side of the spectrum is this ongoing underlying assumption that liberal policies and politicians can't win elections or gain the support of the population.

Many things that are labeled as "left" or "too liberal for the mainstream" could be very maionstream and popular if we'd stop assuming otherwise. They are both common decency and common sense and in the self-interest of the majority of the population.

But we keep undercutting that (unlike conservatives) and doing tortuous gyrations to water them down or abandon them.

That's what I find most frustrating about Obama, despite the things about him that I admire and agree with.

[jpgray]

8. In this taxonomy I class as "whiner" myself.

Part of the problem with the Bismarck "art of the possible" is the fact that "impossible" things frequently occur in politics. Not least of which has been the election of a black man with a Muslim name to the presidency. Much of what has been dismissed as incapable of standing any trial has never been tried, and opportunities can easily be missed on that basis.

This cuts both ways--it is very easy to say something would succeed if fully tried when it has never been fully tried. There is no possibility of refutation. Any similar attempts can be dismissed as not having being honest or complete efforts.

[rhett o rick]

11. Is someone that speaks out for freedom a whiner? Were the founding fathers whiners?

If so, i am proud to be a whiner. I will not agree that basic freedoms per the Constitution are impossible. I will whine until we reestablish the Constitution and bring back manufacturing jobs to the country.

[Armstead]

12. I would say they have been tried -- and succeeded

A public option? Medicare.

Anti-trust busting of the corporate monopolies? Been done.

Labor protections? Media regulation?

Etc.

We've been there, done that and more.


The problem is that over the last 30 years or so we got spooked (or cirrupted) and both allowed the Corporate CONservative GOP to roll things backward and/or prevented us from trying.

So actual liberal/progressive progess is not a novel concept. We've just forgotten and become weernies.

[ClassWarrior]

13. Weernies rise up and give this post a +1!!!

NGU.

[treestar]

24. Then liberals truly have failed to sell their policies

And if they did, they could get more liberal politicians elected.

Face it, liberals like to complain more than they like to sit down and work at cogent arguments.

[Arkana]

9. Politics is, and shall always remain, the art of what is possible.

And in that regard he's done very well.

He's not a dictator, so unfortunately his hands are rather tied in terms of what we think is "necessary".

[Hydra]

14. It's a nice idea in theory

That the people who are saying "No we can't" are working in the art of the possible.

It should have been impossible for a Democratic President to offer us RomneyCare and then tell us to like it. It should have been impossible for BP to spill enough oil to flood all of Florida under Democratic oversight. It should have been impossible for Bush and Cheney to walk away "with honors" so to speak.

I credit President Obama with doing things that should have been impossible- these were not small achievements, but they were achievements that benefited the opposition party.

A great leader, amazingly eloquent, a man who could and should have carried us into a new reality where the Republicans no longer existed. Instead, he gave them a hand up and a platform.

[Supersedeas]

18. I agreem with much of that...

[Starbucks Anarchist]

15. Good post.

It's reasoned and clearheaded. I wish we had more of that here.

[Clio the Leo]

16. It's the classic battle between pragmatist and ideologue....

.... and it will go one forever.

[Bluenorthwest]

20. But this is a classic case of the two sided toast butterers

The 'pragmatists' who also insist that they are entirely 'faith based' depending on which works at the moment are just folks with no ethics, that is not pragmatism. Pragmatists do not explaint that invisible beings demand minorities be treated unfairly, that is irrational nonsense, ideology based on nothing at all.
A McClurkin sort of world they live in.

[Clio the Leo]

21. I dont think Obama's ever described his approach to governing as "entirely faith based." nt

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[barbiegeek]

19. It's not easy to fight the richest 1%, they have $$ & means you

don't even know. We're fighting the mafia, they are just called corporations.

[treestar]

23. What of congress?

Who we have elected to the Senate? Or they the same?