Barack Obama - Out of The Closet

[Donnachaidh]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/michael-brenner/barack-obama-out-of-the-c_b_813027.html

Wall Street's takeover of the Obama administration is now complete. The mega-banks and their corporate allies control every economic policy position of consequence. Mr. Obama has moved rapidly since the November debacle to install business people where it counts most. Mr.William Daley from JP Morgan Chase as White House Chief of Staff. Mr. Gene Sperling from the Goldman Sachs payroll to be director of the National Economic Council. Eileen Rominger from Goldman Sachs named director of the SEC's Investment Management division. Even the National Security Advisor, Thomas Donilon, was executive vice president for law and policy at the disgraced Fannie Mae after serving as a corporate lobbyist with O'Melveny & Roberts. The keystone of the business friendly team was put in place on Friday. General Electric Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Immelt will serve as chair of the president's Council on Jobs and Competitiveness. That is the spot, under a different council name, previously held by Paul Volcker. Both he and his post now will be airbrushed out of Obama administration history to align the past with the inglorious future.

Mr. Obama last week obediently recited the Chamber of Commerce's liturgy about governmental regulation being the cause of what ails the American economy in the pages of the Wall Street Journal. This public oath of allegiance signaled his now admitted complicity with those who supposedly had been his opponents. The one example of alleged bad regulation he cites in the WSJ op-ed is something about saccharin and the environment. The prospect of our corporate moguls being released from the bonds of saccharin regulation doubtless has China's President Hu and his colleagues quaking in their well-tailored suits.

Let's make one thing perfectly clear. These actions were not imposed on Obama. They are not the inescapable outcome of political circumstances. He chose this path. It conforms to his behavior from the very start of his presidency. It was a newly-elected Obama who hand-picked Geithner and Summers. Who installed as his right-hand man Rahm Emanuel from the board of scandal-ridden Freddie Mac and deal-maker at Dresdner Kleinwort. Who declared at a press conference on the eve of his inauguration that he would not seek to repeal the Bush tax cuts but rather let them drain Treasury revenues until they expired, which of course he has conspired to prevent. Who met clandestinely with Big Pharma to cut a secret deal that ruled out the government's bargaining on drug prices. Who met clandestinely with health industry giants to cut a secret deal that ruled out the public option.

This is the same Obama who does not know the main provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935 -- as evinced on repeated occasions. Who put Social Security and Medicare on the rack by rigging his deficit commission with the appointment of Alan Simpson and Erskine Bowles. The Obama who avowedly takes his inspiration from Ronald Reagan; who spent his holiday in Hawaii reading an account of how the Gipper's White House office was run for him. The Obama who has reserved his harshest and heartfelt words for attacks on progressives. Political expediency is not the reason for turning his back on his supporters and on his pledges. After all, spurning his constituents and kowtowing to the entrenched interests led to the biggest off-year disaster in American electoral history. In short, all the evidence is that an old-school "moderate" Republican occupies the White House.

MORE at the link --

[villager]

1. The same Obama who prefers to cite Reagan, more than FDR, for precedent

n/t

[ladjf]

33. Reagan, who tripled the deficit during his terms. nt

[femrap]

40. Remember during the campaign

when he talked so nicely about Raygun??? I do. Red Flags were going off in my head.

He is not 'one my kind' as the song goes...by INXS, I think.

This author really lays out the Truth on this. I can't believe 'they're' going to change the name of the Economic Advisor's Council to Council on Jobs and Competitiveness.

It's like old Soviet Union and rewriting history. And it's also like W...'jobs and competitiveness' in reality will mean Jobs in China and nothing competitive from the US.

War is Peace.

[UnrepentantLiberal]

76. Folks, he calls HIMSELF a Blue Dog

Democrat. Says so in this here article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/01/us/politics/01bai.html?_r=2&ref=politics

"just as his vague notions of “hope” and “change” during the 2008 campaign were meant to appeal simultaneously to both disaffected independent voters and core progressives. And in virtually every case, he has satisfied pretty much no one."

"Privately, Mr. Obama has described himself, at times, as essentially a Blue Dog Democrat, referring to the shrinking caucus of fiscally conservative members of the party."

-----

That "Change you can believe in" banner behind him during the 08 campaign was one big lie. Like all Blue Dogs he thinks we're too stupid to know what's best for us.

[femrap]

79. Welcome to DU....

Just what we need....another damn Blue Dog.


:puke:

[UnrepentantLiberal]

84. Thanks for the welcome

I don't regret canvasing for him in Ohio and Pennsylvania and would still vote for him over the angry old man and the loud mouth dingbat. It's just that like many here I had hoped that his conservative leanings during the campaign were a means to get elected (ie Bush I and II) and not a foreshadowing of his true ideology.

[femrap]

167. I believe it's

up to We, The People. No one in DC cares about the average worker or the elderly poor. Maybe a couple do, but that's it....they are far outnumbered.

So We, The People must assume our power if we want our nation to 'change.' Someday there will be a straw that breaks the camel's back, but I have no idea what that will be.

[RoccoR5955]

140. Blue Dog Democrat = REPUBLICON n/t

[robdogbucky]

150. More at home at Bohemian Grove

Than he is on the South Side

[Autumn]

2. K/R These actions are Obamas choice,

these people he chose are his choice also. Good and interesting article.

[snappyturtle]

151. Absolutely! His choice of people are the key to understanding the

direction the President is moving the country toward...and I don't think we're far from achieving that direction hook, line & sinker.

I think this article is outstanding! FINALLY, an article laying out the lay of the political landscape. Following the article were related links; one is about Rahm. The ruling to keep Rahm out of the Chicago mayoral election is a big problem though, as evidenced by the troops, in this case, Valerie Jarrett, appearing on "Good Morning" today pushing an appeal of the court's decision. See this link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/25/valerie-jarrett-obama-thi_n_813605.html

It's obvious that most citizens don't have representation. The SOTU will need to be very carefully dissected (I wish we had KO tonight). I also wish I remembered which member on this board suggested last Friday that KO's firing was skillful in that many will blame the upcoming merger of MSNBC and Comcast when we should be looking at the timing of the SOTU instead! I bet the WH is masterfully orchestrating the words as we speak!

[CanSocDem]

3. Yes, well....

Those of us looking in, have often wondered why it was taking US citizens so long to see this. Denial won't last forever.


.

[Jakes Progress]

47. If only. Denial is strong with many here.

[MissDeeds]

82. +1000 n/t

[Erose999]

4. Just about every single appointee in the Obama administration has been from Wall St. The country

clubs in the Hamptons or wherever the money-men gather will be empty this summer because Obama will have drafted everybody to his cabinet.

[Stinky The Clown]

7. No. I think, instead, they'll drop the pretense and move the Cabinet to the Hamptons.

This makes the Gilded Age look like an egalitarian tea party.

[Erose999]

8. And they'll get called "socialists" and worse for doing it LOL

[Lorien]

38. +1. nt

[mix]

5. ...and into the dustbin of history.

Neoliberal growth means stagnant wages, wealth disparity, and massive poverty and it has since the 1980s.

He'll be remembered for his occasional social progressivism and the significance of his election, not to mention his oratory and Supreme Court appointments, but this obsessive faith in Chicago School economics will be the end of him. This is a failed economic doctrine; its historical record speaks for itself.

[RKP5637]

24. The completion of USA, Inc., where most citizens are low level employees of the corporate state. n/t

[woo me with science]

93. +1

serfs

[monmouth]

6. I doubt I'll even watch SOTU...Losing interest in him and his very fast...n/t

[harun]

19. Not watching it, he is playing out the part of the Corporations actor in

Washington. Too sick of watching both sides compete for the love of their big-money masters.

[monmouth]

21. You said it far better than I....n/t

[RKP5637]

25. Exactly!!! n/t

[MissDeeds]

83. I'm not watching it either

I'm sick to death of his speeches. His words are meaningless to me; his actions reveal the true nature of his philosophy, policy and character.

[prairierose]

165. I'm right there with you...I'm not watching ....n/t

[truedelphi]

66. Hey there - we can

Not watch it together.

We aren't canceling cable TV until after the SOTU, then we probably will. But that night, M. and I will be kicking back and watching a movie on cable and will probably pass you the :popcorn: if you want some.

[snagglepuss]

9. K & R nt

[TBF]

10. Top Contributors to Barack Obama 2008 -

University of California $1,591,395
Goldman Sachs $994,795
Harvard University $854,747
Microsoft Corp $833,617
Google Inc $803,436
Citigroup Inc $701,290
JPMorgan Chase & Co $695,132
Time Warner $590,084
Sidley Austin LLP $588,598
Stanford University $586,557
National Amusements Inc $551,683
UBS AG $543,219
Wilmerhale Llp $542,618
Skadden, Arps et al $530,839
IBM Corp $528,822
Columbia University $528,302
Morgan Stanley $514,881
General Electric $499,130
US Government $494,820
Latham & Watkins $493,835

http://www.opensecrets.org/pres08/contrib.php?cycle=2008&cid=n00009638

[emilyg]

12. +1

[femrap]

41. University of

CA gave the most??? Given the state of CA's economy and now the huge increases in tuition, I'd be pissed as hell if I were a student there. Nearly twice what Harvard gave.

I had no idea that universities gave so much to political campaigns....and then raise tuition. :wtf:

[hfojvt]

51. those are totals of people who work at those places

thus, if I, who used to work at Citibank gave to the Obama campaign those dollars would be added to the total from Citicorp

although it would not surprise me if a board chairman from Citigroup called for the board to donate $2,000 a piece and if they did not expect a fair amount of access for the $50,000 they raised.

[lonestarnot]

135. Ain't that a bitch! Stunning!

[mix]

49. a regular man of the people nt

[50000feet]

61. Bold GE

for Immelt's appointment.

[TBF]

71. Too late for the edit - but you're certainly right on that. nt

[Moral_Imagination]

100. Whats your problem with GE employees? n/t

[TBF]

137. GE employees are not the problem as you well know, the problem is campaign money

buying influence. Pretty stupid on Mr. Obama's part because folks will only point it out, and it's very easy to check.

[Moral_Imagination]

109. Nice try

Those are contributions by employees of those schools/companies... and they are capped at $2300 per person.

[TBF]

136. No shit. It also shows that he knows where his large donations come from,

cumulatively, and that those folks have been given positions in his government. Facts are hard to argue with, but nice try.

[Oilwellian]

143. Faced with betrayal,

they freeze at pronouncing the word, of thinking the thought, of feeling the emotion. They are easy marks for the upscale con man with the high-minded rhetoric. They see taking offense as itself somehow offensive. They shy away from accusing, from denouncing. So when Mr. Obama spits in their face week after week, they are stunned into denial. Some declare: Our Saviour is also a rainmaker -- a thousand blessings be upon him! Others turn the other cheek. A few instinctively reach for a handkerchief. The more imaginative suggest that he was really aiming at the Republicans, but he's under such great stress that he lost his aim. The truly original believe that it's all part of a clever strategy so ingenious that we poor mortals can't conceive of it.

[harun]

Jeesh, and that was before Citizen's United. The money spent on the next

election will make these numbers look like the Green Ticket. Obama is already saying he wants to raise 1 Billion for the next election.

Democracy is up for bids.

[Le Taz Hot]

127. And the really sad part about it?

He and the DNC/DCCC/DSCC will all come knocking upon our doors asking for our little meager donations just so we can feel that we're a part of the "democratic process." We aren't of course and they'll use our little $10.00 donations to wipe their ass. The sad part is that people will actually donate money to this guy. In some cases, money they don't really have.

[robdogbucky]

153. What?

Did Unocal's contribution get scrubbed already?

It was around $650,000, second only to McGrumpy and Romney in taking oil money in the last election cycle.

[Mimosa]

176. ^ That info explains a LOT. Thanks, TBF ^ n/t

[ThomCat]

11. Yes, his actions and choices are showing us who he really is

who he really supports, what his goals really are, regardless of obfuscation and distractions from well crafted speeches and spin and public relations efforts.

When he attacks the right he then works with them and gives them everything they ask for and everything they want.

But when he attacks the left he refuses to work with us and refuses to give an inch unless we fight like hell and do all the work for him, even put every bit of progress on his desk and force him to sign it. Even then he is sometimes even then in court fighting against it tooth and nail until the end. but then once he signs it, he gets to take credit for everyone else's work, and take credit for goals and results on the left that he didn't do anything to advance. It's a perk of being at the top.

And, Yes, he's appointing conservative financial con-artist, free trade advocates and bubble builders as advisers in ever important spot. He's aligning himself with corporate agendas at every turn. He is definitely showing us who he really is.

Hasn't it been obvious enough yet for more people to finally start to notice? :(

[RKP5637]

28. I think human nature basks in denial. Maybe when wages here fall to the

lowest level on earth people will wake up. I just do not see anything rosy in any of this. Those on the top of the heap will make out very well, very well indeed.

[Quantess]

162. By the time people "wake up"

there will be forces in place to keep the people subdued and obedient. I'll even go so far as to bet the brave people who finally take a stand will be labeled guerillas.

[HughBeaumont]

13. Get used to a low-wage future, no retirement and wars, wars, WARS!

And there's not a damned thing you can do about it. AT all.

Revolt? PFFFFFFFFFFT. You and what army? The guy on the barcolounger eating chips and yelling "YOU tell 'em, Bill! FUCK them liberals!!" to his cheap flat screen bleating his hate fix? The family in so much debt, they can't go anywhere? The student presently struggling in the Debt-For-Diploma scam?

Go back to school? Uh, FOR WHAT? With WHAT MONEY? With what spare time for all the work you're going to be doing? Oh and where's the ROI? People with Masters Degrees are unemployed.

Vote? For WHO? The NeoLib party of Cheap Labor Corporate America or the Corporate Party of Christianity?

Get a second job? SORRAH! Those are now being occupied by people trying to keep a roof over their heads by any means necessary.

When is America going to wake up and realize there is absolutely no sustainable FUTURE in a set-up like this?

[WinkyDink]

27. Preach it, brother. This is the DAMN truth.

[RKP5637]

29. I used to have hope, now I doubt America is going to wake up. Citizens are

being propagandized and bred to love failure by the endless propaganda flowing from media. If there is any better future I will be long gone. There is too much hatred spewed for profit in this country anymore for it to get its act together IMO. I do try to remain hopeful, but damn, anymore that starts to get to be a pretty lame approach.

[Raine]

57. EXACTLY on point

we're all so screwed. :-(

[Echotrail]

63. Yep. My daughter is a freshman in a "Debt-For-Diploma scam"

and I'm worried she's going to have no place to go in 3-1/2 years to put her hard won skills and her passion to work.

I'm working harder in my 50s than I did 10 years ago but my opportunities are shrinking by the day, too. But what alternatives do we have? We keep going without any encouraging signs.

On the contrary, every day another Goldman Sachs or GE head is placed in a government position where they can be as corrupt as they want with no oversight and no accountability. All they have to do is pay the tithe to the candidates.

Looking at 2012 and beyond, our choices (so far) are corporate-sponsored candidate A or B.

[woo me with science]

92. Oh god my heart hurts. nt

[jonnyblitz]

163. best post ever!

:applause:

[Mimosa]

177. +1,000 n/t

[democrank]

14. No wonder Ben Stein likes him.

[Enthusiast]

113. No shit.

Republicans should absolutely love Obama, he does everything they want.

[chimpymustgo]

142. Karen Hughes is loving him too. Need we say more?

[Poboy]

15. Recommend

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

16. Obama has met the real bosses and decided to do it their way.

[RKP5637]

30. I think he realized the real power in this country does not reside in the presidency, but

rather in the wealth and power that transcends presidencies. The presidency is window dressing for the masses, the real power remains in the shadows.

[FLPanhandle]

17. Who is really surprised by this?

Look back to the primary discussions around here. He and Hillary were the centrists and most business friendly of the democrats.

Anyone shocked by this wasn't paying attention.

[femrap]

43. +1 nt

[Kurovski]

80. If Kucinich had gotten anywhere near the nomination...

they would have pulled a "Howard Dean" on him.

[Enthusiast]

114. That or a well placed bullet. nt

[earth mom]

18. K & R & Bookmarked. nt

[RKP5637]

20. I didn't bother renewing my DNC membership this year. I don't feel represented. Anyway, I

feel with all of the corp. money sucked in my tidbit is better spent for selected candidates than the DNC.

[yurbud]

39. NO money to DLC, DNC, DCCC, DSCC. ONLY give through progressive groups or to specific

candidates, and support any progressive challenger to a blue dog or DLCer, even if all the pundits scream they will be a spoiler. Do it anyway. It worked for Tea Party crazies.

[kentuck]

22. "..if it walks like a duck...and quacks like a duck...

...then it is probably a duck".

I have no doubt that he is playing both sides against the middle. So long as there is no liberal Third Party candidate running, he is probably safe for re-election?

Regardless, would we prefer an actual, registered Republican over a Democrat such as Obama? I think we would all have to choose the "real" Democrat over the "fake" Republican, huh?

[Enthusiast]

116. He isn't safe.

He will be crushed.

[RadiationTherapy]

23. ...when you win, you go into this smoky room

with the twelve industrialist, capitalist scumfucks that got you in there, and this little screen comes down... and it's a shot of the Kennedy assassination from an angle you've never seen before, which looks suspiciously of the grassy knoll.... And then the screen comes up, the lights come on, and they say to the new president, 'Any questions?'

"Just what my agenda is."


-Bill Hicks

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MRykTpw1RQ

[WinkyDink]

26. Over. His. Head. I'm sorry, I think Obama has been razzled and dazzled by money men.

[Hydra]

31. Systemic problem

You can't fight this system from within- it's run by dollars and people who are happy with the way things are.

Was Obama an idealist who was put in his place when he walked in the door, or was he an incredibly smooth performer?

Does it matter? The same policies are handed down by all the puppets, regardless of how they feel about it.

[bobbolink]

54. There's only one problem with that "in the door" scenario... his appointments BEFORE inauguration

spelled out clearly where he was headed.

[Hydra]

168. And you're right to point that out, Bobbo

One of my friends from Chicago warned me about Daly and his minions, and that Obama was part of that group. I also read another DUer's comment slightly after the inauguration regarding Obama's ties to Goldman Sachs.

I'm not much concerned about the details, since the root of the problem is that the Presidency and all of the other important offices are for sale. Gov't done right is a check on the power of the wealthy. Gov't by the religion of capitalism is just the opposite.

Time for a 3 way separation of church and state- no mixing god, mammon and govt!

[defendandprotect]

44. Fooled, misused, or simply misguided -- Obama isn't working out -- !!

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

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

[mzmolly]

32. Yes, to my understanding Wallstreet was really behind the Bureau of Consumer Protection.

:sarcasm:

Once again, assumptions and hand-wringing about what the "future" will supposedly hold, take hold. Anyone ever consider that political appointments are at times, political? You know, smart politics?

[ladjf]

34. This is a rather harsh but accurate summary of the "Real Obama". nt

[OKNancy]

35. Well, since he isn't going to do what the deficit commission reccommended

on Social Security, I guess you all can take that part out.

[Little Star]

60. Yeah! He took it off the table, right?

[KossackRealityCheck]

36. Describing Gene Sperling as being from Goldman is stupid beyond belief

which makes me question the overall sanity of the linked article.

Sperling has spent his entire career in the public sector except for that brief consulting type job. He was a protege of Robert Reich, which for some reason gets left out of his resume when discussed on so called progressive web sites. Reich brought him to Washington at the beginning of the Clinton administration. He's just a hardworking policy wonk whose nickname was "Gene the machine" for the hours he put into public policy.

At some point GS asked him to help set up some non-profit initiative of theirs and he got paid big bucks for a year or so to do it.

But he's hardly an investment banker of any kind.

This is just more bullshit. Same shit, different day.

[femrap]

48. Reich did a very

different job while in the Clinton administration....he got the Jobs to China Machine started and moving.

He crows an entirely different tune today.

[Enthusiast]

117. Because Reich now knows

how it has damaged the nation.

[Lorien]

37. Wow, did he ever take away the wrong lesson from the 2010 elections

His business ties and Reagan loving ways are EXACTLY why the people didn't bother turning out to vote. But he knows that; he needed a GOP majority as an excuse for all of it. Good cop/ bad cop.

[Enthusiast]

118. I suspect Obama

wanted a Republican majority. I can't escape that conclusion.

[chimpymustgo]

147. They telegraphed it pretty clearly, and their media minions carped on it consistently.

[Lorien]

169. Yep. Makes keeping many promises easier

just none of the promises that were given to us!

[defendandprotect]

42. Obama administration isn't working as a people's government ...

no question about it -- and time to begin discussing what we're going to try

to do about it --

We made a huge mistake with Obama -- but we have to try to correct it --

While we are suffering from corporatism/fascism in America ....

let's rememember that they need actual elected officials to do the dirty work

for them in Congress!!

Let's get the discussions going --

[decidedlyso]

59. Unfortunately, the elected officials are also bough and paid for. There

are few John Adams and James Madison.

ST incognito

[defendandprotect]

67. THAT's exactly what I was pointing out ---

they have to corrupt government and our elected officials in order to get their

way --

Granted, many of these millionaires and multi-millionaires are simply voting in their

now interests now --

certainly not in the interests of the public!!

[BlueIris]

46. I fail to see why anyone finds this shocking.

It's just not shocking to me. At all.

[ProSense]

50. This is promising: a progress report on the

new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.

[Name removed]

53. Deleted message

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

[Raine]

52. It's obvious who Obama works for and it sure isn't

the American people. It's totally Wall Street and the Corporations, he doesn't give a damn about the real people in this country. Obama can get money for his re-election from them because he won't be getting a dime from me. :mad:

[Moral_Imagination]

97. How much did you give in 2008? n/t

[ima_sinnic]

102. I gave quite a bit

the exact amount is NOYGDB, but as the poster above says, he can get all he needs from his corporate sponsors from now on -- they OWE him big-time, don't you think? since he's pretty much funneled our wallets into theirs and delivered quite splendidly for them. It's all worked out very well -- for the billionaires. For me and the other peons and serfs -- not so much.

But thanks for asking.

[Moral_Imagination]

106. Those are not corporate sponsors

Those are contributions by employees of those schools/companies... and they are capped at $2300 per person.

[ima_sinnic]

152. I'm not referring to contributions by individuals

One hand washes the other, and he has done plenty for corporate interests and their useless, parasitic CEOs in terms of favorable policies, total rejection of any kind of regulation, embracing of Bush's (now Obama's) tax cuts -- did you even read the OP?
He's clinking champagne glasses with those parasites, who do no kind of worthwhile work but enjoy all the privileges of U.S. infrastructure and socialist bailouts without paying taxes. Now, especially, with Citizens United, he'll be getting plenty of campaign cash from corporate interests--in the billions--and won't need any from me or anybody else who's worth less than the combined assets of several small countries.
If you have plenty of money to waste, you're free to contribute to his campaign, but believe me, he won't need it.

[StarsInHerHair]

178. I call it Corporations United....now, it seems a very good idea to get rid of CEO

positions completely, they get bonuses and retirement packages even when they run the corp into the ground. I'm focusing on ceo cfos because they focus the corp. and have a take home pay ratio to worker that is obscene. Make the corp. get lead by the board of directors, at least. In an effort to blunt the corporate takeover of America we should begin to look at ways to block the ceos cfos

[Raine]

172. I gave him way more than I could actually afford

plus I gave my time which to me was worth more than money. The time no matter how hard or long I work is gone forever wasting that is actually worse. Money I can remake even though it was a big sacrific at the time to give. Of course I'm sure that compared to his big monied corporate contributors the amount of money and time I gave was just chump change, of no value to him. I won't be giving either next time. I'll let the corporations give it, they're the ones who have benefited.

[Name removed]

55. Deleted message

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

[decidedlyso]

58. Not me-- I'm waiting for the group of serious people to form. See

DefendandProtect's post number 42. It will form, for if it does not, we will all be slaves. The middle class on down will be laterally arabesqued into poverty. Pay careful attention to the SOTU tomorrow night. Listen what he says as well as what he does not say.

[decidedlyso]

56. Absolutely brilliant!

[davidwparker]

62. ...

:applause:

[RedCloud]

64. Not true! look at how he appointed Nader to be our consumer advocate. Oh my bad!

[cantbeserious]

65. Why Bother Supporting An Administration That Has Done Everything To Satisfy Big Business And GOP

I can't understand how any democrat can support this administration for much longer.

Added Chris Hedges Interview.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vteQnUmCj9U

[defendandprotect]

68. +1 --

[Moral_Imagination]

98. OMG that Chris Hedges guy is a lunatic...

I saw him debating Jonathan Alter on Cspan a few weeks ago.

[cantbeserious]

171. For What Reason Do You Think Chris Hedges A Lunatic?

Your post did not provide any details for the stated opinion.

[DeSwiss]

69. K&R

- I'd make a comment but only expletives come out................

[Name removed]

70. Deleted message

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

[JDPriestly]

72. K&R.

[girl gone mad]

73. Well, when you put it that way...

ugh.

Many of my worst economic fears have come true.

:(

[Jakes Progress]

74. K & R. Truth hurts.

Hurts like a son of a gun. But the first step to recovery is recognizing there is a problem. More understand each day though some still shut their eyes and ears.

[20score]

75. Imagine where we would be if the left had been holding Obama to his word.

In a much better place - both for the country and politically.

But, maybe there is something to be said for capitulation and selling out your ideals for non-existent political gains. But someone will need to explain to me what that something is.)

[Moral_Imagination]

95. "non-existent policical gains"

So what heppened to Feingold?

[Joe Fields]

77. It sure does take awhile for seemingly smart people to catch on.

[Moral_Imagination]

99. The part I can't figure out is why

Bernie Sanders and all the other liberals voted for almost all parts of the Obama/Fascist/Corporatist/MIC/Bush agenda. I see you have Bernie as your avatar so maybe you can explain it...

[liberation]

101. Can you provide specific examples of those votes by Sanders?

[Moral_Imagination]

107. Healthcare reform without even trying n/t

[RegieRocker]

78. For the love of money

[Axrendale]

81. What a rubbish article

Anyone who seriously thinks that Obama's off-the-cuff statements about "widows and orphans" actually represents anything other than political grandstanding, and actually interprets it to mean that he "doesn't know the provisions of the Social Security Act of 1935", not only shows that they haven't been paying attention to the things that the President has been saying and writing about the subject of Social Security for years now, but additionally that they are as stubbornly and mindlessly puritan in their political ideology as the radical wing of the Republican party that they hold in such contempt.

I am now convinced that John F. Kennedy was right when he said that nothing terrifies liberals as much as the idea of being in power and actually working to achieve at least part of their goals. They would rather go down in a blaze of glory.

For the record, it was John F. Kennedy who coined the phrase "Professional Liberals" to use in a similar way to the modern adaption "Professional Left" that so many here seem to find so insulting (he was more polite than his successor Lyndon Johnson, who preferred to describe liberals as "fucking crazies" - and that was when he was in a good mood). The record might also want to note that both JFK and Franklin Roosevelt engaged a number of conservatives to appoint to both cabinet positions and to act as advisors (Kennedy's Treasury Secretary was the man who it was widely felt would also have been Nixon's choice; as late as the 1940s FDR's pick for that same position described the New Deal as a "failure"). Both of these great liberal presidents understood how effective that it can in fact be to employ conservatives to carry out a liberal agenda - as long as they are given sufficient direction.

It additionally might want to be noted that Ronald Reagan's own political hero was Franklin Roosevelt, whom he unabashedly described as having been the "greatest president" in American history. This did not detract from Reagan's own thoroughly conservative ideology one single bit.

In any case Obama's own political hero, as he has never made any secret of, is Abraham Lincoln, whose bust sits in the Oval Office - right next to that of Martin Luther King Jr. Obama has consistently spoken of Ronald Reagan always as an "effective" president who was "transformative" in the sense that he succeeded in garnering immense political success, but whose agenda Obama both viewed and continues to view as a thoroughly negative one. It speaks to the laziness of so many on the left who criticized Obama for reading a biography of Reagan while in Hawaii that they did not even bother to check which of the many Reagan biographies it was. As a matter of fact it was an excellent book (I own a copy myself) that credits Reagan with being a highly effective politician but exorciates his numerous failings as a President, particularly in his domestic policy.

Unrec.

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

88. I can't find the sources of the JFK quotes

Do you have the links? Thanks.

[Axrendale]

96. I cannot provide links, for as old-fashioned as it may be, I am referencing books rather than

the internet. Specifically I would refer you to two books written by Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., who as well as being an excellent historian was also a close aquaintance of both Jack and Bobby Kennedy, serving in the administration of the former and involved in the subsequent political career of the latter, additionally acting as a biographer for both men (he has been dubbed by some as the "Court Historian of Camelot". A Thousand Days: John F. Kennedy in the White House and Robert Kennedy and His Times each explore in depth the fascinating love/hate relationship that the Kennedy brothers had with the liberal wing of the American body polity, with whom they shared a number of basic goals, but differed sharply in their views of how those goals ought to be attained, and maintained an alliance with that was often uneasy.

Of those two books, obviously it is the former that makes the most profound insights into the views of President Kennedy upon both liberalism and liberals, but it was actually the latter from which I referenced the "terrified of power and accomplishment" quote (JFK then went on to speculate that this was perhaps why so many liberals regarded Adlai Stevenson as the Second Coming), as well as the origins of the phrase "Professional Liberals".

Schlesinger is an excellent source, but is certainly by no means alone in being an excellent source on John F. Kennedy's career, a vital part of which that often gets glossed over today is how complicated his relationship with the liberal establishment was. The classic biography by Ted Sorenson is definitely a rival for Schlesinger's work, and more recent efforts by Robert Dallek and Geoffrey Perret are excellent. Also particularly penetrating is Christopher J. Matthews' dual biography of Kennedy and Nixon: "The Rivalry That Shaped Postwar America".

In the context of this thread, it might also be interesting to point out the prodigal efforts that were made by the Kennedy administration to win over Business leaders of their day, despite the patent hostility that the latter group often displayed. In the entirety of JFK's presidency only one major clash occurred between the administration and Capital: the infamous prices battle with Big Steel. Apart from that, President Kennedy's dealings with the business establishment can in many ways be viewed as a remarkably close foreshadowing of the present day story of the Obama administration and business: the story of a progressive Democratic President making strenuous efforts to coopt Capital into a laudable socio-economic agenda, but nonetheless being widely (and unfairly) accused of "anti-business" policies. It prompted Bobby Kennedy to comment wryly upon the natural antipathy that Big Business has always felt toward Democratic administrations regardless of the actual policies being promoted by said administration, a phenomenon that probably has is roots in the era and substance of Jacksonian Democracy.

[tomp]

111. you have proved NOTHING except....

.....how close the ideologies of the democrats and the republicans are, which I think was the point of the op article. thanks.

[Axrendale]

120. No, the "point" of the OP, insofar as it had one,

was the continuation of a rather disturbing trend amongst liberals that dates at least as far back as the manifestation of "progressivism" as a roughly coherent modern political ideology, and which has been one of the major sticking points against which every truly great liberal political figure has had to contend with: the tendancy to equate anything less than ideological purity with the blackest depths of betrayal. That may be a bit of an oversimplification, but it captures the basic grist of what is probably worst in the otherwise basically admirable spirit of American liberalism.

There is nothing wrong with high-flying dreams and ideals. On the contrary, they are more often than not what the great movements towards social progress are built upon. But without hard-nosed pragmatists who are prepared to get down in the mud and fight, those dreams never become anything other than just that - dreams.

There is a world of difference between the figures who embodied - and continue to embody - the very best of the liberal tradition of fighting for social progress, and those who set themselves to fighting against it. This is as true of today as it was of the Progressive Era, the New Deal Era, the Long Sixties, and the Reagan Era. If you think that there is not a vast, vast space between the political values of Barack Obama and those who oppose him - that it makes no difference at all whether he or his opponents is in power, then I would honestly suggest that it is time for you to take the blinkers off. He has spent the first two years of his presidency fighting for an agenda that is fully deserving of our admiration, and he has done so in a way that has ensured that he actually got tangible results.

The wisdom of another great liberal figure of the past, Franklin Roosevelt, is worth keeping in mind:

"I am not bitter, and nor am I a cynic. But I do wish that some people would show a little more maturity in their political thinking."

[tomp]

179. the left wants its pony argument. meh.

what you have shown is that the great "liberal" dem presidents have steadfastly refused to compromise with the left. anything the masses have ever received from govt. came from mass movements of a lot of very pissed off people in the streets forcing therse great liberals to throw a few more bones and crumbs. you're succeeding again at pissing off a lot of people. don't come crying to me when the shit hits the fan.

[MissDeeds]

85. K&R

And thanks for the post.

[Moral_Imagination]

86. Is this entire thread satire? n/t

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

89. Welcome to Democratic Underground

I hope you'll find it a place where you can join the discussion about issues that concern progressives, like healthcare, the environment, a truly representative government, an opportunity to get a good education regardless of income, a banking and investment system that serves the public and not just the bankers, the right to habeas corpus and to be protected from unreasonable search and seizure, creation and preservation of good paying jobs and a strong middle class, alternative energy, reasonable gun control laws, the Bill of Rights -- especially the First, Second, Fourth and Fifth Amendments -- an impartial judiciary, and the right to worship as we wish without having someone else try to jam their religion down our throats.

Or you can just make sarcastic comments. n/t That's o.k., too.

[Moral_Imagination]

90. Ohhh my first lecture....

Yes i agree with your list except i think the 2nd amendment is stupid... happy?

[Bluebear]

94. "My first lecture" - - - I doubt it.

[liberation]

103. Could very well be...

Even home schooled people can get on the internets nowadays...

[Moral_Imagination]

108. You are home schooled? n/t

[Dappleganger]

124. Welcome to DU!

:)

[cui bono]

87. knr

[woo me with science]

91. K&R Devastating but true. nt

[oasis]

104. k and r

[Hubert Flottz]

105. Mrs. Clinton would have been just as bad.

McCain would have been worse. The corporations can't afford to give us a real choice.(same with congress) We would pick someone who would make waves, and mess with their bottom line.

[Enthusiast]

119. It is telling that any of the three

would have carried out a strictly corporate agenda. I doubt we would be any worse off with Clinton or McCain. Srsly.

[JoePhilly]

122. If McCain had won, we'd be in full Depression and at war with Iran,

with no draw down in Iraq, or DADT, or 100s of other things.

[Hubert Flottz]

125. McCain would have been the death of the country.

The republicans in congress don't just want Obama to fail, they want to destroy the United States Of America totally.

[Enthusiast]

128. Yeah, I was exaggerating a bit.

[Fuddnik]

134. McCain probably would have been the death of the country.

Obama barely has it on life support with shock therapy and leeches.

I think what we needed was a Doctor Dean to cure us.

[opihimoimoi]

148. Hey there ole Friend.....them GOPers have a death wish it ...they focus on dividing the Nation 24/7

[Hubert Flottz]

170. They aren't happy just fucking things up they want to totally wipe

this country out. The republicans are against anything good for the people in the USA besides the wealthy 2%. If they can't be the boss they woluld sooner see the entire thing a heap of fly blown shit with David Rockefeller sitting on top with a whip.

[opihimoimoi]

174. The GOPers are trying to reach the Dominate Stage...then they can exploit their way to DICTATE STAGE

[Enthusiast]

133. This is true.

That was just one of the many silly things I have said on the DU.

And if McCain died in office we could have had President Sarah Palin.

[rhett o rick]

149. McCain would have been a puppet of the same people that control our government today.

They dont want a full depression. They are getting what they want w/o it.

[Disintermedia8]

155. Which is really the crux of the problem

Lack of choice because a small set of powerful and aligned interests now control the permanent government, which is where power truly resides. That is the hallmark of a bureaucracy. Among the people, the real choice is whether to keep faith in that crumbling system, or to abandon it in favor of building a better alternative.

[6000eliot]

110. Who are these people who thought they were voting for a socialist?

He ran as a centrist Democrat, so I didn't expect anything else from him.

[Enthusiast]

112. K&R

To the right of Reagan.

[BzaDem]

115. Oh how cute. Another Obama bashing author who thinks he represents a non-negligable portion of the

party.

I guess it is too bad for Brenner that 88 percent of liberal Democrats approve of Obama's job performance, with Democratic approval beating every President in the last 50 years. Poor guy.

[Canuckistanian]

121. So you think the country is headed in the right direction, then?

Just because Obama has popular support? Reagan had popular support, too and look how that turned out.

It's about time there was an unpopular president who could make the tough decisions to do the right things.

[ima_sinnic]

156. yeah, right

too bad for Brenner, being soooo misguided, "just another Obama bashing author" with no credibility, no credentials, no knowledge of anything. A "12 percenter," I guess you'd call him!

I guess he has nothing at all to say, then, and is just another malcontent weirdo flapping his gums. Funny how the OP has 216 recs. I guess there are many DUers who are also "negligible," right?

And there's really nothing at all in his article that has any validity -- Obama is of, by, and for the We The Little People -- it's especially nice that he fought to keep tax cuts for the rich--since We The Little People have no real need of their contribution and are sooo happy to fund the wars from which they so hugely profit while people go homeless and jobs disappear. :eyes:

[JackDragna]

157. I notice how nothing you said refuted the author's points.

This isn't a popularity contest. This is the selling out of the party to monied interests.

[robdogbucky]

159. And his Blue Dogs did how in the election?

and his efforts did what to the Congress?

I love how the list of accomplishments is so short compared to the list of betrayals/failures.

Keep on cheering though

[Still a Democrat]

123. Nothing like a big steaming pile of knee jerk hyperbole in the morning

Now I won't have to bother with my oatmeal.

[Name removed]

126. Deleted message

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

[MissDeeds]

130. Bingo!

[felix_numinous]

129. How many DUers

are actually blue dogs? I have often wondered if there's a way to find out what the actual demographics are here. I know most of us vote for Democratic candidates, but what are our ideologies? How many of us are FDR types? Nationally what are the demographics within our party? We will get nowhere if we get sold out every time by our own party.

Do we feel represented within our own party? I think just as the country is going through an identity crisis, so is our party. We need to define who we are and what we stand for, and make sure we are represented first within our own party, if that is even possible. If not, we may have to change our party from within somehow to reflect who we are. Just some thoughts.

[leeroysphitz]

131. I think it's time for Mr. Obama to extend an olive branch to the business community.

:eyes:

[snooper2]

132. I think the Huffington post is still bitter

:)

[DirkGently]

138. Volcker is apparently out in February. That alone speaks volumes.

[ProSense]

139. The Middle Class and the Political Center

Mike Lux.

The Middle Class and the Political Center

In the State of the Union address tonight, Barack Obama can set the stage for a political comeback from 2010's "shellacking" that would, in fact, be even stronger than Bill Clinton's storied comeback in 1996 -- because Obama has a chance to sweep a Democratic House back into office with him if he does the right things politically and policywise. However, he has to resist the siren call of a D.C. political and media establishment, with their deeply flawed version of what "centrism" is, and instead focus on the real center of American politics: the hard pressed middle class. He has to focus like a laser beam on the policies that help the middle class by creating new jobs, rebuilding the American manufacturing base, helping small business to grow, and preserving the parts of government that directly help the folks in that middle class: Social Security, Medicare, education and student loans, and rebuilding our roads and bridges.

<...>

Every poll I've seen shows voters overwhelmingly hate the idea of Social Security and Medicare cuts, and of raising the retirement age. Every poll I've seen shows voters want the government to rein in the big banks and protect consumers. Every poll I've seen shows that voters want government to help American manufacturers gain protection from unfair competition abroad, want to stop outsourcing, and want to invest in infrastructure and education. The D.C. centrists never seem to quote polling numbers when advocating cutting Social Security or legal bailouts for big banks or policies that promote outsourcing, simply because no such polling exists. None. Yet they still argue that this kind of "moving to the center" will solve all of Obama's problems.

<...>

As the pragmatic progressive that I am, I have absolutely no problem with rhetorical moves to the center in terms of showing how the deficit can be cut and how waste can be removed from the budget, or showing how the administration is eager to help small business and American manufacturing companies prosper, because a Democratic president can do those things while still holding true to progressive values. What I would have a problem is moving to the Washington center, a well-off elite that supports cuts in the Social and Medicare that middle-class retirees count on, and that supports legal bailouts for the big banks in helping them foreclose on middle class homeowners faster. The people in this country understand what the D.C. establishment, dominated by its big business lobbyists and corporate-funded think tanks, doesn't get: that the budget can move toward being balanced; that new jobs can be created; that the big banks can be said no to -- all without cuts to Social Security and Medicare or the other things in the federal budget important to them.

President Obama has been appointing a lot of people close to big business lately, but I'm not going to care if he shows that he is going to come out fighting for the real center in American politics -- the middle class.

[robdogbucky]

161. Here you go

"Barack Obama will not be carrying the Democratic Leadership Council’s baggage in his race to become the second Black person to represent Illinois in the U.S. Senate. The state senator and professor of constitutional law has told The Black Commentator that he is acting to have his name stricken from the “New Democrats Directory,” a list of several hundred DLC-affiliated elected officials.

“I am not currently, nor have I ever been, a member of the DLC,” said Obama, in a statement that substantially reflects a telephone conversation with Black Commentator....

...One important part of that strategy - and on this I think we agree - is for progressives within the Democratic Party to describe our core values (e.g. racial justice, civil liberties, opportunity for the many, and not just the few) in clear, unambiguous terms.
A second part of that strategy - and again, I think we agree here - is to stake out clear positions on issues that put those values into action (e.g. the need for universal health care), and to stand up for those values when they are under assault (e.g. opposition to the Patriot Act).

But the third part of this part of the equation – and on this we may disagree – must be to gain converts to our positions. My job, as a candidate for the U.S. Senate, isn’t to scold people for their lack of ideological purity. It’s to persuade as many people as I can, across the ideological spectrum, that my vision of the future is compatible with their values, and can make their lives a little bit better. Thus, while I may favor common-sense gun control laws, that doesn’t keep me from reaching out to NRA members who are worried about their lack of health insurance..."

June 26, 2003

http://www.blackcommentator.com/48/48_cover.html




Obama's Cabinet To The Right Of Democrats in Congress

"In the 110th Congress, there were 236 Democrats in the U.S. House, 49 in the Senate, and two "Independents" who caucused with Democrats. Of those 287 congresscritters, 74 were members of the New Democratic Coalition, which is affiliated with the DLC. Overall, 25.8% of the Democratic members of the 110th Congress were openly affiliated with the DLC. An additional 31 members of Congress are affiliated with the Blue Dogs, but not with the New Democratic Coalition. If the Blue Dogs are included, the overall DLC-Blue Dog membership in of Democratic congresscritters increases to 36.6%, and 38.1% in the House.

Now, compare this to Obama's cabinet selections. Of the eighteen cabinet members (not counting Joe Biden, who I have seen listed as a cabinet member at times), sixteen are Democrats. Of those sixteen, eight are affiliated with the DLC, or 50%. Obama's Democratic cabinet selections have twice the DLC representation of the Democratic membership of Congress. This list does not include Rahm Emanuel, who will be the first White House Chief of Staff during the Obama administration. Nor does it include national security advisor Jim Jones, who supported McCain during the election.

No Blue Dogs seem to have been selected for the cabinet, but even so the DLC-Blue Dog membership in Obama's cabinet is higher than the DLC-Blue Dog membership of the Democratic caucus in the House or Senate. Adding in the two Republican members, and Obama's cabinet has a Republican-DLC majority. The 55.6% DLC-Republican representation in Obama's cabinet closely mirrors the overall DLC-Republican representation in the Senate (55% in the incoming Senate, plus freshman new NDC members) and House (53.6%, plus freshman NDC members).

The Congressional Progressive Caucus has 69 members in the incoming congress, plus former member Nancy Pelosi (the Speaker resigns from ideological caucuses), plus new membership among freshman. Additionally, three members (Sherrod Brown, Bernie Sanders and Tom Udall) have been elected to the Senate in 2006-2008. Overall, including Nancy Pelosi, 25.4% of the Democratic membership of the House and the Senate in 2007-2008 were Congressional Progressive Caucus members. One member of this group, Hilda Solis, will be in Obama's cabinet. Another member, Xavier Bacerra, was asked to serve as trade representative, but declined..."

Chris Bowers :: Obama's Cabinet To The Right Of Democrats in Congress

[Magleetis]

141. There is a small group

of people in Indiana that get it, and are doing something about it.

Democracy Community Liberty Patriotism Economics Environment

www.aford-in.org

[Stinky The Clown]

144. Hope has long ago faded and the change is all in the wrong direction

With Bush, we at least got to cheer for the Do Not Call list.

[astroBspacedog]

145. Competitiveness and Innovation

Competitiveness ---- low wages, even if we have to pull stakes and move overseas.
Innovation ---- tax cuts


And we all get a huge bonus !!!

[somone]

146. Obama is a Reagan devotee in words and deeds

[Name removed]

154. Deleted message

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

[ima_sinnic]

158. I'm with you 100% on that (n/t)

[Name removed]

160. Deleted message

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

[Safetykitten]

164. But he will be re-elected, right? *with big pleading kitten eyes*

He is SO not like the republicans!

[Vidar]

166. K&R.

[Blue-Jay]

173. Damn you Fartbama!

*shakes fist*

[Catherina]

175. Error: you can only recommend threads which were started in the past 24 hours n/t