Pearl Harbor: Should Obama go to Wisconsin NOW?

[coti]

FDR straddled the fence regarding our military involvement in WWII until the Japanese attacked us.

Once they did, so directly, so brazenly, it wasn't just that there was no longer a question remaining as to whether we needed to get militarily "involved" in the war. We were, truly, already at war. The only question remaining was what we were going to do about it.

Stripping Wisconsin public workers of their right to collectively bargain is the most audacious attack by Republicans on the middle class that I have seen in my lifetime. It is absolutely intolerable.

In my mind, there is not even a question as to whether President Obama should involve himself in this fight. The cold class war has now gone hot. We are in the fight, whether we want it or not.

If he is a leader of the middle class, if he is THE leader of the United States and the strongest protector of our values, he needs to go to Wisconsin. Now.


But maybe DU believes otherwise. Should Obama NOW get involved in the Wisconsin union fight?

[joeunderdog]

1. No It's part of his master plan to act like a Republican for the first 4 years of his term.

[Jackpine Radical]

3. And then the first 4 years of his hypothetical second term.

[readmoreoften]

20. But if he doesn't act like a Republican then the Republicans won't like him.

[QC]

56. And if he acts like a Republican, they still won't like him.

What to do, what to do?

[Earth_First]

2. No, he had his chance to take a stand. This one belongs to US!!!

He can keep his well-positioned, postured responses that his handlers pay him to present...let the people of Wisconsin take the credit for this one!

[baldguy]

4. He should nationalize the govt of Wisconsin.

Toss the remaining Senators, GOP Representatives & the Governor in jail, and hold new elections.

[Davis_X_Machina]

21. I've read a lot of dumb things...

...here, but that makes the All-Star team.

[baldguy]

41. And ignoring the crimes they've committed isn't?

If you think that what they've done is "business as usual", then you're a fool. I doubt you really understand how a representative democracy is supposed to work.

[Davis_X_Machina]

42. The heart and soul of representative democracy...

...is the forcible, extra-judicial seizure of a democratically-elected legislature, and a democratically-elected governor?

[baldguy]

43. When they actively work to break the state laws & Constitution that grants them their authority

They lose that authority. Anything actions they take subsequently, which aren't acts to correct & repair their damages, are illegal.

It's called "malfeasance".

[Davis_X_Machina]

44. Go get an indictment...

...and check back with me. Or mount a recall campaign. But how is sending in the 101st Airborne the solution?

The rule of law works both ways. If you wanted it in December of 2000, and don't want it now, you're not a citizen, you're just a fan. Too much team spirit here.

[Raine]

5. He should at least make a statement

but I doubt that he will. :-(

[MannyGoldstein]

6. First off, FDR did NOT straddle the fence

He pushed through the Lend/Lease act and was at the vanguard, preparing Americans for war for years before Pearl Harbor.

Second, why would we want Obama to go to WI? Do we have a sudden need to surrender?

[coti]

10. With regard to OUR MILITARY, yes, he did.

I was careful to make that distinction. I know he supported our allies in other ways.

[MannyGoldstein]

14. We sent massive military aide to England

And was outspoken that the Nazis and Japanese would have to be dealt with. He worked hard to bring around a nation that, for the most part, wanted nothing to do with war.

[coti]

19. We sold them things. We did not put "our boys" and our butts in the fight

That's where I believe the analogy holds.

[MannyGoldstein]

24. I think a comparison with Neville Chamberlain might work better here

No?

You have a point, but at least FDR paved the way for a fight.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. Actually, I take that back

Chamberlain is a more apt characterization of what we have, but FDR might be a better characterization of what we need.

Oh, hell, I give up.

[flamingdem]

7. NO! The repukes want to tie him to "radicals" and they would love to see him there!

Did you see Howard Fineman's analysis. They will paint WI as radical fringe and themselves as "American Value Upholders". It's clear in Rove's ads as well.

[Lorien]

13. The rupukes aren't the ones who will vote for him

so who gives a fuck what they think? 80% of America backs the unions; Obama should care about OUR votes.

[flamingdem]

28. It's called strategy. Of course Obama supports unions, if not no re-election, duh nt

[Union Scribe]

63. "Hey unions, we have to be SECRET friends, okay?"

What is this, third grade?

[Lorien]

80. SUPER secret!

Duh!

;-)

[upi402]

48. Repukes control him too damn much

Why the fuck do pussEass "Dems" respond to Republican bullshit???????????????

Who gives a shit?

[Union Scribe]

61. WTF?

You're saying Obama should never associate with the people who voted for him because Republicans might not think good things about us or him. Because, like, otherwise they'd totally be foiled in their efforts to smear Obama and Dems in general, right?

Post after post in THIS THREAD proclaims that the public supports the people in WI, so what exactly are you PR creatures trying to protect him from? The grubby, dirty commoners on the ground?

Way to buy into their framing, bud. Hook line and sucker.

[coti]

77. Exactly- What is he to be protected FROM? WINNING?? Being on the RIGHT SIDE?? nt

[inademv]

8. Yes, because the assault on collective bargaining rights

is not longer just theory and planning, it has happened.

[whistler162]

9. No FDR didn't he worked within, barely, the law as

Congress had established it to provide aid to China and England before our entry into WWII.

[B2G]

11. What shoudl he do when he gets there? n/t

[coti]

29. Give a speech and build morale. MORALE is what the people of Wisconsin need to sustain them.

Isn't that his forte?

[tabatha]

12. NO NO NO

The voice of the people is the loudest, and is what will vote the GOP out.

[Lorien]

16. So Obama isn't a man of the people, and he doesn't represent you? nt

[TBF]

23. We know exactly who he works for and he needs to stay away. nt

[Quixote1818]

58. I agree 100%. nt

[readmoreoften]

15. He's not a working class leader. He should make statements of solidarity, give resources, and stay

out of our way.

[TBF]

18. + a million - nt

[coti]

37. He was one.

Before.

[taught_me_patience]

17. NO - What is he going to do there?

This is a state matter.

[Davis_X_Machina]

22. Make DU'ers happy...

...which is why he has the job in the first place.

[mmonk]

25. Not if he really doesn't want to.

We need to know his character. We are watching. You too Senate Democrats.

[scarletwoman]

26. Go to Wisconsin and do what? Make a speech about being a "fierce advocate" for Labor Unions?

Get real.

This struggle belongs to the People, Obama works for the Ruling Class.

sw

[FLAprogressive]

30. No, it would be distracting, insincere, and will not turn anyone else on to the movement who isn't

already.

[coti]

33. I disagree. It would coalesce the movement behind a leader in a position of strength.

And it would put real fear in the hearts of Republicans.

Leaderless, the movement won't last long- especially nationally.

In fact, Obama could end the Republican's putsch right here by rallying those across the whole country behind him.

Not to mention that it's simply the right thing to do.

[swilton]

31. Should and Will are mutually exclusive

[coalition_unwilling]

32. I voted 'no' because, were Obama to inject himself into it, the right

wing would turn around and paint it as partisan politics and politics as usual.

That train left the station a couple weeks ago and Obama wouldn't or couldn't get on the train! then. Now it's too late now for the Dem who lauded Jeb as an "education reformer"

[elocs]

34. I'm a Wisconsinite with a dog in this fight and I still say "no".

This is still a people's protest and movement here in WI and I don't want it to become all about Obama. If he comes here, it will, and I'm betting he is smart enough to realize that.

[coti]

36. If he did, I think it would fundamentally change him.

He hasn't taken on a fight like this yet. And/or won one.

It would become about Obama because he would transform (back) into a true leader. Oddly enough, it might give him a bump in the polls, rather than the other way around.

It gives him a chance to show that he believes in something.

[elocs]

40. To be honest, I am not worried about him, but being in WI I am concerned about us here. n/t

[PeaceNikki]

49. I concur. Also as a Wisconsin resident.

I just got home from Madison and I am pumped. :patriot:

[sendero]

35. LAUGHABLE..

... Obama isn't going to do JACK SHIT.

[BlueIris]

38. He's done. So I don't care whether he goes or not.

Truth be told, I'm kinda hoping he doesn't go--I think it could be bad for unions out there if he schleps in at this point.

[Liquorice]

39. He should take a firm stand with the workers. He's leaving them

hanging. I just can't believe he won't do anything at all. WTF

[TheWebHead]

45. go there and do what?

this is a state legislative matter and he is the boss of the largest entity (along with Walmart) of non-union employees. It would be both beneath the office of the president and hypocritical for Obama to get involved beyond a milquetoast press statement.

[upi402]

46. uh... LEAD!

We elected his ass to lead, not lord

[coti]

47. Building morale and hope is what Obama does best. That's what Wisconsin workers need.

The hope to hold out and win.

That's what strikes and labor disputes are all about.

Not to mention FINANCIAL SUPPORT FROM OTHER DEMOCRATS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

[undeterred]

55. Shovel snow.

[TransitJohn]

50. This is sarcasm, right?

Obama would never go to the mat to support workers in this country. He'll be a real bigtime labor supporter on the campaign trail, though.

[Quixote1818]

51. Why? Public opinion is completely against the Republicans on this.

As far as what the Republican's did today, Obama would have zero impact on that and might even hurt things. If it ain't broke, why fix it? The strategy is working with public opinion.

[Better Believe It]

52. Obama doesn't support this fight and tried to discourage any DNC support for Wisconsin's workers.

[LoZoccolo]

71. So suppose that's true.

It still wouldn't contribute anything to the discussion of whether or not he should be there.

[Better Believe It]

87. Well if President Obama doesn't support the workers he should not be there!

[coti]

57. For the protestors themselves. This has turned into a morale game.

The people have to believe that they can win, or they will give up.

They've come a long way on their own, but a move like this demands a countermove that restores morale.

[TroglodyteScholar]

53. No, he shouldn't.

He SHOULD have at the very start, but his failure to do so made it absolutely clear where he stands...and it's not with the workers.

[coti]

60. Everything has changed now. There wouldn't be a "You're late to the party" response if he showed up

now.

They did something completely ridiculous and unacceptable. He should step in.

[TroglodyteScholar]

70. The whole affair has been "ridiculous and unacceptable."

His inaction can't just be retracted.

[coti]

76. Are you fucking kidding me? If he stepped in now- ala Pearl Harbor- you'd hold it against him? nt

[TroglodyteScholar]

88. I'm ALREADY holding it against him.

When this BLATANT attack on the working and middle class labor force began, there should have been hell to pay for the corrupt Wisconsin Republicans. But Obama showed his hand (or rather sat on them). What good can he possibly do now? Even he takes a supportive position immediately, it'll be obvious that it's disingenuous.

You truly think Obama's views are in line with those of the protesters? After all that he's not done about this situation? You want him to behave as though he's with us even if that is a transparent lie?

[undeterred]

54. Baby, its too late.

[rucky]

59. I don't see how it would help.

I know he's the most powerful figure in the free world and all, but for some reason it wouldn't seem helpful to this fight to me.

[QC]

62. If he goes to Wisconsin he will probably get all reachy outy with Walker

and make push for some kind of compromise in which only half of working people in Wisconsin will be ground into the dirt or something.

Best to stay out of it.

[coti]

65. It's not tangible. It's about giving those in Wisconsin the hope to sustain them, the hope

to hold out long enough to win. Because that's what they have to be able to do.

[jefferson_dem]

64. NO.

We are the movement. We are winning the message. The last thing needed now is to allow "them" to change the subject.

[coti]

66. If they win- long-term- legislatively, we're not going to win the message war.

We have to inject enough resolve into the people on the ground to allow them to win this, long-term, legislatively, in Wisconsin.

[jefferson_dem]

69. We agree 100%.

I just don't think an extremely vocal public position by the President would serve our interests is all -- plus it would allow them to make the "doesn't he have enough problems in DC" argument. There was some talk of Bill Clinton going to WI a week or so ago. That would be perfect!

[coti]

73. Whoever it is- and I think it's pretty clear it should be President- they need long-term morale and

purpose.

They need to be shown that what they are doing not only means something for themselves- in some "selfish" kind of way, though it applies to so many- but it means everything to the rest of the nation.

I expect Wisconsin workers to respond quite forcefully, with a general strike, to this legislation, and they must understand why- beyond themselves- they are taking the action that they are.

[LoZoccolo]

67. No; he's still less popular than the protest.

His involvement could diminish support for it.

[coti]

74. I think he would increase his own popularity back to his campaign levels as well as strengthen the

movement itself.

Those numbers you're seeing in support of Wisconsin workers- those are the same people that voted for Obama....aren't they.... :)


....Economic populism.



The difference between Obama's current poll numbers and those are those same people that have revoked their support from him, because they don't see him as standing for what he did before.....

[LoZoccolo]

79. Liberals remain the group with which he is most popular.

Also, the poll numbers about support of the protest were national ones, and they put it at 60%; Obama wasn't elected by that big of a margin. I think his popularity might increase if he went there, but I honestly do think that there is a bigger risk of the protest losing support because I can't really imagine too many people out there who like Obama but don't support these workers, and who would change their mind due to Obama's support.

[coti]

84. Independents with an economic populist streak are what he has lost.

Some of those have even, somehow, been snagged by the teabaggers.

He lost his populist tone- which translates into moderate liberalism- long ago. Those are the voters he needs to win back if he wants to get back to his 2008 strength.

This would be an excellent issue with which to do that.

[LoZoccolo]

85. Where do you gsther that? n/t

[L. Coyote]

68. That is what they want, to embroil Obama. They control the media story, after all.

[HEyHEY]

72. If he's willing to throw a brick, yeah

[Better Believe It]

75. The horse has left the barn! A day late and a dollar short for Obama to have much impact.

But I would like to see him stand up for working people and less for Wall Street and corporate America.

[coti]

78. Negativity, undue caution, and cowardice will destroy our resistance to this legislation. nt

[Arkana]

81. No. Secret Service protection would disrupt everything

and it would steal the spotlight from where it truly belongs--on the protestors.

[defendandprotect]

82. Obama has already pulled DNC supporters in Wisconsin out -- so think we

should wake up about Obama and move on!!

Let's draft Sen. Bernie Sanders for 2012 -- he can run on a Dem ticket --

with a strong anti-war VP -- maybe Tom Hayden?

Personally, I don't see how we're going to survive two more years of Obama --

leave alone 6 more years!!

[BillyJack]

83. NO - ABSOLUTELY NOT!!!! Wisconsin-ites are doing very fine on their own....

Frankly, if Obama showed up to DISRUPT THE MOMENTUM, I would think he was MORE TRULY in the arms of the Koch Brothers, et al.

OBAMA, STAY AWAY!!!!!!

(On edit: Barack, send some pizza and bottled water ~ ANONYMOUSLY, of coure ;-) if you REALLY want to help out)

[roody]

86. No, there are enough republicans there already.

[BillyJack]

89. Hehe and a kick for this great *snark*

:thumbsup: