Commentary on what Obama needs to do

[Craig234]

Before the election, I said we need an FDR, not a Clinton, on policy; I said we needed an FDR on leadership, not a Carter, and if Obama wasn't FDR he ran the risk of being Carter II.

A president who might have the right position on some issues, but it doesn't matter as much if they aren't assed and he's not re-elected returning the presidency to the radical right as Carter did Reagan.

The return of the presidency to Republicans (and the start of our serious 30 year decline) one election after the nation couldn't say the word Republican without nausea after Watergate, as they turned sour on the party after Bush II, is a lesson of the short memory and effectiveness of campaign big buchs - now far looser than every before - for Obama.

What we got with Obama was too much Clinton corporate compromise on policy, and so far, more Carter than FDR on leading the policies to take effect.

But he's still better than either in those ways on some issues.

Here's an article that has the views of many progressives about what he should do.

In short, it says to recognize that the concentration of power and the problems with our democracy not representing the averqage American are the most important issue and need him to side with the people.

Sadly, I'm not sure how much he can really do now - the Supreme Court has done something it's not easy to undo from turning our nation into one with McGovernment far more than it already is.

Is there anything short of a constitutional amendment to protect the citizens from the monsters the system they run has created?

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/24-2

 

[Throckmorton]

Whether he keeps trying to do what we elected him to do despite the Republicans' obstruction, or stops trying, the right wing will accuse him of being a do nothing socialist who's somehow also destroying the country... Because that's how they will win.

All Obama can do is the right thing, but he won't succeed, not with the 41 vote superminority.

 

[Craig234]

Whether he keeps trying to do what we elected him to do despite the Republicans' obstruction, or stops trying, the right wing will accuse him of being a do nothing socialist who's somehow also destroying the country... Because that's how they will win.

All Obama can do is the right thing, but he won't succeed, not with the 41 vote superminority.

I'd lke to say there's a parallel between JFK beating steel and Obama and Wall Street.

Unfortunately, I think the situation has changed and we'd have had Nixon beat Kennedy.

JFK could not be the great president we need with the changes in the system of things like unlimited corporate money to run against him. Congress would mutiny against his standing up to steel for a start.

 

[Ozoned]

There is nothing Obama can do. He is not pulling the strings.

 

[Greenman]

Is there anything short of a constitutional amendment to protect the citizens from the monsters the system they run has created?

Simply following the constitution would solve the problem. As a constitutional republic, we've allowed the federal government to assume to much power, that's the single root of all of our political problems.

 

[Dari]

Resign for the good of the nation. This new populism he's selling isn't selling. Now that we know he's just another politician, I doubt that anyone will believe him anymore.

 

[MotF Bane]

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

There is no need for yet another Amendment; the one we need is right there. Now it simply needs to be followed. The Republicans, and their various neocon and religious factions, don't follow it; the Democrats, and their various progressive and "liberals" factions, don't follow it either.

 

[palehorse]

1. You do know that the "average American" is not a progressive, right? The majority of this country is much closer to the center than you probably wish to admit -- including the independents who won the election for Obama. Obama is now going to do exactly what Clinton did, and he may just get another term out of it. That is, he's going to move even closer to the center and then try to get little things done. The chance for any profound change is gone.

Obama is now politically impotent.

2. And, you do know that Obama has access to, and an affinity for, just as much corporate funding as anyone who might run against him, right? The recent decision by the USSC does not favor either party -- it will almost certainly corrupt both of them equally. You seem to be saying that their deicision somehow puts one party at more of a disadvantage than the other, which is bullshit.

The entire elected Federal government is already bought and paid for -- all of them. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves.

 

[Jaskalas]

I am eagerly awaiting his speech this week to learn if he's got anything to lead us with or if this is just another stop on the '08 campaign trail. For your sake Craig, I hope he knows how to govern.

 

[Craig234]

1. You do know that the "average American" is not a progressive, right? The majority of this country is much closer to the center than you probably wish to admit -- including the independents who won the election for Obama.

Yes, the country needs to shift to the progressive more. Bur progressives elected Obama as much or more as the more right-wing people - I don't care for the word centrist' really as it implies some permanent 'middle' whn in fact the 'center' can and should shift. We lack many names for the group with those opinions though other than naming them after between current 'left' and 'right'.

JFK, for example, helped lead the nation to the left - for example, as I've discussed with a number of examples, his habit of working 'peace' into cold war rhetoric.

'The strategy [a war word] of Peace' was his book of speeches as President; 'we never fear [a cold war sentiment] to negotiate' was a cold warrior's argument for talk to counter 'appeasment' attacks.

He could turn nationalism - a primitive enotion often used to fuel war desires - into pride in things lke our arts, remarkably. Imagine two thuggish American and Russians in a fist fight over the greatest orchestra.

OK, I exxagerate there, but he did do this. And the right in his time makes the Swift boaters look like girl scouts, with the John Birch society infiltrating our military, for one example.

Obama is now going to do exactly what Clinton did, and he may just get another term out of it. That is, he's going to move even closer to the center and then try to get little things done. The chance for any profound change is gone.

But t's not really a 'moving to the center' issue. It's a 'corporatocracy versus the freedom of the people' issue, and this really is an issue of appeasment - it only strengthens them in an endless war for oligarchy.

Obama is now politically impotent.

2. And, you do know that Obama has access to, and an affinity for, just as much corporate funding as anyone who might run against him, right? The recent decision by the USSC does not favor either party -- it will almost certainly corrupt both of them equally. You seem to be saying that their deicision somehow puts one party at more of a disadvantage than the other, which is bullshit.

First, you're wrong about this. It helps the Republicans. But there's a grain of truth to it - in the war between the corporatist and proessive wings of Democrats, corporatists just got nuclear weapons. Exclusively.

It will shift the Democratic party strongly to the corporatist side.

But more importantly, what's important isn't party, it's the corportocracy versus the freedom of the people.

This is why you will see some parts of the Tea Party aligning with progressives on this much as you saw Dennis Kucinich align with Ron Paul on some issues.

The entire elected Federal government is already bought and paid for -- all of them. Anyone who believes otherwise is fooling themselves.

Prove to me how people like Dennis Kucinich or Bernie Sanders are driven by a corporatist agenda.

They're not. But they can be targetted by massive corporate money to defeat them now.

 

[Craig234]

Simply following the constitution would solve the problem. As a constitutional republic, we've allowed the federal government to assume to much power, that's the single root of all of our political problems.

This has nothing to do with the Supreme Court defining corporations as people and giving them constitutional rights so the people can't limit them.

 

[Zebo]

Obama is so gifted but so corruptedl, sad (or maybe his gift was a sham all along and he was ever corrupted). Regardless he doesn't have it and worse Americans are a bunch of pussies compared to 1930's and are not forcing the issue on the streets if need be so there is no political will to change status quo. If you want something you have to take it, no politician will do your dirty work for you, much easier to sit back and be flattered and wined and dined by the powers that be.

 

[palehorse]

Yes, the country needs to shift to the progressive more.

umm, no.

Good luck with that.

 

[Craig234]

I am eagerly awaiting his speech this week to learn if he's got anything to lead us with or if this is just another stop on the '08 campaign trail. For your sake Craig, I hope he knows how to govern.

Our sake. I hope he learns - like JFK did not to trust the military and CIA after the Bay of Pigs and to break new ground in foreign policy that's the best change we've had in half a century or longer.

I'm not expecting much unfortunately, but I do like what I've heard the last few days, if it's not just calucaulated cover.

One reason I voted for him and expected more progressive policies is his history - a Harvard top lawyer who could get power and wealth instead working for the less powerful. That said a lot.

We haven't quite seen that - as he's gone to the right. We'll see.

I'll also mention something I haven't bothered to in a while - now would be a good time for the right to right its own problems more, to grow its populist base and take back the party from the corporatist sellout.

What a I talking about, didn't I sai the Republicans' core agenda is the rich? Yes. But since we stil have a democracy so far, they need votes and have brought many into the tent, who can take some power.

It's happened. Rememeber the policies of Eisenhower on some issues? The Military Industrial Complex warning wasn't given by Democratic President Marx, but by Republicans General Eisenhower.

 

[Craig234]

umm, no.

Good luck with that.

You are part of the problem then. What are YOU advocating that has any chance to stand up to the corporotocracy?

 

[Craig234]

Obama is so gifted but so corruptedl, sad (or maybe his gift was a sham all along and he was ever corrupted). Regardless he doesn't have it and worse Americans are a bunch of pussies compared to 1930's and are not forcing the issue on the streets if need be so there is no political will to change status quo. If you want something you have to take it, no politician will do your dirty work for you, much easier to sit back and be flattered and wined and dined by the powers that be.

That's simple about politicians being wined and dined - hardly the issue - but right on in that the only visible solution is much more organization by the American people, against the corporatocracy.

While I'm for the progressives, it needs to be a broader issue that isnt limited by the basic left right split being used to divide the people.

 

[Craig234]

Resign for the good of the nation. This new populism he's selling isn't selling. Now that we know he's just another politician, I doubt that anyone will believe him anymore.

President Biden. Interesting.

 

[Zebo]

That's simple about politicians being wined and dined - hardly the issue - but right on in that the only visible solution is much more organization by the American people, against the corporatocracy.

While I'm for the progressives, it needs to be a broader issue that isnt limited by the basic left right split being used to divide the people.

Yes I'd take to the streets and keep it simple and mainstream like : billionaire hedge fund managers pay only 15% in taxes while you pay 40%.

Everyone else insures all for half price.

etc

If your read about the masses organizing back in the 30's it was simple slogans but more that they were there that caused FDR to act. (same with civil rights too)

 

[Craig234]

Yes I'd take to the streets and keep it simple and mainstream like : billionaire hedge fund managers pay only 15% in taxes while you pay 40%.

Everyone else insures all for half price.

etc

If your read about the masses organizing back in the 30's it was simple slogans but more that they were there that caused FDR to act.

I agree with this point, bnut I meant a different simple.

There's a good simple - as in as you suggest "workers pay higher taxes than rich investors", but I meant a bad simple, as in "Bush went to war in Iraq because he likes watcing the killing".

The 'wine and dine' attack is sinmple as a criticism - it's simple and wrong and distracts from the real issue of the system problem of our enormously wealth corporations destroying democracyl.

 

[ProfJohn]

The return of the presidency to Republicans (and the start of our serious 30 year decline]

Craig you are clueless.

In the 30 years since Reagan's policies went into full effect we have only had 3 recessions.

In the 30 years prior to Reagan we had SIX recessions!!! (That doesn't even include the 81-82 recession)

What we are going through now is certainly painful, but prior to that we have been living in the longest prolonged period of growth in out country's history. The only decline we have seen is the decline in liberalism, not a bad thing in the eyes of most people.

 

[Patranus]

1. You do know that the "average American" is not a progressive, right? The majority of this country is much closer to the center than you probably wish to admit -- including the independents who won the election for Obama. Obama is now going to do exactly what Clinton did, and he may just get another term out of it. That is, he's going to move even closer to the center and then try to get little things done. The chance for any profound change is gone.

I disagree. He can't do what Clinton did in todays media.

 

[Zebo]

I agree with this point, bnut I meant a different simple.

There's a good simple - as in as you suggest "workers pay higher taxes than rich investors", but I meant a bad simple, as in "Bush went to war in Iraq because he likes watcing the killing".

The 'wine and dine' attack is sinmple as a criticism - it's simple and wrong and distracts from the real issue of the system problem of our enormously wealth corporations destroying democracyl.

IMO the lefts biggest mistake was not aligning with the tea parties. They have plenty of populism (bank bailouts, give aways, WORKING people ARE taxed too much relative) and could be convinced if educated about other issues like all for half if they were accepted and co-mingled with one another. No, instead they cast them aside as racists, teabaggers, loons and whatnot and gave up any voice while sitting in blog sphere instead. Guess who had voice and who destoryed bill?

Until we get to the point, and I'm thinking worse than gilded age it will happen, where we present a untied front against the machine they will use us against each other and continue with business as usual.

 

[ProfJohn]

Obama is now going to do exactly what Clinton did

Nope, will never happen.

Remember that Bill Clinton was a conservative southern Democrat who was pushed to the left by the leaders of congress.

Obama is a left wing urban Democrat who will never be able to pivot to the right like Clinton did because he has no idea how to do so.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Resign for the good of the nation. This new populism he's selling isn't selling. Now that we know he's just another politician, I doubt that anyone will believe him anymore.

I wondered whether he might consider resigning in disgust, though he probably knew what he was getting into when he applied for the job.

If he resigned, who would take his place? Might it be better if he stayed in office in order to prevent its being occupied by someone who would be worse?

 

[Zebo]

There’s no chance of a second stimulus. The White House will have to jawbone banks on foreclosures, credit card racketeering and the loosening of credit to small businesses. This means taking on bankers who were among the Obama campaign’s biggest backers and whose lobbyists have castrated regulatory reform by buying off congressmen of both parties. It means pressing for all constitutional remedies that might counter last week’s 5-to-4 Supreme Court decision allowing corporate campaign contributions to buy off even more.

^^^
This author nails it. We are so fucked you guys don't even know. Obama is not the man to take us out. Not only do top 1% have all the cash, they own our future earnings in the form of our over priced mortgage payments and T-bills (taxes). We will not recover until people have money to spend again. There about 10 ways to get them money and Obama is doing none.

I am a small businessman. I depend on people having money, not the 2-3 billionaires in my state.