Should liberals be disappointed in Obama so far? Angry? Absurd. They should be thrilled

[babylonsister]

Obama and the liberals
Should liberals be disappointed in Obama so far? Angry? Absurd. They should be thrilled
Michael Tomasky


If it's true that nature abhors a vacuum, then that rather unnatural state of man known as cable television is positively repulsed by one. And so, during this lugubrious interregnum in which millions of us are still coming down from the months-long high of checking Nate Silver and Real Clear Politics nine times a day and dying inside because the polls out of Ohio contradict one another, the political class needs something to chatter about.

It has chosen, for more days running than I'd imagined necessary, the story of the liberal activists who already feel betrayed by Barack Obama. The Politico weighed in Monday with a piece noting that some liberals (actually, it didn't even qualify it with "some"; it just said "liberals") "are growing increasingly nervous – and some just flat-out angry – that President-elect Barack Obama seems to be stiffing them on Cabinet jobs and policy choices."

Well, they didn't call me, and you can place me well outside the magic circle. I'm not nervous or flat-out angry or even concerned. I'm excited. And by the way, the vast majority of the people I know are excited, too.

Obama is still seven weeks away from taking office but has already signaled that he's going to do grand things, huge things – dare I say heretofore unimaginable things. A half-trillion dollar (at least; some suspect it may end up being more like a trillion) jobs-and-infrastructure program, which he wants to enact as soon as possible after he takes office? Liberals have complained for decades – yes, decades, since the 1970s – about the creaky state of America's bridges and roads and the need for more spending on transit. Ditto the schools. We live in a country of which it's still probably true that most schools were built in the 1920s (New York City, for example, opened a new school building once every three weeks for that entire decade). Again, we have complained and complained and complained about their condition, and quite rightly so, for decades.

And here comes a president who is about to do something about all this, and do it more grandly than most liberals would have dared to imagine just a few months ago. And do it immediately. And he's not liberal enough? Please. If President Obama were to pass a trillion dollar jobs-and-infrastructure bill and, Heaven forbid, drop dead on his elliptical machine in March, that single act alone would be enough to make him one of the most progressive presidents in the history of the country.


more...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/2008/dec/09/obama-white-house

[Captain Hilts]

1. Clinton had a conservative Congress and southern Dems who would not support him.

Folks like Nunn.

He got his first budget passed by ONE vote - Gore's.

[EFerrari]

2. Why are is there such an effort directed at getting "liberals" to disengage?

It's anti-democratic and somewhat perverse given that Obama himself has conceded that he was not born in a manger and, that he needed "our" help.

Has he changed is mind on this? :)

[Land Shark]

5. Good point, also some liberals think they "won" so therefore can sit back. WRONG! nt

[EFerrari]

21. If the "left" is being deployed as a back fire to delay the right wing attacks

that we all know are coming -- to keep the right "wrong footed" -- good. But being a chew toy is not what a lot of us signed up for.

lol

[cali]

6. The author isn't attempting any such thing. And he's decidedly a liberal himself.

Funny how you feel it neccessary to try and shut up those you accuse of trying to shut up the left.

As for your silly comment about Obama, that really doesn't deserve any response. It's far too lame.

[EFerrari]

12. I was quoting Obama's own statement, cali.

lol

[babylonsister]

8. Why do some people see 'problems' where there aren't any?

This didn't seem like an attempt by the author to have liberals disengage. I guess we read it totally differently.

[EFerrari]

11. The title itself is prescriptive, Sis. n/t

[babylonsister]

17. I don't understand. The author writes a nice, positive, feel good

article about Obama. Those of us who are feeling good seemed to enjoy it, yet you take issue with it. :shrug:

Have at it, but I'm a born optimist, I've discovered, so I'm going to stay positive because this man hasn't done anything to make me lose faith yet.

[EFerrari]

19. The premise of the article is that liberals shouldn't feel what they are feeling.

:shrug:

I enjoy Obama as much of any of you. Good god! I usually can't even get through one of his most mundane statements without tearing up AND laughing out loud.

But, there is this effort out there (here) on The Internets to stifle people, to make them feel wrong or stupid. And, that's counter-productive. That's not how consensus is built or maintained.

[Political Heretic]

13. I think theres a pretty simple and understandable answer to that.

Because to a lot of people, it feels like "liberals" as you put it are shitting all over good news. And its tough to take sometimes. The thought comes up, that perhaps some people are just never happy unless they see the cloud in every silver lining.

[EFerrari]

18. That's even may be true to an extent. There have been pretty emotional posts

here, ultimatums where, the poster could have asked for more information before swearing off Obama.

But, this is the internets and people have their own style of communicating. Everyone can't be me. lol

But, there are very legit questions to raise about Obama's choices, too.

They all get lumped together and that's not useful. That's just a totalizing of our discussion into freeperish shit flinging.

[Marrah_G]

3. I am pretty darn happy with him so far !!!

[babylonsister]

10. Good! I knew someone would be.

:fistbump:

[Marrah_G]

14. Yeah- but did you ever think it would be ~me~?

:rofl:

I think the whole thing worked out really well. I like his choices so far. And he's shown alot of wisdom.

[babylonsister]

15. Hahaha!

I remember you, and am just very happy to see you're happy! :fistbump: :D

[Marrah_G]

24. I'm happy to see that you're happy to see that I'm happy........

Oh heck .......

:pals:

[Land Shark]

4. The most important thing is "smooth transition". You're not in power until you're in power! True?

Consider the exposure the departing administration has.

Now consider that perhaps keeping the waters calm and smooth until at least the end of January is a reasonable thing to do, even if the only reason is that it's premature to announce final policy shifts when there hasn't been time to work them out.

Cabinet membership can change fairly quickly.

[babylonsister]

9. Exactly. You're not in power until you're in power. Until then,

speaking solely for myself, I'll stay happy and reserve my criticism until it's deserved.
I realize there have been some cabinet picks that people disagree with, but I also heard PE Obama say that he's steering this ship. He's done nothing so far to make me doubt his sincerity, so I'm hanging back and seeing what gives.

[EFerrari]

22. Obama is transiting into power. And I sincerely hope that he's able enough

to manage civil feedback from the left. He gives every indication that he is.

[backscatter712]

7. I'm pretty happy with him so far.

No, he's not ultra-left, and well, neither am I. I'm more of a moderate left.

He's shown us a great deal of wisdom and sanity, which is a breath of fresh air after eight years of *...

[Jim Sagle]

16. Shut the fuck up said Tomasky the Beltway Bozo.

[babylonsister]

27. You have a vivid imagination. nt

[Cha]

29. Not

really.

[Jim Sagle]

36. Dupe - self-delete.

[Jim Sagle]

37. Just good summarization skills.

[question everything]

20. Thrilled, of course

Remember when Bush was running in 2000 on a platform of "restoring honor to the White House?"

He did not, of course. But Obama before even taking office, is. He is intelligent, thoughtful who realizes that he is the President of all Americans, not group that or that.

As a liberal, I am proud of him of doing just what he is supposed to do. Honorably.

[Deep13]

23. I'm chewing my nails hoping the country does not fall apart before January 20.

So rather than being happy or angry, I am waiting with nervous anticipation while Obama waits for the legal authority to DO something.

[babylonsister]

25. January - November, I'm all out of nails.

I'm feeling pretty good considering the condition this country is in. I know there's help on the way.

[EFerrari]

26. No kidding. I'm more afraid of BushCo in their last days if anything. n/t

[Cha]

28. I love Michael Tomasky.

Ever since he was writing for New York Magazine in the early part of the Century he has soothed my restless Democratic soul.

<snip from your article>

"But there is a vast difference between applying pressure and taking bits of evidence and extrapolating to wild conclusions and crazy rhetoric from them. And people who can't see that Obama needs to reassure the political establishment by doing things like re-appointing Robert Gates at the Pentagon precisely so he can have the establishment's good will, which in turn grants him the room to operate and to isolate the political opposition, understand so little about politics that it's not even worth the time it would take to spell out the argument to them."

We have a DUer who called this "knee jerking" and he's absolutely right.

[EFerrari]

30. But it's not "right" to take a special case and smear the whole with it

which is what both that DUer AND Tomasky are doing.

[babylonsister]

31. I don't get your grief there, sfexpat2000. He's not telling anyone

how to think or act, he's expressing himself, and I agree with him. I actually again don't even understand your post, but I'm not very astute at reading hidden motives into articles.

[EFerrari]

33. There's nothing hidden about it.

He's lumping people who do exaggerate and all that with everyone who isn't -- just as our friend did earlier this morning here. Both of the writers I refer to do the same thing: invalidate all your critics and call them Howard Dean scream nuts -- as the truly special cases are, so you can dismiss them.

That's a mistake.

You know, calling thoughtful engagement "knee jerking" is a cop out. There may be jerking knees out there, but everyone on "the left", the new redheaded ghetto of the Democratic party, is not knee jerking when they bring up concerns or objections.

And I'm sort of surprised that you don't see how this is going down.

[babylonsister]

34. I see the concerns and objections, and I even understand some of

them. It's the relentlessly negative posters I have problems with. Without even waiting for this man to have one day in office, they consistently go for the jugular. I think some people have complained for so long they know no other way.

I happen to think we're so lucky to be where we are. If McSame had won, then there'd be a whole lot to complain about.

[EFerrari]

35. McToast was never going to win, thank god.

And Obama is the president elect. His administration doesn't start on 1/20. It started the moment he began to form it on 11/5.

Relentless anything is hard to take, I agree wholeheartedly. So is the STFU line and how ubiquitous it is, even to the point where people don't even recognize it any more. It's just become normal for liberals to be trashed in the press as a frame. How did that happen?

[Cha]

32. I've seen it way more than

once on DU.