Obama: I am a New Democrat

[SoxFan]

President Barack Obama firmly resists ideological labels, but at the end of a private meeting with a group of moderate Democrats on Tuesday afternoon, he offered a statement of solidarity.

“I am a New Democrat,” he told the New Democrat Coalition, according to two sources at the White House session.

The group is comprised of centrist Democratic members of the House, who support free trade and a muscular foreign policy but are more moderate than the conservative Blue Dog Coalition.

Obama made his comment in discussing his budget priorities and broader goals, also calling himself a “pro-growth Democrat” during the course of conversation.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/19862.html

I've said this all along, but Wyldwolf was about the only one who agreed with me.
:popcorn:

[PBS Poll-435]

1. I think I will join you

:popcorn:

[villager]

2. Well, things -- environmentally, economically -- are gonna get a lot "newer" than these moderates

reckon on.

We'll see how authentically they respond...

[Windy]

3. and your problem with his alleged stance in that article is what exactly?

I think his feelings are in line with the majority of the country. Sick to death of the sanctimonious religious fanatics and wanting responsible government. Free and Fair Trade is not that same as Free trade... there is a difference. Wyldwolf was a huge Hillary supporter during the campaign and vehemently opposed to Obama. So what would be his problem? Clinton was for Free trade as was her husband. She was a bit more of a hawk than Obama, but Obama never said he would pull all of the troops out immediately and always said he would deal with AlQ and Afghanistan/Pakistan during the campaign. What is the popcorn for?

Psst....the election is over.

[SoxFan]

8. I was an Obama supporter from the begining...

for the very reasons cited in this article. I never saw him as Kucinich Lite, but as a quintessentially Generation X pragmatist.

By the way, while Wyldwolf was a Hillary supporter, he rarely stooped to the levels of some people on both sides of that fight. He frequently gave Obama credit where he believed it was due on policy issues.

[Jackpine Radical]

13. Huh? The election is over?

When'd that happen? Who won?

Anyway, you're pretty much pointing out the things that threw me into the Obama camp when all of my seemingly further-left alternatives were gone.

I still get nervous about some things--Afghanistan, health care (will he allow the "Medicare" option?), but on the whole, he's turning out better, less DLC-ish, than I had feared. Now, if he'd only let go of some of those pernicious executive powers the Bushies accumulated.

[Lilith Velkor]

28. He won't.

He may have to use them.

[MannyGoldstein]

4. Uh...

"New Democrat" or "new Democrat"? How can you tell which he meant?

As far as I can tell, Obama's a lot different than a New Democrat - the obvious things that come to mind is that he's against torture, and he's for regulating financial markets. Rather than trying to crush unions, he's trying to build them back up - he seems to actually see the middle class as something other than prey. He's not yammering "The era of big government is over". I expect that he'll do a lot of other things differently - health care, tariffs, etc, but we'll have to see what happens.

It is true that he has New Democrat DINOs running the financial bailout, but that folly is becoming apparent to all, and will probably change in the next few months.

[wyldwolf]

6. uh...

Obama has been a Democrat for decades. He ain't exactly a new one.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. A New *Kind* Of Democrat

Behaviorally, he's *much* different than a New Democrat - just doesn't make sense.

[polichick]

9. What you're saying makes the most sense, given everything else he's said...

...small "n" on the new.

[SoxFan]

10. How is he different than the New Dems?

Obama is much closer in ideology and temperament to someone like Tauscher than to someone like Dennis Kucinich or Bernie Sanders.

[MannyGoldstein]

12. See Post #4

Obama generally embodies actual Democratic values.

[wyldwolf]

15. considering her was speaking to the New Dem coalition, your theory is stretch

[MannyGoldstein]

20. You Win

Still, it must be some sort of rhetorical vehicle.

[wyldwolf]

26. maybe. But when he met with the BlueDogs he didn't say "I am a Bluedog."

[Lilith Velkor]

40. Bwahahahahahahaha!

Spin baby spin! :rofl:

[SoxFan]

19. What a ludicrous post

New Dems support torture? Crushing unions?

Care to give us a link to back that up, or are you just blowing smoke?

[MannyGoldstein]

22. Bill Clinton Began Outsourced Torture

a.k.a. "extraordinary rendition": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition

As to Clinton on labor, I don't have a ready reference, but this might cover it: http://www.afn.org/~iguana/archives/2000_02/20000213.html

[PBS Poll-435]

27. From your own link, the practice of "extraordinary rendition"

Started in the Reagan Administration.

In September 1987, during the Reagan administration, the United States executed an extraordinary rendition, codenamed Goldenrod, in a joint FBI-CIA operation.

[MannyGoldstein]

30. It Scarcely Matters, Since Clinton Was Still A Torture Fan

even if he didn't start it, but the Wikipedia article also states:

"The American Civil Liberties Union alleges that extraordinary rendition was developed during the Clinton administration by CIA officials in the mid-1990s..."

If you check out Jane Mayer's writing on the subject (she's considered the authority on these things), you'll see that she agrees that Clinton started torture-as US-policy. Do a Google and see.

[wyldwolf]

32. so the ACLU and Jane Mayer are misinformed

[wyldwolf]

31. I'd already debunked Manny's Clinton claim a week or so ago. Amazing how people...

.. will still post the same debunked lies if it fits their world view.

[MannyGoldstein]

35. You Did? Please Refresh My Memory.

IIRC, your argument was something like "Clinton was into torture, but LBJ was first although I have no actual evidence that this is true".

It may be that my memory is bad - feel free to demonstrate this.

[wyldwolf]

36. sure

When I pointed out the US has outsourced torture in latin America since 1965.

Then your predictable back tracking and caveats were, "did the President know? Was there Presidential directive or exectutive order?"

Now, you've just been shown it was Reagan and not Clinton that meets your qualifications.

[MannyGoldstein]

37. Well, We Can Both Agree That Clinton Was Fine With Torture

As to who did it first... we'll have to agree to disagree.

[wyldwolf]

39. but that wasn't your original argument made here and made a week or so ago

[MannyGoldstein]

41. Are You High? Seriously.

I just acknowledged that my position continues to be that Bill Clinton was the first US president to make torture an official US policy, and that you disagree. You are free to disagree, although some actual evidence (beyond Wikipedia and "because I said so") would be welcome.

[wyldwolf]

43. your position is obviously not factual

:shrug:

as for being high, I've quoted a book stating torture was conducted by the US in latin America in 1965.

You're the one quoting wiki. And by the way, the directive you're referring to doesn't mention torture...

[Cha]

5. Why do we need two of these threads?

The exact same thing?

[SoxFan]

11. They were posted almost simultaneously

[DevonRex]

18. No they weren't. You posted this 1 hour, 20 minutes later than WW.

[wyldwolf]

24. time zones? Mine are set for USA/Mountain

[DevonRex]

29. Mine, too.

[Enrique]

14. maybe he meant a gnu democrat

he's certainly not a New Dem. :shrug:

[Occam Bandage]

16. He's a non-ideological pragmatist?

God, I'm shocked.

[jefferson_dem]

21. Really...

Color me :wow:...


...


:sarcasm:



Try again politico.

[grantcart]

25. Yeah he should have written a book or two and let us in on that

[Captain Hilts]

17. I agreed also. And I'm upset...

that the Bruins are good in the same year the Caps are!

Go Sox!

[JTFrog]

23. Anonymous sources from Politico nail it!

Errrr.....

:eyes:

[Marrah_G]

33. Of course he is.

The problem is that during the primary many people saw him as THEY wanted to see him rather then what he was really saying.

I was very prepared to see him govern from the center and voted for him knowing that.

He is not very left, he is not even (in my opinion) a progressive.

He is a Center/slightly to the left pragmatist Democrat.

I fear that many who placed him on an enormous pedestal made up of their own projected viewpoints are going to find themselves very depressed over the next 8 years.

[noiretextatique]

42. exactly

it's not like this is earth-shattering news. i thought he was very clear about who he is during the campaign.

[ShortnFiery]

34. OMG! I hope he's just playing a role. We don't need no more stinking CONSERVATIVE

Democrats representing OUR Party.

You're a smart guy Barack, THINK AGAIN?!? :evilgrin:

The President and Congress SERVE US, We the People - let's MAKE THEM do THEIR DAMN JOB! :thumbsup:

[quickesst]

38. Sometimes I think....

...a lot of people here believe the Democratic Party consists of the Democratic Underground Democratic Party, and the rest are only here to cast a vote at election time, only to return to their percieved status as "sheeple". When Obama speaks, or makes a decision, he will speak, and make those decisions whether anyone from DU approves or not. Some of ya'll need to get out a little more. Thanks.
quickesst

[bertman]

44. Earlier today I emailed the White House expressing my disappointment

that our President would align himself with the corporatist, Wall Street branch of the Democratic Party.

Being an "Old Democrat" myself, well, actually Progressive or Liberal would be accurate also, I find it unsettling that President Obama would publicly proclaim that he is a New Democrat. New Democrats to my way of thinking are similar to the Blue Dogs in their more conservative stances on issues. And while I can understand that President Obama would not want to offend the conservative wing of our party I don't understand why he has to announce that he's one of them. If he really is a New Democrat I will become a New Independent or New Green or something other than a Democrat.

If you wonder why I have such strong feelings against the New Dem/Blue Dem branch of the party please read this commentary by Jane Hamsher
http://firedoglake.com/2009/03/11/cancer-patients-die-while-new-democrats-help-bankers-get-billions/

If that's what New Democrats stand for then I'll take the "old-fashioned" liberal, progressive, non-centrist, working-class oriented wing any day.