Obama speaks to progressives -- with respect. MUST-READ INTERVIEW

[JDPriestly]

In this Rolling Stone interview, Obama has responded to virtually every question that I have had about his presidency and what he will do in the future about issues important to our country in my view.

Everyone who posts on DU should read this Rolling Stone interview in its entirety as soon as possible.

Obama finally addresses comments to people with IQs over 85 and some experience under their belts. I was just delighted to read it, and for the first time since the election I have a sense that Obama knows where he is going and who he is -- and that he has not been completely sold out but is trying to cope with reality while holding on to his values. I have seriously questioned this.

Again, you really have to read the whole article, but here are a couple of paragraphs that provide some hope for the future.

. . .

During the past two years, we've not made as much progress as I wanted to make when I was sworn into office. It is very hard to make progress on these issues in the midst of a huge economic crisis, because the natural inclination around the world is to say, "You know what? That may be a huge problem, but right now what's a really big problem is 10 percent unemployment," or "What's a really big problem is that our businesses can't get loans." That diverted attention from what I consider to be an urgent priority. The House of Representatives made an attempt to deal with the issue in a serious way. It wasn't perfect, but it was serious. We could not get 60 votes for a comparable approach in the Senate.

One of my top priorities next year is to have an energy policy that begins to address all facets of our overreliance on fossil fuels. We may end up having to do it in chunks, as opposed to some sort of comprehensive omnibus legislation. But we're going to stay on this because it is good for our economy, it's good for our national security, and, ultimately, it's good for our environment.

. . . .
We instituted the first increase in fuel-efficiency standards in this country in 30 years. It used to be that California would have some very rigorous rule, and then other states would have much weaker ones. Now we've got one rule. Not only that, it used to be that trucks weren't covered, and there were all kinds of loopholes — that's how SUVs were out there getting eight miles a gallon. Now everybody's regulated — not only cars, but trucks. We did this with the agreement of the auto industry, which had never agreed to it before, we did it with the auto workers, who had never agreed to it before. We are taking the equivalent of millions of cars off the road, when it comes to the amount of greenhouse gases that are produced.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/17390/209395?RS_show_page=0

There is a little treat at the end (some stories about his tastes in music and experiences in the White House).

I would say that Obama has great taste in music -- except -- (as an opera fan) -- I hope that he checks out some sopranos other than Maria Callas. Her singing technique was, in my opinion, absolutely awful. Of the old-time singers, Joan Sutherland was a treat -- with great technique and musicality. Anyway, even the technology of classical song has progressed since the 1950s. Thank God.

[JustAnotherGen]

1. I absolutley intend to read it

But I as another poster said on another thread re the interview . . . It's only a matter of time before Gibbs takes it all back. *sigh*

[Myrina]

3. ... the ability to give an interview and a speech ...

... is what got most of us "fired up and ready to go" in '08 ... only to leave us all scratching our heads since January '09.

I don't want purty speechifyin', I want to see some Executive Orders correcting some of the egregious shit that went on between 2000- 2009.

[SammyWinstonJack]

9. +1

:thumbsup:

[pgodbold]

59. What she said.

[Poll_Blind]

2. Everyone should read the interview. The full interview, not just excerpts.

I cannot recommend that enough.

K&R!

PB

[zipplewrath]

4. Okay, I did

He didn't answer alot of my questions or criticisms, and it is a pretty long whine about how he isn't appreciated enough. Not to mention his surprise that the GOP wouldn't work with him. I also love his "this job is hard" bit. Right out of Bush's play book. He knew, or should have know, this before he asked for the job. Now that he's got it, I don't really wanna hear about it.

The excerpts from Axelrod's book are more telling. How he jumped right everytime he had a chance and how Axelrod's more progressive leanings were ignored virtually every single time. Not to mention how he kept avoiding confronting the GOP time and time again, or equivalenced them and the left.

[Poll_Blind]

7. I have found myself being critical of the President for his extensions and...

...inflations of some Bush-era policies. When I first started reading the interview my eyes were practically rolling in my head as I silently mouthed the word "softball". However, once the interview gets going I think that while it may not cover as much ground as any of us would hope, it sure lays out in very clear language exactly what the President thinks on issues and how he views them.

Whether people are critical (as I am) of these policies or supportive, I think everyone should read those words, those responses, because that's it straight from the horse's mouth as it were. There were a couple of points, like the "This job is hard" bit (that you mention) that I just stopped reading for a second, looked up, shook my head and continued.

I was discussing with someone earlier the difficulties involved in trying to untangle Obama's political decisions which have an unusually high number of rightist leanings and "good enough" defeatism- but which are also peppered with jags toward things which we more-typically identify as Progressive/Left political values.

It's not easy, IMO.

This interview may not ultimately untangle those sometimes conflicting decisions but I gotta tell you, for better or for worse, we get a much clearer image of the man than maybe ever before.

PB

[zipplewrath]

10. No

"This interview may not ultimately untangle those sometimes conflicting decisions but I gotta tell you, for better or for worse, we get a much clearer image of the man than maybe ever before."

It's pretty much the image that has been emerging for the last 18 months. It's the "no drama" approach. Never take a risk so big you might lose. And the incessant whining about how hard the job is and how we all don't love him enough is very tiresome. Especially from an administration that has no problem telling their critics just how wrong they are. And NEVER admit that you failed. The very definition of success is "whatever I accomplish".

[JDPriestly]

13. You have a point about the "no drama" approach.

Unfortunately, Obama does not seem to realize that he has to appeal to the King Kong, might makes right mentality of so many Americans and that he has to compete with Lindsay Lohan.

Still, his vision on energy is a great one.

I was disappointed that he does not address the trade issue.

[frylock]

5. what does the economic crises have to do with DADT, prosecution of war criminals..

and the continuation of the wars?

[Radical Activist]

6. Congress uses the economy as an excuse not to deal with those issues.

[frylock]

15. i thought we were talking about obama?

[Radical Activist]

18. I answered your question.

That's why those issues were raised in the article. You probably didn't even read the entire OP or you would have known that.

[frylock]

19. i read the op..

obama making excuses for the dem shortcomings. real good stuff there.

[Radical Activist]

21. Obama is explaining how the Senate is blocking a progressive agenda.

You seem intent in displacing blame. We really can't expect the President to do everything for us, especially when he needs help getting through the US Senate roadblock.

[frylock]

22. he can apply pressure to the blue dogs..

he seems perfectly content to capitulate to their demands.

[Radical Activist]

23. The people can apply pressure to blue dogs.

That's our job. It's more productive than whining about Obama.

[frylock]

29. what does that even mean?!

i don't have blue dogs in my district. i do have a president that felt a need to fly to cleveland to pressure kucinich to cave into voting for this shit health insurance bill. please show me where obama made an effort to pressure blue dogs into voting for at least a public option.

[Radical Activist]

31. Are you a single issue voter?

I swear some people wear the public option on their sleeve like a red badge of courage. Getting the Senate to pass the HCR bill we have now required Obama to push them left. Maybe we would have gotten the public option if the netroots had put more pressure on the Senate blue dogs. You don't have to live in their state to do that. If you can bitch about Obama on the internet then you can bitch about conservative Senate Democrats too.

[frylock]

38. no, i have several issues..

war, prosecution of war crimes, REAL healthcare reform, just to name a few.

still waiting for you to provide that example of obama pressuring blue dogs. take your time. i've got all day.

[Radical Activist]

39. I already gave you one.

Getting the blue dogs to vote for any HCR at all took pressure from Obama. I know people don't like to admit that but it's true. It wasn't an easy bill to pass.

Neither was financial reform, credit card rules, mortgage/lending industry reform, getting cap-and-trade through the House, and his pressure on the Senate to do the same. Obama has constantly pushed the blue dogs and if progressives want to be useful then we should be helping.

[frylock]

40. what do you mean "we should be helping?!"

i have never seen anything coming from you that would indicate that you're even REMOTELY progressive, let alone left-leaning. your screen name is a running joke around these parts! btw, that comic is truly fucking lame. not one bit of originality at all.

so meanwhile, you just admitted that dems provide the greatest hurdle for obama. and you wonder why people here are railing against dems rather than repubs? the repubs are fucking IRRELEVANT! the only people giving the right their cred is the milquetoast capitulating dem leadership.

[Radical Activist]

44. Short term memory?

I just wrote that we can help by putting pressure on the Senate. They're the problem so they should be the target. Whining about Obama all the time is counterproductive because the Senate is the roadblock we should be targeting. You do realize that not all Democrats are the same and that attacking Obama does nothing to help pressure the Senate blue dogs? It's not daddy Obama's job to pressure the Senate for us. It's the job of we, the people. Don't you know how to pressure politicians?

I often express very progressive opinions on issues. It's pretty sad that some people think I'm not progressive just because I defend a progressive President against weak, misleading spin at DU.

[frylock]

45. obama is NOT progressive..

i think the problem here is your definition of progressive differs greatly from, oh let's say just about everyone that's signifigantly left of what is now determined to be the center. and yes, it is "daddy Obama's" job to apply pressure to elected dems in congress, you know, like he pressured kucinich. you remember that? do you?? flew allllll the way to cleveland to do it. and if he REALLY did apply as much pressure to the blue dogs just to get them to sign onto this shit health insurance bailout act, then we've got a big problem. maybe he should have threatened withhold support for those blue dogs rather than happily endorsing them for reelection, no? moreover, what makes you think that people like myself AREN'T pressuring congress? how many fucking phone calls do i have to make before i come to the realization that my REPUBLICAN rep is not going to vote along with the dems?!! i understood that a long time ago. it would be nice if obama picked up on that as well. i heard that he's a pretty smart guy. i'm having my doubts.

i'd love to see the posts where you "often express very progressive opinions on issues." seriously.

[Radical Activist]

46. I think that you filter out information

that contradicts your narrative and biases about Obama. That's what it looks like in this thread since you're repeating talking points that I've already responded to two or three times.

Defining progressive...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=459671&mesg_id=459671

He has more progressive accomplishments than any President in at least two generations. If you're using a Marxist or European definition of progressive then I'll agree that he isn't that. He's progressive in terms of the American political spectrum.

[frylock]

47. oh good. it's time for the list..

being more progressive than any president in the last two generations does not make one progressive. we've been moved so far to the right that obama's "centrism" is now considered socialism! we need to tack HARD left! that's the CHANGE that i voted for.

what information am i "filtering out?" that obama is powerless to influence the dems in congress? bullshit! he does it ALL THE TIME! progressive in terms of the American political spectrum?! i suppose that's why a majority of people don't think the health care bailout bill went far enough. don't project your definition of what a progressive is on someone who is a fucking progressive. you're a centrist, plain and simple. here is where the center now lies in the "American political spectrum:"

<-----------------------------------|------------->

anyone who falls to the left of that center is now considered a moonbat crazy commie.

[Radical Activist]

48. You filter out the fact

that getting the conservative Senate to pass the major reforms which it has already passed required a great effort on Obama's part to push them left. And I know you'll call them worthless sell-out reforms so spare us all the talking points.
Obama is pushing the Senate left. Do you support him in that effort or not?

As I wrote, Obama is progressive by the standard American political spectrum. You wrote, "being more progressive than any president in the last two generations does not make one progressive." Well, actually yes, it does if you're operating under in existent planet earth definition of progressive. "The list" is also known as series of facts that refute your knee-jerk talking points.

[frylock]

50. well then lets just continue moving the existent planetary definition of progressive further right..

so that the next right-of-center president will look like fucking FDR. i'm out. btw, what is the existent planet earth definition for right these days? or left? or up? or down? or or?

[Radical Activist]

51. Thankfully, we have a President who's changing the trajectory of American politics.

Unlike Clinton, who simply compromised and/or accept conservative assumptions, Obama directly challenges conservative ideology on a regular basis. For example, his BP speech in which he strongly refuted the Reagan/Bush attitude about the relationship between government and business. Isn't it cool to have a President that uses an address from the Oval Office to spread progressive principles? Or is recognizing when Obama does something like that too challenging for you?

[JDPriestly]

25. The Blue Dogs, not the Republicans, were Obama's biggest impediment.

Absolutely true. It is really sad that the Blue Dogs don't vote with Democrats on controversial issues. It's part of their jobs to educate their voters about the issues. Blanche Lincoln, for example, does not have the ability to change people's hearts and minds. She is basically a very boring person. Doesn't inspire much of anything or anyone, in my opinion.

[JerseygirlCT]

36. DADT is one issue that I think is pretty clear

He blew it. He should have gotten into office, and the very next day, handed down an EO that it was no longer to be enforced. Period.

The bigots in the Dem party would quickly move on to other things. The GOP would holler and scream, but who cares?

He didn't have to weenie out on this one. He really didn't. Strategic mistake.

[XemaSab]

8. I read the whole thing

and it drives home a lot of what's frustrating about Obama.

Bush put forth a shitstorm for progressives that was VERY effective. One day the dude is cutting back family planning money, and the next day he's opening up the entire west for oil and gas drilling, and the next day he's opening Gitmo and pushing for the Patriot Act, and the next day he's implementing No Child Left Behind. And then he was getting up and speechifying about all kinds of other stuff, throwing red meat to the right wing. Literally every single day it was something different with that guy. It was an intentional policy to keep the left wing crippled. How do you fight something like that?

And it wasn't incremental stuff, or little stuff, this was shoving a radical agenda forward in large blocks. Much like the gulf oil spill, I think it's going to take decades to clean out the mess left by that administration.

Now we've got Obama up here carefully putting forward piecemeal bits of legislation that does move our country in the right direction, but the problem with this is threefold: it gives the right wing time to launch a counterattack, there's no sense of making progress on multiple fronts, and there's no effort to get the base inspired with a big vision.

I went and saw Bill Clinton back in '94. He had been president for two years, and he came out west in support of Kathleen Brown (sister of Jerry Brown and daughter of Willie Brown :P ) and other California democrats. He wasn't running for anything himself, but DAMN he gave a good speech on that day. I don't totally agree with the nickname "Slick Willie," but that dude could sell sand to a Bedouin.

We want to believe the best of elected Democrats, ya know? It's like a marriage. Maybe your husband has been working late for the last several months, and he comes home tired and cranky and you're starting to wonder if there's something going on, but the guy comes home with flowers and takes you out to a nice dinner and a lot is forgiven.

The part that makes Obama so frustrating is that he could get his base back in a week. But it seems like he's not even trying to make the effort to court us.

[Poll_Blind]

12. First, I agree- and thank you for posting. Second, WHY DOES HE...

...DO THIS SHIT? At his level this behavior is for a reason but...I gotta tell ya...I don't see any upside to it.


THIS:
"The part that makes Obama so frustrating is that he could get his base back in a week. But it seems like he's not even trying to make the effort to court us"

PB

[hulka38]

11. He may as well try the respect thing.

[mdmc]

14. ..

[Crystal Clarity]

16. Great article. Thanks for sharing. nt.

[TBF]

17. OK, just read it all.

I liked it more than I expected to. I'm a romantic at heart, so he just should have stopped with the part about his wife and kids getting to him, that was a perfect close. To come back and lecture progressives about not standing on the sidelines was unnecessary. Whomever sent him back in to say that should be fired.

But, yes, until that point it was a good interview, and I'm sure it does reflect what he deals with on a daily basis, and how he sees things.

[deaniac21]

20. That was one hard hitting interview, too!

[andym]

24. Very informative interview

with clear explanations of recent history.

[Kalun D]

26. TALK TALK TALK for the people

Walk Walk Walk for the banks and the corporations

""and that he has not been completely sold out but is trying to cope with reality while holding on to his values.""

Yeah, not completely sold out, he's just sold out like 90 percent

[old mark]

27. Thanks for the opportunity to read this article. It mostly made a lot os sense, but I have

seeveral problems with Mr. Obama's words...He states several times that many of the great accomplishments of his Administration have gone unnoticed...the Administration has done little or nothing to "sell" their own victories. Most people DO NOT live in rapt fascination of everything done in DC, despite what Washintgon believes - we have lives to live. You have great things to tell us, so please TELL US!

Second, the lecture to the Left was a gratuitous slap...another gratuitous slap...at the people who got him his job. I really have a few complaints about Obama's administration, and I intend to continue to make them known, but I NEVER had any intent to sit out the election. I have never missed an election in 42 years, and plan to vote Democratic till I'm dead. BUT...I want a little more real Democratic/Liberal/Progressive perspective to any coming legislation. The GOP won't ever stop being a negative bloc, and will never vote FOR anything, no matter what.

Why even respond to their side?

Let them die and rot on the vine, and go on without them. They are anti Americans and are not worthy of consideration.
Rec.
mark

[treestar]

56. The claim the left got his job for him is false

And there is no "slap."

I'm sick of the left claiming to be more important than the rest of the voters. That somehow they are owed. If you support a politician, it is downright corrupt to expect favors in return for votes. And it's only your vote you control. Enough with the claim that you knocked on some doors meant you personally get credit for those people's votes and you are owed.

[andym]

28. What's interesting is how little of the contents of this interview

are mainstream in the MSM or in the blogosphere. Is it because the Obama administration is just that bad at communication, or are there other salient reasons. Except for this thread and another on GDP, I do not hear people discussing the explanations that the President provides.

[clarence swinney]

30. FEEL GOOD PRESIDENT

He is a Professor. He loves Lecterns.
Bush went to speak to tightly controlled audiences.

Obama has blown it.

His many many speeches to a couple hundred is Preaching To The Choir.

They are Democrats. They will vote Democrat.

He missed using Press Conferences seen by Millions.
He missed using Oval Office Prime Time speeches seen by tens of millions.

He feels good daily doing it but RESULTS count.

Obama Goofed and it will cost our nation. and him.

[bobbolink]

32. Let me guess.... he said NOTHING about us poor folk, right?

He ignores us while he continues to shred the safety net, then expects HUGE voter turnout, is that right?

[scheming daemons]

34. You know, instead of the lazy snark... you could actually READ the interview

The OP provided a link.

[bobbolink]

37. "Lazy"... ah, yes... one of the code words for "professional left"

Sorry, it has been so overused that it has lost its sting.

Try again.

Maybe you can inflict a wound the next time.. .the kind of wound that will MAKE those you look down on vote.

:rofl:

[scheming daemons]

41. No... "Lazy" as in... too damn lazy to click the link the OP provided

[bobbolink]

43. Your projection.... and ugly snark.

If you want to find out why the Dems aren't doing so well, take a look in the mirror.

I'm sure it comes as a big surprise to the young ones, but this kind of ugly attack doesn't gain power.

So, have it .... other will see just how ugly you can get.

Bye now...

[scheming daemons]

54. You started this with snark about an interview you didn't bother to read

You jumped all over the President with a snarky post about an interview that you couldn't be bothered to click on.


There's ugliness here... but it started with you.

[bobbolink]

57. I said, "Let me guess... he said NOTHING about us poor folk, right?"

We poor people are ignored and called names and shit on right here on DU, and you call my question "snark"?

Wow.... talk about thin-skinned!

That is downright delusional.

[treestar]

55. What shredding of the safety net?

:wtf:

[Arkana]

33. This IS a really good interview.

It's nice to read his words without the media's filter.

[HuckleB]

35. Great interview with a president who has accomplished a great deal to date.

[yurbud]

42. there was a missed opportunity for a follow up question: once he realized GOP was set on obstruction

what did he do differently if anything?

What will he do differently on that front going forward?

[Admiral Loinpresser]

49. Very depressing.

Read the whole thing. Kudos to the interviewer who asked the most important questions. Of singular importance was his questioning on climate change.

The James Hansen question dealt with climate change as the primary moral imperative of our age. Obama tried to finesse the question because, IMO, his actions do not comport with such a view. He tried to give it great lip service while very subtly disagreeing that it is the most important moral issue of our times. His slip was showing on that one.

What I found more disgusting was that he adopted the meme of rear-guard Republican rhetoric:

“What I would agree with is that climate change has the potential to have devastating effects on people around the globe, and we've got to do something about it.”

Is Obama ignorant or disingenuous on this topic? Climate change is not a potential crisis, it is a very real catastrophe today. Two of the six continents are in crisis because of climate change. Antarctica is melting away and Africa is experiencing genocide, mass deaths, disease, drought, famine and vast refugee movements because the major African lakes are disappearing (some have already evaporated altogether). The African delegation was so insulted by the bullshit of Obama and other wealthy-nation leaders that they walked out at Copenhagen. One African famously responded to the offer of aid from wealthy nations: “That won’t be enough to pay for the coffins.” I hope Obama was just being disingenuous in his framing, rather than ignorant.

I must tip my hat to Obama on fuel efficiency standards. That’s one of the best things he’s done.

I wish the interviewer had asked: Mr. President, since Alexander the Great, how many global powers have successfully occupied Afghanistan?

On HCR I wish the interviewer had asked: Mr. President, is it constitutional to require citizens to buy a service which they can’t afford?

Also, since the health care segment of the stock market reacted favorably to your bill, do you think the market analysts believe health care industry profits will be higher due to HCR?

[zentrum]

52. The issue is that he didn't fight

......from day one in office. That's what he seems to not get. He appeared completely unprepared for how vicious the republicans would be though there's no excuse for not knowing that. He was absent during the entire first month of the health reform roll out--a power vacuum that allowed the tea baggers to take over the narrative and he's been on the defensive ever since. All avoidable if he had lead the democrats to stand firm, force filibusters and fight for the mandate he was given

The issue is not his ability to intelligently articulate policy --it's his appearance of cowardice and appeasement.

[Dr Morbius]

53. You obviously don't know what you're talking about.

Maria Callas was a goddess. She made me appreciate opera.
:)
Aside from that, I have no problems with your post; I even recommended it.

[pam4water]

58. Tell me when his words it up with some actions.