Disqus - Latest Comments for Lit3Bolt

Re: Is He Kidding ?

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 19:45:52 -0000

Like the ability to build submarines, tanks, and fighter/bombers. Or not.

Re: Is He Kidding ?

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:39:00 -0000

"Seems the whole world will get it before us."

America: We Do the Right Thing Last

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:18:00 -0000

My comment was mainly aimed at Dr J, casualobserver, and DLS. I hate seeing the fermenting CW of "Ho-hum, Democrats overreached again and America said, No!" and people forgetting the pure obstruction of the Republicans, as if the Democrats acted in a vacuum.

Beyond that, big government is here to stay, along with the Imperial Presidency, and corruption in whichever party is currently in power. The only way I see to even begin touching those issues is a Third Constitutional Convention or another Civil War which I don't think will happen in my lifetime.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:19:09 -0000

Then why all the teasing from Obama about the public option? Why all the waffling? I don't get it.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:15:22 -0000

The Republicans were perfectly idle bystanders during this time?

I'm sorry, but I'm still seeing double standards. However, that aside, I think everyone can agree that there is no coherent strategy going on here on the Dem side of things and the onus is on Obama, hence the speech coming soon.

Also, I want a lot of you to take a look at yourselves and check the pure glee you're feeling at the Dems messing up. That's not a good thing, folks. I mean, if you're getting a thrill out of your political beliefs being reinforced, more power to you, but I thought we ALL agreed this country needed healthcare reform.

But apparently not. We just need a "correction" in Congress in 2010 so we can return to more urgent business, like increasing troop levels for ill-defined missions in Afghanistan and tax cuts. Yeah, that'll solve everything.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 02:06:04 -0000

What bell curve? You make reference to things that do not exist. And besides, you seem to assume this is a perfect bell curve, but lo and behold, bell curves can SKEW to one side or another.

As for extremists, I'm willing to call a spade a spade, and Van Jones is a spade...errr, extremist. But it proves Obama is a radical just as much as Michael Moore proved Saddam and Rumsfeld were secret lovers in Fahrenheit 9/11. And then to tie that into people (a large amount of people, let's be fair) who call for a public option, and paint them as "hard left" is dishonest. Being progressive on health care is not an "extreme" position, and if Obama throws them under the bus, well, turning on your base is always a super winning strategy.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Dr_J — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:40:45 -0000

"What exactly are the Progressives doing wrong? Fighting for what they believe in?"

Yes, exactly. With Democrats in control of both the White House and Congress, progressives in the legislature or the blogosphere or wherever have more influence and are under more pressure to get the job done. We have a tough job to do, one that affects billions of lives.

Unfortunately fighting for what you believe in—if that’s the only virtue you can claim—will get you fired from every job on the planet, from plumber to pope. Jobs have requirements, and running the country requires finding and selling solutions to all sorts of social, political and economic problems. Though progressives embody the best intentions and brim with solutions to social problems, they’re failing to find and sell the needed solutions to the other two. They're consequently feeling their agenda stall and their influence recede.

Re: Dying for Health Care

SteveK — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:46:58 -0000

Lit3Bolt wrote: "Only poor people want government run healthcare, Kathy."

What a strange thing to say. You're joking... right?

Universal health care is ** wanted ** and enjoyed by ALL citizens in:

Americas
- Brazil
- Canada
- Colombia
- Mexico
- Peru
- Trinidad and Tobago
Asia
- Bhutan
- People's Republic of China
- Hong Kong SAR
- India
- Israel
- Singapore
- Taiwan (Republic of China)
- Thailand
Europe
- Austria
- Finland
- Germany
- Ireland
- Netherlands
- United Kingdom
- - England
- - Northern Ireland
- - Scotland
- - Wales
Australia
New Zealand

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_health_care

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

CStanley — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:31:13 -0000

Oh, I definitely agree that there's no moderate consensus, Litbolt, but there still are a huge number of people who fall within the middle part of the bell curve and much smaller numbers who fall to the extreme left or right. Those on the far edges have to understand that no matter how strongly they hold their beliefs, they'll have to convince a large enough portion of the mainstream to go along with them in order to build consensus.

I figured you might come back with a comment like this one which basically questions who falls into the extremes- but I was reacting to your original statement where you called these people the 'hard left'- and in doing so you automaticallly defined them as the extremists on that side.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

CStanley — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:25:56 -0000

Plus, if this past summer is what things look like with Congress in charge, then more power to the Presidency.
Indeed.

I don't think the president should write the legislation either, but there is a sense that he should be working with his party in Congress to pass something along the lines of what his mandate showed to be the majority will of the people of the entire country, as opposed to the individual Congressional districts or states that the legislators represent.

And at the very least, there's a sense that the president should know and understand the different versions of policy that are being debated in Congress, and to the extent that his party in Congress asked for him to go in front of the people to sell the bills they were writing he should have either endorsed one version or another. His speeches and Q&As have done more to obfuscate than to shed light on the debate- he repeats broad talking points that could be seen as supporting one version or another, without committing to any specifics. And mainly he falls back on the old standby lines about how the status quo is unsustainable and gives false assertions that those who oppose these plans are supporting the status quo or have no solutions of their own to offer.

Re: How Do Dumb Things Happen ?

Almoderate — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:03:43 -0000

"(why DIDN'T they release the text beforehand is a valid question)"

It was released beforehand. Whether or not folks decided to take the time to read it is completely up to them.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 18:00:35 -0000

In politics, the perception is often the reality. Presidents don't control the economy, or gas prices, yet get blamed for that. Presidents declare war without Congress and are vastly powerful. To deny that is to deny reality, and to refuse to use power is just as consequential as using it.

I don't like it either, but if he doesn't use his power, he'll be damned, and if he does he may still be damned but at least he can affect the world around him. No US President can afford to be a mere figurehead anymore. Plus, if this past summer is what things look like with Congress in charge, then more power to the Presidency.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

tidbits — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:37:14 -0000

Lit3 - Your comment is very well taken.

One of the problems with "Obama being Obama" is that he does not, or does not show, clear and defined directions to his party or to the country. He was elected as the calm, intelligent mediator of ideas. Good campaign tactic; maybe not so hot as a governance model. See my prior comments to other posts on Obama as the ultimately electable candidate who lacks the experience/toughness to govern effectively.

In a very real sense, I believe he is being himself, sorting through ideas, letting others write the legislation, while he tries to "sell' broad ideas as a delegating (almost figure head) leader.

Re: How Do Dumb Things Happen ?

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:36:31 -0000

Problem is, no one has a clearly defined idea of what a Vice-President (or a First Lady, for that matter) should actually do outside of the very limited defined duties. But you're right that there's two schools of thought on the Vice-Presidency: one views it as a training ground for future Presidents, while the other sees it as the place where political careers come to die. Wonder which it is with Biden? lol

Re: Wall Street’s Odds-on-Death Panels

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:30:20 -0000

DLS, I'm waiting for you to denounce Republicans for their support of Medicare. Don't worry, I'll wait.

Re: Dying for Health Care

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:28:40 -0000

Only poor people want government run healthcare, Kathy.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:19:01 -0000

So then why hasn't Obama endorsed Wyden-Bennett, for example? His refusal to clearly support anything is what's making people jumpy, and he looks like he's unable to control his own party, be they Blue Dogs or progressives.

I agree everyone's wondering who the real Obama is. Maybe tomorrow will clarify things.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 17:06:55 -0000

Ok, now we're getting somewhere. I'm objecting to laying this all at the feet of progressives and the hard left. I mean, you can't have it both ways, where progressives are mind-controlling Obama but are also a powerless faction that can and should be brushed aside. It's not that simple for Obama, and maybe we need to wake up and cut the man a wee bit of slack. By and large, he is a moderate politician, and I don't think you and others were fooled by that. However, the Democratic party establishment outweighs him in experience and connections still, despite all he's done for the Democratic party, and may be seen in some circles as Bush was to Republicans, as a useful idiot. He obviously as a Congressional scholar doesn't believe in using the Presidency as a club to get his way ALL the time as Bush did (Congress was so afraid of Bush after 9/11 he could ask for the moon and get it). He's also not as politically powerful as people like to believe, you only get that kind of power from terrorist attacks or decades in Washington. So Obama, to put it bluntly, is in a very tight spot and is finding he can't speech his way out of it and win, and his political judo tactics don't work on his fellow Dems.

Bottom line is, yes Obama does owe something to progressives, but no, I don't think your fears are going to be justified and Obama is going to veer "hard left."

If this is more of a referendum on the healthcare debate, I agree with you, Congressional behavior has just been flat out awful, and that goes for both Dems and Reps. Obama, in an ideal world, should set his foot down on some necks, but I don't see Pelosi and Reed as out of control, they just have political tin ears. I don't see how staying out of healthcare debate as helped Obama "avoid the mistakes of Clinton." That's a bit of CW that is suspect.

Finally, Van Jones and progressive defense of him seems rather minimal and limited to the blogs. I see him more as a further example that the Obama team cannot vet staffers to save their lives. To use him as evidence of Obama's judgment just plays into that political guilt by association game I thought we were all tired of, and if we're going to play it, let's play fair and demand no Republican staffers be "birthers" or "Trotskyites" (who became the neocons). Besides, the guy got sacked...what more do you want, or can Obama do?

So instead of "Progressives are Ruining Obama's Presidency" I think your headline really needs to be "I don't know what Obama believes in and I'm afraid it's more leftist than I thought." That's an opinion I can understand and empathize with.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:39:35 -0000

The thing is, left, right, moderate, liberal and conservative have been so chewed up as to be meaningless. What is the "mainstream?" Define it for me. Is it what "moderates" believe? Or independents? Or the Village? Or the MSM? Or is it the CW? Everyone insists they are the gatekeeper to the Mainstream; everyone insists that a moderate course is the best course. There is no evidence to back up these claims.

If there is no liberal consensus, then I would argue strongly that there is no mainstream consensus either.

Re: How Do Dumb Things Happen ?

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:28:07 -0000

Remember McCain had an awful primary campaign. He was being written off 18 months before the Presidential election, and emerged only because Romney and Huckabee split the various Republican factions. Besides, there was always a sense that the 2008 Republican candidate was a shoo-in sacrificial lamb, and not many serious people were competing for that honor. Then there were McCain's antics during the debates and "suspending" his campaign. Also, McCain downplayed his bipartisanship and veered sharply right. So maybe I need to adjust my analysis: during the Dem primary, Obama was the exciting black candidate, and he shifted chameleon-like during the general election and did little but allow McCain-Palin to implode. Compared to McCain-Palin, Obama seemed safe, and I think that's pretty solid CW.

Also, I disagree with your points that his inexperience is unprecedented and that Vice Presidential choices do not matter. However, I agree that Obama's politics concern everyone now because only he seems to know what the they are.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

DLL83 — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:11:42 -0000

". . .what exactly are the Progressives doing wrong?"

Now that's a much better approach.

Well thought-out comment, some good points here. Good food for thought. If I get the time I might respond more.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Polimom — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:08:36 -0000

Lit3, I definitely agree that Obama has to pick up his game pieces and start to play. But I'm coming from the perspective of someone who voted for Obama but hoped the Dems would *not* take majorities... because I, like MANY people, was concerned about the Dem leadership and the strength of the direction they might tack together.

I don't know whether you were watching or participating in discussions at the time, but there was a LOT of debate and concern about the risks of combining Pelosi et al with Obama. Obama was much less known; there were no illusions anywhere about how far to the left some of the Dems are. And that ties right into the Van Jones bit. He's not anywhere near mainstream, politically -- yet he's seen as "normal" by progressives. Did his appointment mean that we from the middle therefore read Obama altogether wrong?

Perhaps I and others misread Obama altogether -- but I haven't given up yet. When I do, you can bet I'll write a post along much different lines.

"There also has to be put up or shut up moments based on the ideals and campaign promises Obama has made. Also, every effort has been made to include Republicans in a meaningful healthcare debate. If reconciliation is used for the healthcare bill, well, boo hoo."

At the risk of ticking you off beyond any hope of discussion, I'd like to point out that saying, "public option or bust, buddy" is hardly an inclusive approach. It does seem to be the preferred tactic, though, by those I've cited in my post, including the organized 'roots and the Dem leadership (who evidently didn't get the memo about using the term liberal, btw).

And as to the ramifications of reconciliation? I guess we'll just have to let that one play out to see if I'm right about the scale of the backlash if they do it.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

CStanley — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 16:02:34 -0000

hard left views are not mainstream (no evidence for this, just blanket assertion; hard right views are not mainstream, ergo, hard left views are not either).

I don't see why anyone would need to provide evidence of this. By definition and according to an understanding of a bell curve, anyone who is 'hard' to one side or the other is not in the mainstream.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:44:34 -0000

Good stuff pacatrue. What would also have been better, much better, is to divide healthcare into chunks rather than some massive uber God-bill. I also agree with the conservatives that when someone wants to pass something through in a massive, unread, written-after-the-fact bill, someone is getting screwed, and that someone is in all likelihood the American people.

Above and beyond all else, this is on Obama. The progressives are only one side, one faction of things, and to demonize them and claim they are irrelevant and not mainstream is foolish, IMO.

Re: Progressives are Killing Obama’s Presidency

Lit3Bolt — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 15:37:10 -0000

I apologize, to both you and Polimom, I'm allowing my own frustration to show through.

I mean, what exactly are the Progressives doing wrong? Fighting for what they believe in? There is plenty of consensus in liberal policy. What there doesn't seem to be any consensus about is what Obama thinks and actually believes in. And Polimom's evidence is atrocious. Somehow, a post at Firedoglake about Van Jones and a WSJ editorial belching Rightwing platitudes is evidence that Progressives are Killing Obama's Presidency (I think he's doing a fine job of that on his own) and hard left views are not mainstream (no evidence for this, just blanket assertion; hard right views are not mainstream, ergo, hard left views are not either). As tomjoyce pointed out, get rid of all the government programs and spending and give them back as tax breaks and vouchers and we'll see how conservative America really is. Also, the poll Polimom cites uses the dreaded word "liberal," which is still apparently a dirty word, a word no serious people in politics want to be associated with.

And to say "America" voted for Obama and that's who he should represent is meaningless. Little more than half the country voted for Obama, and no one knocked on more doors, gave more money they could ill afford, and yelled louder than progressives. And now, all of the sudden, the consensus is that Obama should ignore the Left and ignore his base at all costs if he wants to keep control of his Presidency? That's Beltway-speak. I simply cannot recall an instance Bush was treated the same way; even during Terry Schivo, the backlash only happened after the fact and the media was slow in picking it up.

Polimom's advice is fine from a pure political perspective, but many progressives did not vote for Obama merely to grant Dems political power. There also has to be put up or shut up moments based on the ideals and campaign promises Obama has made. Also, every effort has been made to include Republicans in a meaningful healthcare debate. If reconciliation is used for the healthcare bill, well, boo hoo. It has a long history of being used before and it will be used again. The tyranny of the minority works out great in practice; just ask California. This article trots out the "hard left" as a convenient softball target and amusing boogeyman; you could just as easily say the Blue Dogs are ruining Obama's presidency and be just as right.

What I think is much more accurate and less demonizing of the left is that Obama is killing Obama's presidency, as well as a lack of Democratic consensus. The Democrats need to compromise with themselves, not the Republicans. Obama could use his office as he did almost immediately after being elected for such things as the Stimulus package, war spending, and bank bailout bill, but he has not done so because he doesn't want to make the "mistakes of Clinton." Well fine, he's just making mistakes all on his own then.