Obama is a "Process Liberal" -- Why He MUST ask Holder to Resign (Michael Tomasky)

[KoKo]

Obama Should Ask Holder to Resign
by Michael Tomasky May 14, 2013 9:13 AM EDT

Barack Obama is a process liberal. A law and social-science liberal (much more, it has always seemed, than an economics liberal). If he’d never gone into politics, he’d be a law professor, as he was; and, I’m guessing, after a certain number of years, chairman of the board of a major Chicago foundation. And if the CEO of the foundation in question did something wrong and needed to be relieved of his post, Obama would let the process play out, even if it took two years, which, in foundation-world, is about how long these things take.

So now we have this situation involving the Justice Department and the Associated Press, news of which broke last night. DoJ, after presumably subpoenaing phone companies, obtained logs of outgoing calls (numbers called only—there was no wiretapping) made by some AP reporters and editors involved in producing a story that appeared in May 2012 about how a plot by a Yemeni terrorist to bomb an airliner was foiled.AP actually held the story for a few days at the time at the administration’s request, and then published only when it got the green light. But even so, the administration wanted to know who AP’s source was. And so the subpoena—extremely far-reaching as these things go, and possibly sought in violation of the guidelines governing such action.

Well, this is a big deal. This one isn’t ginned up by Republicans. Oh, they’re bound to start in on it today. They’re total hypocrites as usual. First, they’ve wanted Obama to be tougher on leakers, not more lax. And second, if this had been George W. Bush’s Justice Department, by and large I’d imagine most conservative would be saying, “Good! To hell with those sissies at AP. This is national security.”

But their hypocrisy isn’t the main story here. On this one, the administration’s is. For a journalist, I’m not a very good First Amendment absolutist. As the guy who wrote just a week ago that there are no absolute rights (I was writing about the Second Amendment), I realize it would be dodgy of me to carve out an exemption for the First just because I’m a journalist and such an exemption might benefit me. So I recognize that there are times when journalists might have to reveal sources—when a person’s life is at stake, say, and others. And remember, the Supreme Court has never recognized a journalist’s right to protect source confidentiality. But even with all that, it’s pretty clear that Obama has been waging a secret war and then pursuing journalists trying to dig into it with more zeal than even the Bush administration did. And it’s an extra irony that Mr. Process Liberal is presiding over all this.

So what’s he going to do now? I think we can predict. He’s going to stand by Eric Holder for now and let some interminable process play out. Just like he’s going to let some lengthy process play out at the IRS.

MORE of this read which is an important caution about "Drip, Drip, Drip" at:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/05/14/obama-should-ask-holder-to-resign.html

[MjolnirTime]

1. Hey what do you know, Koko, the Obamaphobe, wants Holder to resign!

How utterly unexpected!!

[KoKo]

3. Since when is Tomasky an "Obamaphobe?"

His Bio sure doesn't seem to show that. If anything Tomasky is trying help Obama out...showing that acting "slowly waiting for process to play out" could be dangerous for his administration.

Tomasky doesn't want Obama to fail...but, he wants Obama to get out of his "Process Mode of his Personality" and nip this in the bud before we get the "Drip, Drip, Drip" of scandals that have harmed other Presidents.

[MjolnirTime]

7. I said Koko was an Obamaphobe. And I'm right.

[KoKo]

8. I'm an Old School Democrat...for your information.

Did you bother to read the article?

[truedelphi]

2. You know what? I don't care what type of Process Foundation Head

Obama might have been. And using the word "liberal" in the same sentence with the name of the man who gave the Financial World, the Big Agri Famine Food World of Mosnanto and Novartis, the War on Some Drugs, Big Pharma, Big Privatization of Prison world so much in such a little time, I am also tired of hearing, "Well the Republicans would have done the same thing."

I don't vote for Democratic candidates to watch them do the same things Republicans might have done.


I mean, why vote if we are going to end up with the same friggin thing? (Except for Gay Marriage.) I am totally sick of being corralled into a narrow little chute of political reality, and a reality from which the powerful and rich get more power and more wealth while the rest of us are reduced to pauper status.

[KoKo]

9. I've heard Obama described as a "Pragmatist,Cautious Deliberate Thinker, Master Chess

Last edited Tue May 14, 2013, 06:32 PM - Edit history (1)

and Poker Player"....but, in all my questioning about Obama's "turn around" after his Election the First Time and now The Second Time.....I felt that Tomaksy nailed it as to what had me wondering "Who is Obama ...the man I voted for who ended up not being what I thought I had voted for.

Thomasky's well thought out description of Obama as a "Process Liberal" was a break through in my understanding of who he is and why he's done the laundry list of stuff that Bush did that we hated...but once Obama continued it...we were supposed to fall in line and Praise Him.

If you read the whole article I linked it will give you better perspective than the "Snips" I was limited to by Copyright Law to post here on DU. Taking what I posted out of context because of a "quick read" and maybe "pre-judging" my views might have made you post what you did.

Just read the FKING article...and see what YOU THINK about the read and not your view of ME... I am wanting Obama to Succeed...and that's why Tomasky's article is a good read, and good advice.

[truedelphi]

17. I didn'tmean to sound like I was attacking you.

There are plenty of people on this board that I view with enough disdain that I don't read their OP's or bother with their remarks should they reply to me. Sorry if I left room for you to think my attack was meant at you.

I did get through a few of the paragraphs that are part of the entire article, at your link. And it strikes me that "process liberal" is just a clever and fancy-pantsy way of saying someone is a bureaucrat.

But it is clear to me that Obama is not simply a bureaucrat. Rather he has an agenda, and when it serves him to do so, he will carefully find a way to frame his policies in the "higher ground." For instance, after he was elected, he suddenly "knew" about medical marijuana. (Back in early 2008, he claimed he didn't know enough to make any remarks on the subject , but would consult those whose views were more expert on the matter.) So now he declares that has taken the high ground with regards to medical marijuana, that med marijuana is marijuana, and marijuana is a "public health issue." In other words, he is only letting his DOJ go after the medical marijuana clinics and dispensaries here in California for our own good.

But the flip side of this marijuana issue is that when HSBC got caught laundering tens of billions of dollars of money for the violent drug cartels, Obama certainly did not venture forth and talk about a "public health issue." For every dispensary he closes down, he is giving elbow room for the violent cartels to regain the sales the semi legalization of dope here in the Golden State had tamped down. Before the dispensaries were up and running, and people could obtain cards to leggally (according to state laws) grow the stuff, we had a huge problem with the cartels.

members of the big cartels would actually kidnap newly arrived indigent undocumented men and transport them off to the middle of one of the National or State forests. And then that person would be forced to be a gardener for the cartel, with the threat of the cartel killing off his family if the "gardener" didn't do as he was told. He is left in the middle of an immense tract of uninhabited land, with just the groceries they cartel members occasionally drop off for him. And know something? A lot of these schmucks ended up being killed after their service was over - so all their gardening got for them was some bags of doritos and soda pop, followed by death. That is what Obama is bringing back!

In other words, if he was simply a bureaucrat, then at least some of the times his "bureaucratically" anal processing might let him and/or those around him arrive at true solutions. But instead we have all these shitty policies, and a thinking person has to start suspecting at some point that there was an agenda. After his first election, we watched the man immediately appoint of Geithner, and leave Bernanke in place, (and later on, of course, the re-appointment of Bernanke), amd the philosophy o those two men has allowed 15 to 16 trillions of dollars go off as "loans" to the coffers of the Big Financial Firms, with some 4.7 trillions never being repaid. You are on the hook for that money; so am I, and it is enough of a debt that Social Security will be looted for it, and our grandkids will be paying. Obama has let Geithner establish a "Geithner doctrine" that states in trouble can't be offered loans - only Big Financial firms get those. Yes only the military and the nuke industry deserve big time, multi-billions of dollas of loans.!

For me, just watching him on TV, he has become more and more Nixonian. He possesses that same manner of talking, that same inflection and that phrasing of, "Let me respond to that with this" kind of duplicity, and he can never say, "Well, you have a good point."

My conclusion is I don't really care what makes Obama tick. His actions show me he is either as corrupt as all of those people he has surrounded himself with, from Geithner to Mike Taylor, to Jack Lew, or else he continually and totally misjudges character, and also totally misjudges the meanings of policies that are being created, which means the man is beyond incompetent. But I tend to think he is just corrupt. (Occam's razor.)

[tularetom]

4. Process schmocess, he isn't any kind of "liberal" at all

He's a pragmatist centrist non wave making politician more interested in the office itself (and the doors that it will open for him post presidency) than in actual governance.

[dennis4868]

5. I don't understand how Tomasky can say this

First of all, he doesn't know all the facts. How can he? Does he know all the facts and circumstances behind the subpoena for the medical records. Also, Holder recused himself from this case. Tomasky likes to yell fire when it is not warranted.

[KoKo]

10. lol's.

[Samantha]

11. I don't understand either

unless he is going after him because a lot of press is angry over the AP issue. But I don't understand why he defines him as a Process Liberal either. Looking at the history of President Obama's performance, I just don't see that.

Holder was first interviewed by the FBI and recused himself because of that interview. The decision to proceed came from some very reputable District Attorney, supervised by an assistant DOJ (I think) Attorney General. And that person, whatever his title, gave the go-ahead for the tap. But all of the facts have not come out yet about the terrorist attack and they might not ever since they might be classified. How does Tomasky pretend he even knows these facts -- he can't.

I agree with President Obama's statement on the Benghazi issue that there is no there there. It is all political. And so I think it is. I have thought that all along.

The IRS scandal also has facts yet to be revealed. But when this story broke originally in 2010 about all the Tea Party political entities applying for a tax exemption, I remembered the outrage here about all of the outright lying about no participating in politics. Of course they were simply avoiding paying taxes and they were solely political. Specifically, people at DU discussed Rove's organization and demanded an investigation.

But another announcer said in 2010 there was an overabundance of Tea Party Organizations forming and claiming to be charitable organizations, so it stands to reason the Tea Party would be investigated more because there were simply MORE applications. And the taxpayer foots the bill for their expenses. Likewise, that commentator said President Obama's main fundraising entity had the same classification -- charitable organization! If that latter point turns out to be true and someone complains about that and that the taxpayers sponsored it financially, I certainly would understand their complaints but I have no facts on that issue at this time.

Sam

[ProSense]

6. Nothing

"Obama is a "Process Liberal" -- Why He MUST ask Holder to Resign "

...in the piece explains why Holder should resign over this incident given all the details known to date. People are making demands before all the facts are known.

Hypocrisy: "Republicans accused the administration of deliberately leaking classified information"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022840983

Michael Isikoff: Holder interviewed in DOJ investigation
Posted here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022842030

Holder: ‘This Was A Very Serious Leak’
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022842283

DOJ Defends Subpoenas To AP: We’re Enforcing The Law
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022842962

[apples and oranges]

12. Sure. The guy who fought GOP voter disenfranchisement attempts in 2012

should resign because republicans and fake liberals say so.

[KoKo]

13. Who are you talking about...your post didn't say?

[otohara]

14. Talking Heads Opinions

fuck them, let's get some facts before setting our hair on fire.

[MetasticTwine]

15. What a crock of BS

Holder CANNOT be required to resign over it.

First, it was 100% wihtin the bounds of the law.

Second, Holder recused himself and thus had no knowledge or responsibility for the 100% legal subpoenas.

[KoKo]

16. The Point Tomasky is Making is that Obama needs to be Agressive on this or RW

will Run with it...and the "Drip, Drip" of news with a RW Repug Base fighting against you..means you will be overwhelmed and weakened as a President.

Since Obama is newly into his Second Term ..whatever Changes he hopes to make for his Legacy for Dem Party going into the Future could be Brought Down ..if he doesn't tackle this "latest" and come down HARD.