The Sorrow And The Self-Pity -- Krugman

[Donnachaidh]

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/12/08/the-sorrow-and-the-self-pity-2/?src=twt&twt=NytimesKrugman

There is a case for the tax cut deal, as the best of a very bad situation. But Obama did not help that case yesterday by lashing out at “purists”.

Leave aside the merits for a moment: what possible purpose does this kind of lashing out serve? Will activists be shamed into recovering their previous enthusiasm? Will Republicans stop their vicious attacks because Obama is lashing out to his left? It was pure self-indulgence; even if he feels aggrieved, he has to judge his words by their usefulness, not by his desire to vent. This isn’t about him.

And beyond that, who are these purists? Yes, a few people on the left refused to support health reform over the lack of a public option — but not many. To the extent that Obama has had trouble selling that plan, “purists” weren’t a factor; his own lack of effective messaging was.

On taxes: there might be more forgiveness now if Obama had shown any sign of fighting before now. A new article by Noam Scheiber confirms the impression I and others had that the administration really didn’t push Congress to take up the issue:

Within the administration, the split over whether to mount a tax-cut offensive broke down largely along wonk-operative lines. The wonks spent the last year mystified that the White House was ducking the fight when the substantive merits were so one-sided. The operatives brooded that the politics could abruptly turn against them, despite polling showing little public appetite for the upper-income cuts. “They view it through the class warfare stuff—Kerry in 2004, Gore in 2000,” says one administration official. “They worry that they’ll get painted as lefties, tax-raisers.”


More at the link ---

[Skittles]

1. purists = thinking people

[Supersedeas]

8. and yet thinking people are treated by the Whitehouse, by the President's fan club and by the Corp

Media the same way thinkers were treating during the Bush years -- just marginal, trivial principles getting in the way of progress for rich people.

Two Presidencies, same intellectual attitude, and the status quo remains.

Change you can believe in???

[Donnachaidh]

2. more from the article --

"What’s particularly striking is that Obama seems passionate about denouncing his progressive critics, even as he has nice words for the people who have spent two years trying to destroy him."

Nailed it.

[bobbolink]

15. Exactly spot on. Very well worded. And unspeakably sad.

Obama talks about leaving a burden for our children. What we are leaving is the destruction of what was left of our political system.

[OHdem10]

3. When you are governed by brown shirts, you might wish there

had been some purists.

[Laelth]

4. They worry that they'll get painted as lefties?

Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! They had better BE lefties, or they don't deserve my support.

There's a serious problem if they're worried about appearing to be exactly what the people want them to be--exactly what the people elected them to be. If we wanted Republicans, we would have voted for them.

-Laelth

[dennis4868]

5. So basically Obama...

should keep quiet and take the bashing he is getting from the left and not defend himself...WTF?

[frylock]

10. you don't get up in front of the cameras and berate the people who fucking elected you..

have you ever played sports? ever? if you have, then you know that you save that shit for the clubhouse. you do NOT, under ANY circumstance, give the other team ammo. this was fucking amateur hour. and if obama is butt hurt over the fact that people are criticizing his lame-ass policies, then he clearly is not cut out for the position.

[AndrewP]

14. +1

[bobbolink]

16. No, he should continue taking the bashing he is getting from the right, and lapping it up.

[myrna minx]

6. He can sneer at and loathe the Dem base all he wants, that's his prerogative.

He seems to be only interested in what the right wing has to say and has nothing but contempt for the people who voted for him. Once trust is lost, it's difficult to regain, and I no longer trust him.

[closeupready]

9. I don't either, frankly.

n/t

[frylock]

11. i don't beleive a damn thing he sez anymore..

does anyone believe anymore that he would have voted against IWR if he were in the senate at the time?

[closeupready]

7. He's an amateur, that's why he lashed out.

n/t

[frylock]

12. yep

[Poboy]

13. SINGLE PAYER is the 'purist' position. We only wanted a public option

that that was our compromise position. This man got up there yesterday and tried to beat us in the face over his strawman set up. He is full of shit.