The Real Obama Betrayal - Jesse Lava/HuffPo

[WillyT]

The Real Obama Betrayal
Jesse Lava - Director, criminal justice campaign at Brave New Foundation - HuffPo
Posted: 8/30/11 10:54 AM ET

<snip>

Has Barack Obama betrayed the progressives who supported him in the 2008 election cycle?

Lefties have been outraged about Obama's repeated lunges to the right -- on the budget, on war, on the rule of law. Yet to hear pundits' tut-tutting response, you'd think these critics are naïfs.

In Politico, former administration official Sean Smith said Obama was never going to be a "left-wing Reagan" and is "governing exactly as he said he would": through pragmatic problem-solving rather than confrontation. On Charlie Rose, Fareed Zakaria of Newsweek snickered that Obama's critics are gripped by "some kind of fantasy version of liberalism where a Democratic president comes in and America becomes, I don't know, Sweden... That's certainly not where Barack Obama is politically." Even The American Prospect's Paul Waldman says "no one who was paying attention in 2007 and 2008 can say that the Obama they got wasn't the one they should have expected" given Obama's belief that if "you bring everyone together, hear their concerns, and treat them respectfully, you can arrive at policy solutions together."

So why did so many idealistic progressives pick a candidate who has turned out to govern as a moderate conservative, according to former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett? Did Obama pretend to be something he wasn't? Or were progressives just too starry eyed about this charismatic candidate to see the plain truth?

In reality, Obama did betray progressives, but not, technically, by concealing his true identity. He did it by pretending to be more than that identity.

<snip>

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-lava/the-real-obama-betrayal_b_937537.html

:shrug:

[Skittles]

1. anyone who paid attention is not surprised

disappointed and disgusted, but not surprised

[Jackpine Radical]

3. And I was paying attention.

I picked him over Hillary in the Primary, but I was unhappy with both choices.

[tblue]

22. I could have gone either way. It was a coin toss cuz

neither was progressive enough for my taste. But I was never taken in by the "Hope & Change" slogans. I kept asking, "What's he mean 'change'?" I never thought he really answered that. And I think a lot of people projected their dreams onto him and, of course, he seemed content to let them but plausible deniability was I guess preserved.

[mike_c]

10. yup-- Obama is the first reason I did not vote democratic party in 2008....

Hillary Clinton is the second.

[DFab420]

2. Lol wow so Huffington Post points out that a candidate tends to shine more then an actual Presidency

Shocking I tell you.. SHOCKING!

Thank god we have such amazing journalists at the Huffington Post who can make such amazing and compelling discoveries about the inner workings of American politics..

:eyeroll:

[WillyT]

6. LOL !!! - And Will You Be Shocked As Well... If Many People Decide Not To Vote Next November ???

Laugh all you want, but I believe there are already many here who won't (or at least won't vote for Obama), I know many both at work and around town who won't, and who knows about the public in general.

And all of these people I'm referring to, voted for Obama in 2008.

I'm pretty sure I'll probably go into the booth and hold my nose and give him my vote, but the only reason I can't tell you I will for sure... is there a looong time between now and November 2012.

We'll see, huh?

:shrug:

[DFab420]

11. Yea because the best way to punish a politcian is to not vote for him!! THat will teach him a lesson

I'm sure when he isn't re-elected all the smarmy self righteous "liberals" will be so proud of themselves for sitting on their hands as we hand to country back over to the GOP...

It's a brilliant idea really.


..

No offense but people who pout and say they are taking their votes and going home have no right to even enter the public discourse anymore. If they want to be petty let them be petty.

[SammyWinstonJack]

14. 'smarmy self-righteous "liberals"?'

:wtf:

[DFab420]

16. I put liberals in quotes cause I would like to believe liberals never stay home.

And am willing to say those who do aren't really "liberals"

they just have liberal opinions

[WillyT]

17. Yeah... These Are The Guys That Want Our Votes

:banghead:

:shrug:

[Bluebear]

19. The new GOTV strategy for the centeists

Insult and demean

[WillyT]

15. Well... When You Go From "Hope & Change", "Fired Up, Ready To Go!" To...

"It Could Be Worse".

You tend to lose a lot of folks.

It ain't so much "punishing a politician", as it is giving upon the system.

:shrug:

[tblue]

23. Wait. WHO is handing the country "back over to the GOP"?

That would be the Democrats who roll over. That's who empowers the Repubs. Not fighting liberals.who hold the line and are quite possibly the only thing keeping this country from turning further right until it falls off the earth. And those who stand back and let this rollover continue, they are not helping. Sorry.

Look at Wisconsin. The Democrats EVEN AS A MINORITY did not back down. Thank God the national party didn't push them to act like Washington Dems. I'm pretty sure they wouldn't listen anyway.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sabrina 1]

45. 'smarmy self righteous "liberals"?

And this is your campaign strategy to get this President re-elected?

I will know who to blame if a Republican wins the WH. Thanks for exhibit A.

From I get from your post is that Obama doesn't need those 'smarmy liberals' who helped get him elected last time.

In that case, who is going to replace them? Republicans?

[Bluebear]

8. Duh

[WhiteTara]

4. Here's what I know

We are in the midst of economic meltdown, societal meltdown, environmental meltdown and it's easy to throw stones rather than get out and work in the party and push the pukes with your weight their. Everyone has a little rock and even if they are throwing with all their might, but little rocks don't do much. A big rock cemented together from all the the little rocks rolls much further down the hill and when it hits the target, it rolls right over it.

So, my friend, did you register anyone to vote today? Do you carry forms with you? Did you set up a political action and get your phone tree working? Let's do something positive instead of just throwing little rocks around the room.
:rant:

[zalinda]

42. Why, so htey can be insulted and/or ignored more?

Rahm prevented anti-war dems to run in 2006, how do we know that that isn't happening again? Yes, he's in Chicago, but what if his stink still lingers? All I've seen is insults or threats against people who aren't happy with Obama. This is really a great strategy. And then Obama supporters wonder why they don't want to man the phones, GOTV or go house to house? Why should they? Because the repubs are worse? Because everything will change when Obama gets a second term? Because they have no where else to go?

Yeah, right. The left have been treated like the abused wife, who gets beat up daily and then her 'honey' demands a blowjob.

zalinda

[WhiteTara]

43. Well, I don't think you know what beat up is.

Lose the WH and the pukes control the purse strings in the House and it is game over. We are so self centered that we don't see a larger picture. The attitude is whiny and with a sense of entitlement. I want what I want and I want it right now.

Go study the civil rights/women's struggle and see if you want to go back to before that hard fought and only partially won epic tale. The struggle doesn't end in one election season, or a decade. There is no final bout and we win. This is a path. Evil is everywhere and very strong. Virtue is weak and must constantly be cultivated or it withers and dies.

I've been involved in politics as an activist and a party member for over 40 years. Trust me, you won't be insulted or ignored by your local candidate. S/He needs your help and dollars. This is where the real power builds. You have to work on the local level. I know it isn't as sexy as DC politics, but this is where the candidates begin. Work for them, make sure they are working for you. We need to take back the House and hold the Senate. Please don't have a fit and take your ball and go home. We need players.

If you can't work for the president, for the world's sake, work for the school board member who believes in science. The Mayor who wants to sign the Peace petition. The state Assembly member and state Senator. Work for the national Congressional Rep and Senator. The presidency isn't the only egg in the basket and they all need to be nurtured to hatch.

The price of freedom in ever vigilance. (paraphrased from one of our country's founders)

So, brush yourself off, get a thick skin (politics requires that) and fight for what you believe in.

[zalinda]

44. I know what it's like to be beat up, believe me

I had an abusive father, an abusive boyfriend and then an abusive husband. It is the same sort of cycle with the dem party. Hey, elect him again and this time he won't vote to fund the war. Or, this time he will vote for the COLA. Or, this time he will fight for a REAL jobs program.

I'm living on $711 a month, my body is racked with pain, all the time between the Fibromyalgia and the Arthritis. My son can't find a job, so he's living with me. He has his own physical problems, probably because of the alcohol is father consumed, plus his genetic flaw of producing premature babies. (He blamed me for the prematurity, until his third wife produced 2 preemies from him after having 5 normal births with her first husband.) There are only a few jobs that my son can physically do, and the majority of them have been outsourced. Yea, Obama wants 3 more free trade agreements.

Every day is an uphill battle just to survive. All my life I've been fiercely independent, but my family has been reduced to food stamps and food banks. I can't even remember when I've bought anything (other than food) from a real store, as thrift stores or dollar stores are the only place I can afford.

While people like me, and people worse off than me, are barely hanging on, Obama has a lackadaisical attitude about creating real jobs, or getting the rich to contribute to the debt of this country. And, the wars? Hey, wasn't he supposed to the the anti-war President? Every day the wars continue, rich people not only make more money, but they are putting there foot on the necks of the poor. I'm not sure who is luckier, those who are under the rich people rule, or those who have been killed.

zalinda

[WhiteTara]

46. Zalinda,

I'm sorry for your pain and your suffering. I wish there was something I could do to help you personally, but that doesn't really seem possible. So, I'll work on finding a good person in my district to try and represent us all. I know that this is no comfort in this moment and I am sorry for that too. I wish you well and hope that your life will get better.
:hug:

[zalinda]

49. Thank you. n/t

[Rex]

5. I knew exactly what I was voting for, I've never had any delusions about

the POTUS like so many around here that sniff the vapors he walks on. That being said, he still gets ALL the support from the dismayed here which cost him nothing but internet traffic. Meanwhile the GOP wants him to start sacrificing elderly people on a public alter every hour. The difference is night and day.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. Obama ran as a centrist Democrat, but he went

Hard right from there. His views on entitlements and war are now to the right of most Republicans, and he's gone back on dozens of campaign pledges, without apologizing or even trying.

[NV Whino]

9. Well...

"So why did so many idealistic progressives pick a candidate who has turned out to govern as a moderate conservative, according to former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett? "

We had no choice. Any progressive or liberal candidate was sidelined by the dems and the media. I knew what we were getting, but frankly, he has not even lived up to my very low expectations.

[peacebird]

13. "lesser of 2 evils" is a hard slog to sell in this economy... he is better than any of the R's

by far, but he's still so far short of what we need.

[Me.]

12. +1

Though I'm sure you'll find yourself at zerp

[kentuck]

18. I thought he would campaign from the middle and govern from the left...

I had no idea he would campaign from the middle and govern from the right. It never crossed my mind.

I thought he was a community organizer. I thought he had progressive tendencies. I was wrong. He is a moderate conservative - exactly what we did not need at this time. Unfortunately.

[bvar22]

20. That is a pretty BOGUS interpretation.

Millions paid close attention.
I paid attention.
I discounted all the lofty rhetoric,
the "historic-ness" hype,
and listened carefully for specific statements on policy.
Millions of other Progressives did too.
I eventually voted FOR this candidate based on HIS statements about POLICY.


Restore America’s Honor
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-june-15-2010/respect-my-authoritah

Transparency
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5t8GdxFYBU


EFCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMNVIQqatyU

NAFTA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_LtbLEKHsi0&NR=1

Cadillac Tax
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I8wmN3wvhNM&feature=player_embedded

Support for Striking Union Workers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SA9KC8SMu3o

Public Option & Mandates
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acc6Wn_BWlk

Starting NEW WARS without Congressional Approval
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejvyDn1TPr8

*said "everyone would have a seat at his table,
(and then shut out the Democratic Wing in his cabinet
http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?contentid=254886&kaid=86&subid=85
...and shut out the Democratic Medicare for All Wing from the Health Care Reform "debate".)


Where is THAT guy now that we need him? :shrug:
He didn't even show up for the fight.



You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.

Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[tokenlib]

21. He also favored removing the cap on the payroll tax..

which appealed to all of us who are going to really need Social Security someday--

[bvar22]

24. Thanks!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Sh9hndECgU

As a member of the Working Class "Raising the Payroll Tax Cap" WAS and IS important.
He was "specific" in that statement.
Wonder what happened to Raising the Cap?



Solidarity!
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[hfojvt]

28. this is the video that I liked

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7pw0cFRTLE

especially since it so closely matched what I wrote earlier

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/65

is that really what Clinton thinks on both counts

Posted by hfojvt in General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009)
Mon Nov 12th 2007, 04:47 PM

Then somebody is an idiot, and it's not me.

Total income going to wages in 2006 was 6.445 trillion. 1 trillion is 15.5% of that. However, the social security tax rate is only 12.4%. So, if all wage income was taxed, total revenue would only be about $800 billion. Social security is already taking in something like $700 billion (it was $611 billion in 1999). So, the net is $100 billion which is a trillion over ten years.

Do we always talk about ten years at a time, or is that some kind of Republican trick to make a $100 billion tax increase sound bigger than it really is?

And about the middle class. Here's a table showing only 16.47% of households make more than $97,500 a year.

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

That's for households too, which often have multiple earners. If people in the 80th and 90th percentile of income are middle class, then that is some strange definition of "middle" that I do not understand.

[bvar22]

31. I remember when Hillary said that during the debates,

...that raising the CAP would "hurt the Middle Class, those making over $97,000/year."
My jaw hit the floor.
Any further chance Hillary had of gaining my support was gone forever after that incredibly STUPID statement.
I wonder if she still believes that.

[hfojvt]

35. heck, now apparently Obama believes it too

He no longer says anything about raising the cap. After all, that would violate his Reagan-pledge to not raise taxes on people making less than $250,000 a year. Apparently that was his most important promise, to not raise taxes on the upper-middle class.

[MannyGoldstein]

27. Well stated

Thanks.

[leftstreet]

33. +1

[xchrom]

25. Recommend

[LetTimmySmoke]

26. I was fooled by Obama in 08

I'll be the first to admit it, and the first to declare that I will not repeat my mistake in 2012. Donations and volunteerism is obviously out of the question.

[RickFromMN]

29. Vote for President Obama, yes. But do more? Argh. I knew Single Payer was a long shot.

I hoped for a public option. Health Care was my hot button. I am sorely disappointed.

My enthusiasm is gone. Maybe President Obama can get his Wall Street friends to campaign for him.
Bad idea I think. His Wall Street friends are probably Republicans. So much for that idea.

Okay...President Obama needs to be sold to the public. How to go about it?

Saying President Obama is the lesser of two evils doesn't wash.
The Republicans aren't going to say their candidate is the lesser of two evils.

President Obama got Osama Bin Laden...that's a selling point.

President Obama got Health Care Reform (Obamacare?)...that's a mixed bag.

President Obama kept the Recession/Depression from being deeper...try to sell that.
A Recession/Depression is still a Recession/Depression no matter how you slice it.
I agree it could have been worse, but most people won't understand or care.
A bad economy and unemployment is bad...it's now President Obama's watch.
How do we sugar-coat that.

The next President will get to make some Supreme Court appointments.
Of course we want a Democrat in the White House...most people won't care or understand.
Those that care will vote Democrat anyway.
As a side note, how do I know President Obama won't make conservative appointments...I don't.
Trusting President Obama is getting harder and harder.

The Republicans are being stupid...at least I think they are being stupid.
They are touching the "third rail"...they are threatening Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid.
Unfortunately, President Obama seems to be giving them cover. He appoints a commission.
Why won't he come out swinging, telling the public he will defend Social Security to the bitter end?
Why won't he make the Republicans pay for threatening the Social Safety Net?
I guess he won't. It's not his style. He will give them cover. It will be a non-issue.

I'd like to think President Obama supports more consumer rights than any Republican.
Will the vast majority of the voters care.

I like the idea of green energy....another issue not important to most voters.

What hot button will determine who is the next President?
To borrow President Clinton's phrase, it's the economy stupid. It's jobs, jobs, jobs.
What can President Obama do between now and the Election to improve the economy and create jobs?

No FDR-style work programs possible. No money. The Federal Government is hamstrung.

We will plod along...unhappy...unloved...hoping the Republicans have it just as bad.

[unkachuck]

32. "...Obama...

'...was never going to be a "left-wing Reagan" and is "governing exactly as he said he would"...'

....shit, thank you, I can see that was my mistake....

....now, where can I find a "left-wing Reagan"?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

34. Most righties are pragmatic enough to hold their noses and vote for their guy

simply because he is "their guy" (or gal). That's why they keep winning more elections than we do- because they stick together in thick or thin. What do we do? We throw fits when something doesn't go our way and threaten to refuse to vote for candidate a, b, or c in the next election because they "betrayed" us. Last election I was prepared to hold my nose and vote for Evan Bayh. Evan Bayh! Why? Because I adored him? Hell no! He had a "D" behind his name and voted our way most of the time. I hated his guts for being such a jerk-off towards President Obama but he still voted for the Democratic agenda when push came to shove. He screwed the party royally here in Indiana in the end by deciding to abandon ship at the last possible moment but I would've still voted for him had he run.
Until we get over the fact that we live in an imperfect world and that we won't be able to choose from "perfect" candidates all of the time and get out there and work for the party that most closely represents our views (even if we have to hold our noses to do it), our ability to control the debate, legislation, etc. in Washington DC, as well as our statehouses, will be severely limited. Did anybody ever stop to think that the more liberals/progressives abandon the Democratic Party, the harder the party is going to have to work to attract more of the detested "centrist" voters to win elections and consequently become less progressive (not more)? :shrug:

[Le Taz Hot]

36. Did you mean for your screen name

to be a parody? :eyes:

[Proud Liberal Dem]

38. No

:eyes:

I don't see why somebody can't be a proud liberal Democrat AND a pragmatist who recognizes certain self-defeating/unproductive actions when I see them. :shrug:

[JNinWB]

37. I predict....

That there will never be a future presidential campaign that will not require voting for the lessor of two "evils".

Using the word "evil" is hyperbole at its best! By the time a President (such as Obama) runs for re-election, every political opponent has honed the most vile and vicious attacks to haul out during the campaign. The "Progressives" will parrot this character assassination so D voters will loath Obama and stay home.

Mission accomplished.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

39. I don't believe in the whole "lesser evil" concept

unless we're talking about one Republican being less evil than another. I don't think President Obama or most Democrats are "evil". Not always what we want them to be but I don't question their overall character and genuine willingness to help the average person, much more so than nearly any Republican.

[sabrina 1]

48. Really? You think people have no reason to be critical of this

admission and that anyone who is, must be a fake Democrat? But you don't think that putting SS/Medicare and Medicaid on the table would make someone a 'fake Democrat'

What IS your idea of a Democrat may I ask?

[court jester]

40. I supported him over Hillary because he opposed the insurance mandates

like he said here on the Ellen show

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9R-z-fFnuh0

“Both of us want to provide health care to all Americans. There’s a slight difference, and her plan is a good one. But, she mandates that everybody buy health care. She’d have the government force every individual to buy insurance and I don’t have such a mandate because I don’t think the problem is that people don’t want health insurance, it’s that they can’t afford it,” Obama said in a Feb. 28, 2008 appearance on Ellen DeGeneres' television show.

“So, I focus more on lowering costs. This is a modest difference. But, it’s one that she’s tried to elevate, arguing that because I don’t force people to buy health care that I’m not insuring everybody. Well, if things were that easy, I could mandate everybody to buy a house, and that would solve the problem of homelessness. It doesn’t."

instead his administration had single payer advocates arrested.

So instead of a jobs bill for the economy, what suckers like me got was mandated payments to for profit insurance corporations, who's job it is to maximize profits (and pay their CEO's more money in an hour than a regular working slob will earn all year).

People will, at least, be forgiving when some of us say "ARE you SERIOUS?"

"No, I Don't farking believe him THIS time!"

[Major Hogwash]

41. " . . . according to former Reagan official Bruce Bartlett?" Great source, Jesse.

Why don't you start quoting Mary Matalin while you're at it.

[TheKentuckian]

47. Shit, look at the Frums, Sullivans, and worse that the "pragmatists" link all the time.

and in this area we can be at least semi sure that a con knows a con.

At least no one is trying to paint Bartlett as a moderate that is "on our side".