White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs recently gave an interview during which he complained that the "professional left" was not being supportive enough of the Obama administration; that the administration's accomplishments were not being praised or recognized enough. Apparently, the left (as the Democratic party's base) should just fall in line behind the administration. Wrong, Mr. Gibbs.
Barack Obama was swept into office by a margin of 10 million votes. On top of that he was also handed unprecedented majorities in both Houses of Congress. The American public emphatically decided that they wanted a change in the political direction of their country. The message was clear: the American people strongly preferred the Democratic agenda to that of their Republican counterparts. It was an open invitation to really make some improvements.
Sadly, this invitation was not accepted. Not by the new White House and not by the vast majority of Congressional Democrats. They have been an embodiment of the stereotype: weak Democrats. There was no reason to be weak, the mandate was clear. George W. Bush claimed a mandate when he barely defeated Gore and Kerry in 2000 and 2004, respectively. Despite the much smaller margin of victory, Bush ran the country. He did not sit around and seek bipartisanship on every issue. If he believed something was the right thing to do, he did it. Damn the consequences (admittedly, his ideas were mostly terrible and the consequences have left the country in a much worse condition than when he was inaugurated in 2001). During that time, the right fell in line. They supported the President and would not have a word said against him or his policies.
Mr Gibbs, you cannot have one without the other. You just cannot. You cannot have a weak, pandering President who has caved to the right wing on just about every issue he has been presented with since taking office and still expect the left to simply tow the party line. It is rather admirable of Obama to wish to govern for everyone, really it is. The sad fact is that the right wing is not letting him do that. They are giving him nothing. The Republicans have filibustered just about every single piece of legislation that has passed through Congress since Obama took office. They have sought, and got, concession after concession. Did it help garner any support? Absolutely not. Has Obama changed his tactics? Not enough to notice a difference.
As a result of this meek, tepid strategy of constantly caving to the smallest demands of the right wing (often preemptively), the Stimulus Bill was nowhere near as big as most economists said that it should be (and included the cornerstone of the Republican agenda: tax cuts); the health care system has not been reformed in any meaningful way (instead of starting from single payer and compromising from there, the administration started with a rather pathetic 'public option' and caved in from there); Van Jones and Shirley Sherrod have been forced out of their jobs; Wall Street is still unregulated and the CEOs still have their ridiculously high-paying jobs without so much as a slap on the wrist (without putting in place some real reform the economy is almost certain to crash again. When it does, conservatives will be able to blame Obama); off-shore drilling has been increased (despite the Gulf Coast disaster being an indication of how dangerous it can be); cap and trade seems all but abandoned; those who advocated the use of torture in the previous administration have been left unpunished; and warrant-less wiretapping has continued with no admission that it breaks the rule of law. Other members of "the professional left" would draw also attention to the escalation of the war in Afghanistan as a point of weakness on Obama's part.
This is why the left is complaining. The left is complaining because it is in their right to do so. Obama was elected on a platform of change and yet has provided very little. Yes, the Stimulus bill helped the economy and probably prevented a major depression and yes, there was some progress made in the health care reform struggle but neither were as effective as they should have been. With Obama's constant pandering to those who oppose progress, he is looking very ineffective, which is something that Republicans could punish him for by pointing out (although, for some reason, they seem to be much more fond of scaring white voters into thinking he is a foreign, Muslim, fascist, Marxist, communist, socialist slowly seeking to take over the country and subvert the Constitution).
Mr. Gibbs, you can complain about the "professional left" all you want. The simple fact is that the Obama administration is just not doing enough. I will be one of the first to point out the economic disaster you were handed by your predecessors, but that should be the justification needed to really drive home the importance of doing things differently, rather than an excuse for why nothing significant has yet been achieved. If the Obama administration actually did what it set out to do without folding to the whims of the right at every turn, there would not be nearly as many complaints from the left, despite your contention that "[t]hey wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president".
Barack Obama was swept into office by a margin of 10 million votes. On top of that he was also handed unprecedented majorities in both Houses of Congress. The American public emphatically decided that they wanted a change in the political direction of their country. The message was clear: the American people strongly preferred the Democratic agenda to that of their Republican counterparts. It was an open invitation to really make some improvements.
Sadly, this invitation was not accepted. Not by the new White House and not by the vast majority of Congressional Democrats. They have been an embodiment of the stereotype: weak Democrats. There was no reason to be weak, the mandate was clear. George W. Bush claimed a mandate when he barely defeated Gore and Kerry in 2000 and 2004, respectively. Despite the much smaller margin of victory, Bush ran the country. He did not sit around and seek bipartisanship on every issue. If he believed something was the right thing to do, he did it. Damn the consequences (admittedly, his ideas were mostly terrible and the consequences have left the country in a much worse condition than when he was inaugurated in 2001). During that time, the right fell in line. They supported the President and would not have a word said against him or his policies.
Mr Gibbs, you cannot have one without the other. You just cannot. You cannot have a weak, pandering President who has caved to the right wing on just about every issue he has been presented with since taking office and still expect the left to simply tow the party line. It is rather admirable of Obama to wish to govern for everyone, really it is. The sad fact is that the right wing is not letting him do that. They are giving him nothing. The Republicans have filibustered just about every single piece of legislation that has passed through Congress since Obama took office. They have sought, and got, concession after concession. Did it help garner any support? Absolutely not. Has Obama changed his tactics? Not enough to notice a difference.
As a result of this meek, tepid strategy of constantly caving to the smallest demands of the right wing (often preemptively), the Stimulus Bill was nowhere near as big as most economists said that it should be (and included the cornerstone of the Republican agenda: tax cuts); the health care system has not been reformed in any meaningful way (instead of starting from single payer and compromising from there, the administration started with a rather pathetic 'public option' and caved in from there); Van Jones and Shirley Sherrod have been forced out of their jobs; Wall Street is still unregulated and the CEOs still have their ridiculously high-paying jobs without so much as a slap on the wrist (without putting in place some real reform the economy is almost certain to crash again. When it does, conservatives will be able to blame Obama); off-shore drilling has been increased (despite the Gulf Coast disaster being an indication of how dangerous it can be); cap and trade seems all but abandoned; those who advocated the use of torture in the previous administration have been left unpunished; and warrant-less wiretapping has continued with no admission that it breaks the rule of law. Other members of "the professional left" would draw also attention to the escalation of the war in Afghanistan as a point of weakness on Obama's part.
This is why the left is complaining. The left is complaining because it is in their right to do so. Obama was elected on a platform of change and yet has provided very little. Yes, the Stimulus bill helped the economy and probably prevented a major depression and yes, there was some progress made in the health care reform struggle but neither were as effective as they should have been. With Obama's constant pandering to those who oppose progress, he is looking very ineffective, which is something that Republicans could punish him for by pointing out (although, for some reason, they seem to be much more fond of scaring white voters into thinking he is a foreign, Muslim, fascist, Marxist, communist, socialist slowly seeking to take over the country and subvert the Constitution).
Mr. Gibbs, you can complain about the "professional left" all you want. The simple fact is that the Obama administration is just not doing enough. I will be one of the first to point out the economic disaster you were handed by your predecessors, but that should be the justification needed to really drive home the importance of doing things differently, rather than an excuse for why nothing significant has yet been achieved. If the Obama administration actually did what it set out to do without folding to the whims of the right at every turn, there would not be nearly as many complaints from the left, despite your contention that "[t]hey wouldn't be satisfied if Dennis Kucinich was president".
1 comment:
Once again, cowardice in our political leaders has been the follow-up to promises made on the campaign trail.
Same old, same old...what a let down.
Post a Comment