Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
Shorter Sirota: progressives who believed Obama's pitch are now to blame for having believed him, while Obama himself remains totally blameless.
Since the coup of 1963 every American President has been beholden to the military-industrial complex. How the MIC conforms to economic realities doesn't necessarily reflect Obama's freedom from them.
The retention of Gates says it all.
As someone else (I forget who) said:
"So Obama turns out to be a prostitute just like everyone else in Washington. He only pretended to be a geisha for the election."
I'm shocked, shocked.
So you don't know who he is either! But given that 60% of his 600 million dollar pot came from big donors, including many from Wall Street, that may mean you just don't know to whom THE LEADER is beholden. There are several possible Obamas: (1) the Chicago pol, and you know much of it came from there (2) the Third-World liberationist (3) the 60s-style radical , (4) the conventional-minded Harvard liberal. and (5) the Establishment front.
So far we have seen the First, Fourth, and Last.
David's piece is nothing more than layers of pure B.S.. Obama was elected by the 'little people' out there, the volunteers, the contributors, the canvassers, the callers. We, put him in office and we expect real results. Thusfar, it does not look good as it appears that he has enabled Podesta, and other insiders, to appoint a Bush/Clinton cabinet. We, the people, he works for, will not permit him to screw this up.
If he does, all that good will, that organization, those contributions, will disappear and he and his cabinet will be replaced!
Obama was elected to implement the platform he ran on. To the minimal extent possible at this stage, he is on track to do so. As to Obama's free agency, that's baloney parlor games. He is beholden to the People who elected him to be a successful executive. To improve economic conditions, end wars and roll back the executive abuses of the last eight years. I do not think this is a difficult concept to grasp.
Neither do I think that getting one's panties in a twist over transitional tea leaves is a sign of steadfast vigilance against transgression by the political establishment, while not doing so makes you an unthinking Obama worshiping automaton. That is possibly one of the most stupid false dichotomies I have ever heard, and I just got through through the Bush years. So, please, for the sane amongst us, chill the fuck out.
Yes, the huge mailing list and support Obama has give him great flexibility to bring pressure on Washington. However, we are not mindless drones here to do the Great One's bidding--however appealing that idea may have been to the McCain campaign. If Obama does stupid things, he will not find his army of well informed internet supporters goes along with him mindlessly.
Look, I like many of us have swallowed my rancour against Republican extremists for years. They were so over the top arrogant and did so many stupid things that have affected people so adversely and apparently have few regrets.
Those of us on the extreme "Left" (whatever the heck that means anymore) were agitating for such unrealistic things as tolerance, international cooperation, fiscal forebearance, and scientific reality on issues like climate change. When were we going to get our day in the sun and give these turkeys a taste of their own medicine.
But you know, the fact of the matter is that the other side was just plain stupid and swaggering around is just playing their game (and look where it got them). It is sensible to involve them on some level so they don't go all thingy and stuff things up out of pure spite.
We have serious issues to solve and I imagine Obama as an outsider needs to have people who know the ropes. Unlike the current occupant I imagine he will subject these advisors to intense cross examination and take independent advice.
Here is a politician who talks to us in complete paragraphs and seems to be an honest man so it will be some time before I rush to judgement.
"David's piece is nothing more than layers of pure B.S.. Obama was elected by the 'little people' out there, the volunteers, the contributors, the canvassers, the callers. We, put him in office and we expect real results. Thusfar, it does not look good as it appears that he has enabled Podesta, and other insiders, to appoint a Bush/Clinton cabinet. We, the people, he works for, will not permit him to screw this up."
The last objective analysis I read, the entire story about the small doner contributions was nothing but a myth. Certainly, the primary SD vote wasn't about the "little people." Many of them voted AGAINST their constintuents' choice.
As for having great power? *cough*
If this faction had great power, you'd be seeing a different cabinet.
Clearly, that's another puffed up ego myth.
I'm really getting tired of reading and hearing about how President-elect Obama ran a great campaign. He didn't. He hired people who are experts and THEY ran it! He had control over the message, true, but not the administration of the campaign itself.
There's a book out titled "Michelle" - it's a biography of Michelle Obama, and there are interesting parts involving campaigns and campaigning. Not just for president, but for the U.S. Senate. I'd recommend that people read it not only because it provides information on a great person (Michelle Obama) but also provides insight into Barack's political ambitions and those involved in running the campaign.
By the way, I'm thrilled that he got elected. But I never expected him to run the country, or even run his administration, just like he didn't run his campaign. Others will be doing that and it's those "others" that I worry about!
Obama no only promised change, he promised compromise and and a 'United' Sates of America. not a 'blue or 'red' America.
Change requires negotiations and no leader can get change unless they have experienced people who know their way around D.C..
When teh McCain camaping called Obama a left winger, I knew and understood how wrong they were. I am a loyal Obama supporter, a progressive, a liberal on social issues, but not a far lefty. I supported Obama because I understood after reading his 'Blue Print for Change' that he was a very pragmatic person. I have been very pleased by his choices. He has picked left leaning people where it counts, (environment, health and human services, some close white house staff), and centrists where it counts (economics and defense).
If you want to get out of Iraq safely, it's a good idea to have Gates on a transition team. Obama staed in his plan he plans to build a better military.
Much of the initial coverage about Fort Hood turned out to be wrong. Is there anything wrong with that?
The accountability imposed by another country for the CIA's kidnapping and torture reveals much about our own.
Fox News' morning show plays to type, talking about whether Muslims in the Army should face "special debriefings"
The survivor and author is upset about comparisons some on the right are making to genocide
Once seen as a lunatic fringe, reactionary anti-women groups are courting respectability
Salon headlines in your mailbox
