Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
"I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it."
In particular, what can I try to convince my friends to do to get Obama's attention focused in the right way?
...and it smells like victory! Congratulations Glenn!
Of course it wasn't just Glenn and its only a small and impermanent victory, but Glenn is exactly right. The squeaky wheel gets the grease.
Obama has also indicated that he might respond to pressure when it comes to the reinvigoration of the federal government as an agent for stimulating the economy. Axelrod suggesting that Congress won't be a potted plant in response to progressive criticisms of the tax cut portion of the stimulus package indicates that. Watching the shifting of the ratio of tax to spending on infrastructure, health etc., will be telling. It will move in the progressive direction only with more pressure. Glenn, as usual, has the template right.
Chris Bowers wrote:
[...] I recently heard an interesting anecdote about the 1993 budget fight. While it is probably the most progressive piece of sizable legislation to pass into law in two decades, it was a grueling fight--passing both branches of Congress by a single vote--and it still could have been better. At the signing ceremony, President Clinton found then Representative Bernie Sanders, and told Sanders that he, Sanders, should have made a much bigger public display of how he, Clinton, wasn't giving enough to liberals in the new budget. Such a public display would have provided Clinton more room to maneuver on the left.
"Politicians, by definition, respond to political pressure. Those who decide that it's best to keep quiet and simply trust in the goodness and just nature of their leader are certain to have their political goals ignored. It's always better -- far better -- for a politician to know that he's being scrutinized closely and will be praised and supported only when his actions warrant that, and will be criticized and opposed when they don't."
Of course, Bush never bent to political pressure where it really mattered.
Sickening, it was yesterday to hear a man weave, grimace and pontificate about what most sane people would reflect upon as eight years of fear-mongering and lies.
When Bush made any decision that affected the economy, military, environment, health care, etc., etc., it was always with the most cynical pandering. The least powerful in their attempt to change his mind were continually dismissed as leftist traitors.
Bush never misled the thinking, aware American people that he was other than a partisan, rich, interloper who thought of himself, first.
The rewriting of history to paint him as a compassionate man because of an African Aids program will not suffice in reforming his character or morality.
Of course, Bush never bent to political pressure where it really mattered.
Samuel Alito and Harriet Miers would beg to differ.
Thanks Glenn, for taking all the "Leave OS alone!" factions to the woodshed.
Now I'm outta hear, before all the slaughter=self-defense apologists stink the place up again. You did have to remind everyone about that distressing little situation in Gaza, so things will deteriorate in here correspondingly.
Samuel Alito and Harriet Miers would beg to differ.
So would advocates in both parties of comprehensive immigration reform.
There is no doubt that politicians require pressure even to do the things they believe in. More so when the belief is missing. I suspect that some "Obama supporters" who comment here ("Give the man a chance, for crying out loud.") are trolls of a more subtle and insidious kind than shooter.
I find it disturbing that people place all their naive hopes for re-shaping all national policies, from foreign to domestic, on one man. Has the last 8 years effectively demolished any expectation of accountability and responsibility for the other 2 branchs? Shouldn't everyone's own Congressperson and Senator be similarly pressured?
It also seems pretty weird to compare liberal pressures on Obama and the Israeli lobby on Congress. Nevertheless, the near-unanimous pro-Israel chorus in Congress really demonstrates who is really running the show, and how thoroughly, in this country. So observers may want to reconsider the where the real, not apparent, power resides.
Morning brother--
I was thinking of you and this very topic last night, for Sunday I went after Chis Von Hollen for stating we little folks understood that any issue Congress was too lazy and obdurate to address would of course be "triaged."
I'm ignored at Daily Kos for it, I wouldn't say shunned, but the level of implacable silence to even complete Democrat fuckups like Reid and Feinstein feels like shunning.
CVH is a darling of the fresh elements of the Democratic Party, but when the fuck all did this little hoser decide what the people understand? Denial, that's all I got. Maybe I'm a lousy writer, I don't know, but I notice I always get a much greater response at the Big Orange of Denial when I don't criticize the slimy lizards in our beloved great Party.
I met you first time in a Kos thread, Glenn, I haven't forgotten, I asked if you were a lawyer or a reporter, and got steered back to you old blog. Go ahead and cross-post there, see what happens.
They can't ignore the great Glennzilla, can they? Let's find out if The Big Orange can take this. Why not, what could it harm?
"Of course, Bush never bent to political pressure where it really mattered."--me
Yes, I recognize your point. My "never" is in context of my own priorities during his term.
Though a bit over the top in my "really mattered", most would agree that the two wars, torture and habeas corpus were political issues that really matter (among many others that Bush showed defiance).
Juan Cole's post in particular reminded me of one of Paul Krugman's older and more brilliant political-economic essays - called Rat Democracy.
http://www.slate.com/id/1920/
He takes the economic concept of "rational choice" (generally shortened to "rat choice"), and looks at the following question: "Indeed, if you take rat choice seriously, you stop asking why democracy works so badly and start asking why it works at all."
This essay could hardly be better applied to the issue around the evidently uniform Village support of Likudnik policy. And fortunately, Krugman also had some answers to the problems of Rat Democracy - I think your blogging on this issue is an example of what Krugman describes as "civic virtue", one of the means he identifies of reshaping the political dialog and landscape.
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
