Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
...because as glenn notes, you think the other side is going to let up? no chance of that: it knows this is the time to make the greatest impact on an incoming administration.
draw the lesson from clinton (no progressive, he); his first term was defined by his early missteps, which all came from trying to placate and coopt a conservative cadre that was relentless about its interests.
progressives need to make clear over and over and over again that they are not about to let this white house lose its way from the first principles that elected it. and guess what? when the obamanauts see that they can make headway on that agenda without the sky falling, they will gain confidence in continuing to do what they said they would.
progressives have to remain tough, and hard, and loud. because the other side will not rest. ever.
With a little luck, you might be the next Ann Coulter.-- wbgonne
and with a little luck, you'll grow a brain.
On January 11, an estimated 10,000 people rallied in front of the Israeli consulate in midtown New York in support of Israel’s attack on the Gaza Strip.
But hatred was plentiful at the rally Paterson addressed. Right in front of the stage, a man held a banner reading, “Islam Is A Death Cult.” Rally attendees described the people of Gaza to me as a “cancer,” called for Israel to “wipe them all out,” insisting, “They are forcing us to kill their children in order to defend our own children.” A young woman told me, “Those who die are suffering God’s wrath.” “They are not distinguishing between civilians and military, so why should we?” said a member of the group of messianic Orthodox Jewish Chabad-Lubavitch group that flocked to the rally.
No one I spoke to could seem to find any circumstance in which they would begin to question Israel’s war. No number of civilian deaths, no displays of extreme suffering -- nothing could deter their enthusiasm for attacking one of the most vulnerable populations in the world with the world’s most advanced weaponry. There are no limits, no matter what Israel does, no matter how it does it.
http://www.alternet.org/story/119372/pro-israel_rally_attended_by_big-time_ny_dems_descends_into_calls_for_%27wiping_out%27_palestinians
Glenn, thank you for posts. I have been trying to make the same argument, though not as eloquently or succinctly as you have, to my fellow Obama supporters. As a background, for the first time in my life I gave money and volunteered to a campaign so I won't take back seat to anyone. However, my position is as follows, I work hard to get Obama elected but as soon as he got elected I took a defensive position in which I will stay until and unless he shows me otherwise and deliver on his promises. And even then my question will continue to be "what have you done for me lately?"
Glenn, keep up the good work. I've been passing around your posts to my friends in the hope of opening a discussion about how to engage this new administration.
Just indulge my suggestion for a second: Call up a mental health professional -- just pick one randomly from the phone book -- and tell them the following:
There's a website where I'm not allowed to participate. Whatever I write there is automatically deleted by college interns or others as soon as it's seen, anywhere from between 5 seconds to, at most, 15 minutes after I write it. Nobody ever sees what I write.
Despite this, I spend much of my day -- every day, hour upon hour, day after day, week after week -- sitting in front of the computer, writing things at this website that I know virtually nobody will ever see. I've been doing this for months now. This consumes hours of my time every day.
In fact, this definitively futile activity has become one of the major focal points of my life. I spend a substantial portion of my finite life writing things that are erased within an average of 60 seconds, and I can't stop and don't want to stop. I have nothing else to do with my time or with my life.
Don't take my word for it about what this means. Just see what an actual mental health professional says upon hearing this. You don't have anything to lose by asking one of them what this might mean.
"We must reject the division of labor so often proposed to us: individuals can get indignant and talk; governments will reflect and act. It’s true that good governments appreciate the holy indignation of the governed, provided it remains lyrical. I think we need to be aware that very often it is those who govern who talk, are capable only of talking, and want only to talk. Experience shows that one can and must refuse the theatrical role of pure and simple indignation that is proposed to us. Amnesty International, Terre des Hommes, and Médecins du monde are all initiatives that have created this new right — that of private individuals to effectively intervene in the sphere of international policy and strategy. The will of individuals must make a place for itself in a reality of which governments have attempted to reserve a monopoly for themselves, that monopoly which we need to wrest for them little by little and day by day."
--Michel Foucault, 1984
Before we go breaking our arms patting ourselves on the back, let’s remember that correlation does not equal causation. Just because these events happened within close proximity does not mean that the latter was caused by the former.
While the application of reasonable pressure is unquestionably appropriate (an obligation that was abrogated by many during the last eight years)let’s not turn this whole thing into a circular firing squad before the man even takes office.
I imagine, someone out there has the definitive source. Digby's does come from the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute. Hard pressed to find a more definitive source than that, I suppose, except that reference, within the text of a speech given by someone else, is kind of vague for my instincts. Still and all, it's a really "safe" one to use.
In poking around, what I'm finding is a story. And, invariably the quote is embedded within that story - although the principal characters (who FDR was speaking to) can change.
For example,
I'm reminded of something that Eleanor Roosevelt once told a group of us at a dinner. It was when she had first introduced A. Philip Randolph, a great labor leader back in the 1930s up to and including the civil rights movement.
And she introduced him to Franklin Delano Roosevelt for the first time at a dinner, and Roosevelt beseeched him to please tell him what he thought of the nation, what he thought of the plight of the Negro people and what did he think - where the nation was headed.
And A. Philip Randolph held forth and spoke eloquently on his thoughts, and at the end of it Roosevelt said to him, "You know, Mr. Randolph, I've heard everything you've said tonight, and I couldn't agree with you more. I agree with everything that you've said, including my capacity to be able to right many of these wrongs and to use my power and the bully pulpit." He said, "But I would ask one thing of you, Mr. Randolph, and that is go out and make me do it."
Google cache of Tavis Smiley PBS interview with Harry Belafonte in November 2008 below:
http://tinyurl.com/7hdl86
Alternatively,
Franklin Roosevelt’s example is useful here. After his election in 1932, FDR met with Sidney Hillman and other labor leaders, many of them active Socialists with whom he had worked over the past decade or more. Hillman and his allies arrived with plans they wanted the new President to implement. Roosevelt told them: “I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it.”
http://www.pnhp.org/news/2009/january/how_to_push_obama.php
Similarly, Amy Goodman of Democracy Now! in her interview with Adam Cohen
Google cache:
http://tinyurl.com/6vu5ww
Essentially, that's what I'm finding as I search. A story, repeated by others, in which the quote is embedded.
The quote also seems to take various forms.
I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it.
You've convinced me. I want to do it. Now make me do it.
The former is more "popular" than the latter.
So far, the longest list of quotes I can find attributed to FDR is the collection at:
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/f/franklin_d_roosevelt.html
which does not include either of those noted above.
So, what we really have is an anecdote. And, what we really need is a research librarian who knows how to scare up historical anecdotes. Are you out there William Timberman?
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
