Site Presented By
Sunday, Nov 8, 2009
"Pressure is more effective when it comes from those who usually support you."
Think of the foolish posture Bush took from day one. He was selected by a thin majority of the SC (stop the count), and lost the popular vote by at least 600,000-- yet this arrogant man ran the country like he slid into home base.
If any President wanted to have the majority voters support would he ignore so many? To Bush, it didn't matter--because they were not necessary to fulfill his corporate/military-for- profit agenda.
Right, it demonstrates how very corporatized the country/government has become. No president really need be pressurized by any Congress, party or significant populace.
Bush proved beyond all doubt that political pressure rests in the money/lobby machine--the votes are window dressing and sometimes, just a nuisance.
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.
Absolutely. I'm sure Obama's plan was to go on ABC and make noises about not closing Guantanamo right away and using torture-obtained confessions and other tainted-evidence, and then send out advisers the next day to leak to the NYT that he really intended to do so quickly and in a way that would please the ACLU. I'm sure the anger and criticisms he provoked had nothing to do with it.
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.
Thanks for providing the proof -- just in case people didn't believe me -- that people really do use these empty platitudes to demand that Obama not be criticized. No circular firing squads. A penny saved is a penny earned. Yes we can.
Just because these events happened within close proximity does not mean that the latter was caused by the former.
Good point. The transition team may have decided, just for shits and grins, to pull a complete 180° from the Stephanopoulos interview to yesterday. Just because, what the fuck, nothing much else going on this week.
I'm glad you pointed that out, because otherwise you'd have missed one of your last chances to pull out this classic:
let’s not turn this whole thing into a circular firing squad before the man even takes office.
remember contract with america?
The democrats have solid control over both houses of congress.
Now is not the time to be skittish.
If Bill Clinton had gotten more support from fellow democrats he could have made bigger changes.
The lesson is clear.....you have to try for as much as you can now, the demcorats won't control congress forever.
ps some think that making small steps is better but in 2 years very little will have changed and your right back where you started.....if you make big changes, you have 2 years for them to take effect before the next election. if they are good changes then you have something to take to the voters.
The FDR comparison is a terrific way to address the would-be censors of Obama criticism. Thank you so much for generally explaining so well what is wrong with this stance, and all the rest of your increasingly good work here. I find your writing of great help in clarifying and framing my own arguments.
let’s not turn this whole thing into a circular firing squad before the man even takes office.
What does "before he takes office" have to do with anything? Just this: now is the time when many of the policies are set into cold viscous tar. Changing them later takes heat.
What is the danger of a firing squad? The Secret Service has protected him physically. He has others to protect him from political attacks, and they are competent. It is better to assume that only a message expressed with 'vigor' is going to get through.
Glenn glenn glenn,
To make the claim that Obama "...made no mention..." of closing gitmo asap is factually incorrect. read the transcript and watch the tape. what obama said was:
"I don't want to be ambiguous about this. We are going to close Guantanamo and we are going to make sure that the procedures we set up are ones that abide by our Constitution. That is not only the right thing to do but it actually has to be part of our broader national security strategy because we will send a message to the world that we are serious about our values."
With the huge array of forces expending unbelievable amounts of time, energy, and resources to get him to do the wrong thing, I will never understand why anyone would suggest that those who would like him to do the right thing should just stand on the sidelines. Trust me, the opposition is not standing idly by. Why should we?
Great post as usual Glenn.
As we are in the "transition phase" awaiting Obama to take office, I am amazed at the trasition of mindset that I have seen in some that are supporters of Obama. There are people that I have discussions with, who share my views regarding the Bush Administration. Over the last 8 years we have shared the same view on holding the Bush Administration to account for decisions made and some of these people were first to want to line up in the streets to put pressure on the Bush Administration to change course.
Suddenly, post November 4th, these same people who voted and fully supported Obama now suddenly do not want to apply the same principles of accountability to the incoming administration. We hear the tired lines of "well just let Obama get in there, wait a few months and let's see where he takes us." I have even had a friend say to me:
"The word 'accountability' gives me a negative connotation and I am tired of all the negativity from the last 8 years. We should just support our new President now."
The complete 180 degree change in position is something astounding to watch and it is one of the reasons that I expressed concern about the opportunity of "real" change. Real progressive change is only going to happen if the tidal wave of Obama supporters, so energized by the campaign, join with already established progressive movements and amplify their demands. If this largely energized, largely youthful movement that put Obama in office decides to "sit back" and "just support our new President", then we are going to end up with more "inside the beltway" status quo. Change does not simply happen, it is created.
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
219 Democrats and one Republican join in favor of the legislation, which passed by a narrow margin
Salon headlines in your mailbox
