Excellent--well worth 11 minutes to watch.  Thank you for the link.

They need to put a governor on their rhetoric...way too fast to settle in an be absorbed.

I remember once upon a time there was this guy on TV back in the good ole black and white days named Walter Cronkite. There were others, such as Chet Huntley and David Brinkley too. Then of course McNeil and Lehre and Bill Moyers followed up in later years. They all had a story to tell. They took the time to explain what was going on so the average citizen would understand the political posturing behind the news. We don't see that now a days.

I've caught up on some of Krugman's posts over the past 2 weeks and I noted in each and every one, they scream out there's something missing in the rhetoric...basic knowledge.

For instance, many of the GOPer's and tea-baggers campaigning for political office all have a severe deficiency in their basic understanding of economics. More specific, what should the governments role be if the economy is depressed...what should they be doing to reverse the trend? For example, they are of the opinion the only way to reduce the federal deficit is follow the same method a family would use to reduce their finances if they were in over their heads in debt...cut back on expenses and only spend when it is absolutely necessary.  However, the government has a unique ability that's not found in a family setting...the ability to generate income through taxes. And its' that ability to levy taxes that changes the debate.

At the first instance where the GOPer's and tea-baggers began to belly-ache about the blooming deficit, efforts should have been made to education Congress and debate the issue why spending was necessary, complete with the history of past recession and the methods used to curtail the downward spiraling economic factors driving the economy into the dump. By not pushing the information out to rebut the GOPer and teabaggger claims of the government out of control spending spree the stage was set for what happened last week.

And that info should have been made public too with townhall meetings, info-mericals, Obama's weekly address and so forth. The public needed to be engaged with info that could be substantiated by sources both local at their libraries as well as on the internet. That was the fight not fought.

There's also the issue of not taking GOPer's to task for the damage they were responsible for too. Instead, the Democrats allowed themselves to be tarred-and-feathered for the policies of the GOPer's and Bu$h. I do find it odd that the Party directly responsible for the housing, employment and economic problems over the past two years are now claiming they will clean up the mess created by the Democrats. If the Democrats in Congress refuse to fight for themselves, then why should I bother too either?

So if the pundits want to change the course, I would suggest they start from a basic premise the public is completely clueless about politics, policy and what's really going on behind the closed doors. If they 're all fired up over the ballooning deficit, first debate how the surplus in 2000 was replaced with a deficit that was twice as large, what actions took place that kept feeding it and other actions that should have taken place, but didn't to offset it. They need to build a solid foundation first before they debate any further. Otherwise, all you end up with is an uninformed voting block that's mad as hell about something they don't understand but wants something done about it immediately no matter what the cost.

Up front, I need to say that no matter which browser I used, or even trying direct access from youtube, this video played as if I only have dial-up internet.  That means, it was herky-jerky to the Nth degree, so I would have lost any nuanced discussion in the long intervals between five-word audio/video comments.

However.  I think almost everyone here has missed what the segment was about: Obama's failure to operate outside the beltway scene, using the legions of voters, new, base, unaffilitated, who got him propelled into the White House.  To wit: upon his election, Davis Plouffe wnet off to write a book, and the campaign operations was shut down, only to emerge close to two years later to (depending on your take) either: a) campaign for Dems for the midterms, or b) campaign for Obama for 2012. 

The three men were specifically NOT trying to frame any of the popular issues as Left or Right, (which is the only way forward, IMO) but appealing to actual common sense themes that most Americans support, and want and need to make the case for.  The discussion was NOT about offering an agenda, or naming the items, but attempting to frame how far Obama wandered from ANY populist issues he'd run on, i.e. getting government responsive to the People, not the Parties and corporations. 

They weren't concerned about what his books may have told about himself, but what and whom he told us he was and intended to do during the campaign: Use Us to Bring Change.  Too many Dems claim that it was WE who abandoned him and that we let down, and were lazy.

It's nonsense.  We see who he chose for his Cabinet, economically and for Defense and Intelligence.  Retreads from the Clinton/Rubin years: Big Bank/Wall Street-friendly people, engaged in the same old crap, with the same old crapsters on his call sheets daily.

Frontline's Obama's Deal that was broadcast the other night outlined some of the give-aways to the Big Pharma and the for-profit health care industry, plus the insurance industry way ahead of any negotiations.  Youo can excuse it, or call it the most naive strategy ever, I don't much care.

But the news, as kgb points out, that he sent Geithner to speak with Stewart for two hours IS  a big deal!  I assume that Stewart had been catechized sufficiently by the time Obama sat down for his interview with him to buy the truckload full of crap that he did.  For instance: that his administration 'solved' the 2008-2009 financial crisis (wow; it's SOLVED???) for less money than the S&L crisis; he even gave FIGURES as percentages of GDP!!!  Stewart didn't even follow up!!!

You might want to quit framing Left/Right labels sometime; all we do is argue about that lately: 'who identifies as what'; 'but look into the internals', la la la...yeah, the internals matter, but SOLUTIONS THAT WILL HELP US and Obama could be helping us with matter more, IMO.

Politico buzz says that my least favorite Corporatist Dem is in a too-close-to-call race for her Illinois House seat: Melissa (ptui! Stardust spits on the ground at her feet) Melissa Bean, of the House Coalition to help the White House water down any meaning financial reform.  But: rumor has it that if she loses, the Prez will offer her the job running the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, which is possibly worse than a fox guarding a henhouse, but I'll desist fronm running out the metaphor to its horrid mega-conclusion...

Read Yves Smith on Obama's B.S. on Stewart's show if you want an alternative view:

http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2010/10/obama-no-longer-bothering-to-lie-credibly-claims-financial-crisis-cost-less-than-sl-crisis.html

And/or read Black and Wray on why it is necessary to put many big banks (zombies, I guess) into receivership, and how to accomplish any of it the right way, while still letting them perform everyday banking services.  They make a good case why this must be done to ever get this econoomy going again for actual people, not just Wall Street, and avoid a lost decade as Japan did:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/william-k-black/foreclose-on-the-foreclos_b_772434.html

I will now eat crow, and say I beleive that Stewart has acted as a shill for the status quo.

I don't really see what the argument is about here. Obama's self-declared objective is to serve as a buffer between the pitch-forks and the corporate elite. And he's done that eminently well. The pitch-forks, at least those standing against the elite, have been defanged. Anyone on the left who still considers Obama as their leader is utterly delusional. Sure, wars will escalate more slowly, the living conditions of the middle class will decline more slowly, rights will erode more slowly, with the current Dem party establishment in power than they would with the current GOP in power. But there is a GIANT leap from that observation to the claim that the Dem party is part of the Solution and not part of the Problem.

Of course any progressive movement - i.e. one that seeks actual progress - has to find a way around the Democratic party.

But, then again, I'm sure KGB has said this much more eloquently than I can.

I hate to admit that I can be brought to tears by politics, but it's true, and this segment had me crying.

As you (and everyone else around here) knows, I have been more patient with Obama than just about anyone, and it has worn extremely thin. I am not QUITE ready to admit defeat, but I'm frighteningly close to it.

My dilemma is, if not the dems, then who? If not Obama, then who? I'm afraid I'm in the camp who felt (and probably still feels) like Obama is our last hope. If he couldn't/can't do it, no one can.

As "on the money" as this piece is, I feel like we are still missing a gigantic piece of the puzzle. I think we can all agree that everything is AFU. I think we can all agree that the repubs are dangerous, and the dems are only slightly less dangerous. And I think we can all (or at least a large number of us) agree that an army of "us" can still be marshaled, in spite of our profound disappointment in Obama. But then what the hell is that army going to do? And who are we going to fight? And WHO are we going to replace Obama with, if we do determine that he just ISN'T going to lead us where we want to go. I'm all for an insurrection of sorts, but I'm hearing a lot of "we're going to fight" but not a lot of specifics about how. I'm game to fight. I really am. Now tell me what I can do, and I'll do it.

As a side note...on 60 Minutes, Obama admitted that he has gotten so caught up in "getting things done" that he has neglected the process, which tells me he gets it. Is ANYONE seeing ANY signs that that insight is being turned into action, because (although I haven't been paying a lot of attention lately) I haven't SEEN anything that would reignite my spark for him... I know this is going to sound ridiculous as I hear myself thinking it, but CAN he get his mojo back? Can he yet be who we so desperately need for him to be?