Wattree's picture

    I Haven’t Totally Given Up on Obama, but as My Late Wife Used to Say, He’s Working My Last Nerve

    By Wattree on Tue, 04/05/2011 - 9:01pm |

    Beneath the Spin * Eric L. Wattree  

    I Haven’t Totally Given Up on Obama, but as My Late Wife Used to Say, He’s Working My Last Nerve 
     
    I haven’t totally given up on Obama . . . yet. But I thought I’d write this article just to ensure that there’s no need for speculation about how many of his more politically sophisticated base views the current political landscape.

    I’m an Obama supporter, but I’m not an Obama cheerleader. While I agree that President Obama has done more for this country in the short time he’s been in office than any president since Franklin Roosevelt, presidents are not only assessed based on what they do, but also what they fail to do. So in spite of the fact that he’s saved America from a second Great Depression, his success in that area pales in comparison to what he’s failing to do – aggressively confronting America’s most insidious domestic enemy and the most serious threat to our democracy since the Civil War, the current GOP leadership.

    President Obama made his first mistake when he said, “We should look forward, not back,” with regard to the Bush/Cheney war crimes in Iraq. First of all, the attorney general is supposed to be independent to decide what course to take in such matters, so Obama was supposed to simply keep his mouth shut and let his attorney general decide whether or not Bush and Cheney’s “alleged” war crimes warranted prosecution. By failing to do so Obama effectively established, and elevated Bush and Cheney to a class of people who are above the law – and that not a good thing in any democracy. It was such a class in the Jim Crow South that allowed Black people to be lynched with impunity.

    But in spite of that, many Obama apologists often argue that the president is only one man, so he can’t do everything. That’s an invalid argument. First, the president does set his own agenda as to what he considers important to this country. And secondly, the president of the United States has the largest staff of lawyers and experts in the Western world, so why can’t he do everything? That’s his job. Even Obama himself said that the president has to be able to do many things at one time.

    But even if the president can’t do everything, failing to aggressively confront the Republican Party constitutes neglecting the biggest threat to America in generations. The GOP is a bigger threat to the American way of life than Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda can only destroy buildings, but the GOP is on a single-minded mission to destroy the United States Constitution, and in his oath of office, the president swore to protect that precious document.

    So those of us who are merely supporters of the president, as oppose to blind cheerleaders, understand that the primary reason this country is in its current mess is because the American people have been brainwashed into supporting politicians instead of principles. That’s why our system can be so easily controlled by money. Money is being used to brainwash us into loving politicians over principles. It’s the oldest game in the world. We are literally being pimped. It’s just that instead of selling our bodies, we’re selling our souls – and the souls of our children.

    When we support politicians over principles we tend to ignore, or go into protective mode, when the politicians that we support go off course. That allows politicians to control us. On the other hand, if we supported principles over politicians, politicians would be forced to adhere to the mandate that got them elected, which would allow us to control them.

    As I’ve pointed out many times in this column, the primary quality that should set progressives apart from all others is an affinity for humanity, independence of thought, and a fierce determination to remain a seeker of truth above all else, regardless to where that truth may lead. But those values no longer seem to be the case among many who define themselves as progressives today. Many contemporary ‘progressives’ tend to possess the very same rigidity of thought, and meanspirited, knee-jerk adherence to ideology that the progressive movement was created to combat. The response that many of these people bring to even the slightest divergence from their rigid ideological beliefs can only be described as one of radical reactionism.

    That concerns me greatly, because while conservatives and today’s so-called progressives remain completely divergent in their views toward governance, in terms of intellectual disposition they’ve become different sides of the same coin. I’ve often heard it stated that the regimented intolerance of reactionary conservatism is reminiscent of Nazi Germany. That may, or may not be true. But if it is, it must also be acknowledged that the intolerant regimentation of many contemporary radical ‘progressives’ represents the USSR at best.

    Many modern ‘progressives’ have allowed themselves to become infected with the exact same kind of intellectual rigidity that we previously associated with the radical conservative mindset. In fact, many who define themselves as progressives today could very accurately be called latter-day conservatives. They have a slightly updated set of values, but their rigidity and rabid defense of their ideology will surely morph into the closed-minded conservatism of tomorrow.

    While many liberals are busily distracted in fighting for the political fortunes of ‘their man’, radical conservatives are hard at work taking America apart, both brick and mortar. Thus, while the patient is lying on the operating table dying, the surgeons are engaged in a feud over what brand scalpel to use. And while we should be saying I love America, we’re being distracted by cheerleaders chanting, “I love me some Obama.”

    I like Obama too, but not nearly as much as I love America. Thus, a politician should only be supported as long as he adheres to his mandate, no matter how warm his smile, or how nice a guy he is. If we’re looking for love, we should go out and find a lover, because if we want to maintain the kind of democracy in which we’ve become accustomed, when it comes to politics, there’s absolutely no room for blind love affairs.

     Eric L. Wattree
    http://wattree.blogspot.com/
    [email protected]
    Citizens Against Reckless Middle-Class Abuse (CARMA)

    Religious bigotry: It’s not that I hate everyone who doesn’t look, think, and act like me – it’s just that God does.

    Comments

    I know you've been on Obama about not going after Bush Cheney et al. for war crimes...but really.  How many war criminals in our time have slept through the system.  History will judge them, as well their spirit.  We need to move on.  Expecting Obama, and thus judging him, in his position in the here and now to fulfill your sense of justice is just ideological fantasy. By continuing to focus on it diverts from battles we can win.


    by Elusive Trope on Tue, 04/05/2011 - 9:54pm

    I agree AT.

    Have no fear Eric. Obama does not have to get his hands dirty with the whole Bush/Cheney horror - the Hague awaits them.

    http://www.bushtothehague.org/2011/02/no-immunity-for-former-presidents-under-law/


    by mageduley on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 1:51am

    Now how is some old hague going to straighten this mess out?


    by Richard Day on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 1:53am

    Ha! So true DD. It does appear that the old Hague doesn't have any teeth left.


    by mageduley on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 2:04am

    You're missing the point, AT.

    It's not about retribution.  It's about adhering to the rule of law.  Every democracy is couched in the rule of law, so without it, you no longer have a democracy, you have anarchy. In addition, by failing to prosecute Bush and Cheney, the president elevated them to a class that's above the law, and we can't tolerate a class that is above the law and still maintain the kind of society in which we've become accoustomed.

    One of the reasons that over a million innocent men, women, and children died, and thousands of American troops were maimed and kill in Iraq, was because President Ford failed to follow the rule of law.  If Richard Nixon had been prosecuted and jailed for his part in Watergate, and we would have made Ronald Reagan his cellmate for the Iran/Contra affair and for flooding America's inner cities with durgs in order to support his illegal war in Nicaragua, Bush and Cheney would never have dared pulled the stunt that they did in Iraq.  In turn, if their excursion into Iraq hadn't happened, we wouldn't be in the economic fix that we currently find ourselves.  Make sense?


    by Wattree on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 7:37pm

    I do not wish to sound like a bootlicker, although I know I do at times, but it is difficult to disagree one sentence of your post.

    Too many people could not even recite the successes of this Administration.

    But this tea party movement and the slaughter that took place at the election booths all over this country are causing more problems than I ever would have predicted.

    And the repubs are doing their best on the Federal and state levels to deny the vote to as many voters in the coming election as possible.

    We live with a government that is one of many version of a democratic/republic.

    If the majority of the votes wish to elect corporate fascists, so be it.

    The dems fight and fight and raise money and put together petitions and knock on doors and buy ads and....

    It clearly is not enough.

    There is a part of me that really hopes they shut down the government.

    After a month or so 'independents'--who are the biggest idiots in my book because they claim to be educated and independent in their thinking-- will go nuts!


    by Richard Day on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 12:12am

    Richard,

    I don't see you as a bootlicker at all.  If I did I wouldn't have nearly as much respect as I do for your opinion. I think we're just two objective thinkers capable of connecting the same dots. It's really not brain surgery for anyone with a historical perspective that extends beyond last week's news cycle.  


    by Wattree on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 7:50pm

    I find your essay to be arguing two conflicting points of view and confusing about what you would like to see.

    Here you complain too many people are supporting individual politicians instead of principles:

    So those of us who are merely supporters of the president, as oppose to blind cheerleaders, understand that the primary reason this country is in its current mess is because the American people have been brainwashed into supporting politicians instead of principles....if we supported principles over politicians, politicians would be forced to adhere to the mandate that got them elected, which would allow us to control them.

    And then you move on to complain at length that too many progressives/liberals have become rigid ideologues, which is basically sticking to certain principles (ideology) like conservatives do, and no longer being open minded seekers.

    I sense there's some sense behind what you're trying to say, but somewhere along the line you're using the wrong terminology to get that across, at least to this reader. If you think sticking to a set of principles is not being ideological, then some more specifics about what those principles are that you think should define liberalism/progressivism would be helpful. (humanism, maybe, I sense you might be trying to  get at?)


    by artappraiser on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 2:06am

    Also confusing: You basically say people shouldn't support individual politicians unquestionably, after announcing you yourself are an Obama supporter?? I think of a cheerleader, which you say you are not, as a person who cheers a team or person onto certain goals; that sounds at least a little more like what you are asking people to be, though not exactly. Some specific examples of what you are actually upset about would help define the terminology you're using. All I know from reading this is that you don't like anything going on or the way anyone is acting, but I don't have much of a clue what you would like to see change. Get some priniciples or quit being rigid about principles? Support a president or don't support him? Instead applaud individual actions by him and voice disapproval of other actions by him?


    by artappraiser on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 2:32am

    I'm more curious by the contention that Obama's biggest fault is not fighting the GOP, vs. his freely taking up policies that continue GOP overreach.

    As an example, the GOP can't force the military to strip Manning naked, nor force Obama to defend the military for doing this. But that's what Obama did.

    Obama brought an eco-mess down on himself by proclaiming an expansion of off-shore drilling just weeks before BP screwed up in gargantuan proportions, and the administration spent as much of its efforts in keeping tree huggers from recording cleanup efforts as it did making sure the leak was stopped and cleaned up. (Independent videos of the sea bottom indicate it will be ages before effects recovered from, but the press like Obama has moved on).

    And then I'm baffled by "While I agree that President Obama has done more for this country in the short time he’s been in office than any president since Franklin Roosevelt,..."

    Well, I'll be damned.

    Have a look at Wikipedia and compare what significant Obama has done (positive) besides health care.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndon_B._Johnson

     


    by Desider on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 2:39pm

    Desider,

    Here's a few.  This is about a year old, so it's not up to date:

    - Spur Job Creation: "In addition, to help those most affected by the recession, the Budget will extend emergency assistance to seniors and families with children, Unemployment Insurance benefits, COBRA tax credits, and relief to states and localities to prevent layoffs."

    - Reforming the Job Training System: "The Budget calls for reform of the Workforce Investment Act (WIA), which supports almost 3,000 One-Stop Career Centers nationwide and a range of other services. With $6 billion for WIA at DOL—and an additional $4 billion in the Department of Education—the Budget calls for reforms to improve WIA." Strengthen Anti-Discrimination Enforcement: "To strengthen civil rights enforcement against racial, ethnic, sexual orientation, religious, and gender discrimination, the Budget includes an 11 percent increase in funding to the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division. This investment will help the Division handle implementation of a historic new hate crimes law. The Budget also provides an $18 million, or 5 percent increase, for the Equal Opportunity Employment Commission (EEOC), which is responsible for enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against a job applicant or an employee. This increased investment will allow for more staff to reduce the backlog of private sector charges."


    - Support Historically Black Colleges and Universities: "The Budget proposes $642 million, an increase of $30 million over the 2010 level, to support Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs), including Historically Black Colleges and Universities. In addition to this discretionary funding increase for MSIs, the Administration supports legislation passed by the House of Representatives and pending in the Senate that would provide $2.55 billion in mandatory funding to MSIs over 10 years."

    - Help Families Struggling with Child Care Costs: "The Budget will nearly double the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit for middle-class families making under $85,000 a year by increasing their credit rate from 20 percent to 35 percent of child care expenses. Nearly all eligible families making under $115,000 a year would see a larger credit. The Budget also provides critical support for young children and their families by building on historic increases provided in ARRA. The Budget provides an additional $989 million for Head Start and Early Head Start to continue to serve 64,000 additional children and families funded in ARRA."

    - Reform Elementary and Secondary School Funding: "The Budget supports the Administration’s new vision for the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) … The Budget provides a $3 billion increase in funding for K-12 education programs authorized in the ESEA, including $900 million for School Turnaround Grants, and the Administration will request up to $1 billion in additional funding if Congress successfully completes ESEA reauthorization."

    - Increase Pell Grants: "The Recovery Act and 2009 appropriations bill increased the maximum Pell Grant by more than $600 for a total award of $5,350. The Budget proposes to make that increase permanent and put them on a path to grow faster than inflation every year, increasing the maximum grant by $1,000, expanding eligibility, and nearly doubling the total amount of Pell grants since the President took office."

    - Help Relieve Student Loan Debt: "To help graduates overburdened with student loan debt, the Administration will strengthen income-based repayment plans for student loans by reducing monthly payments and shortening the repayment period so that overburdened borrowers will pay only 10 percent of their discretionary income in loan repayments and can have their remaining debt forgiven after 20 years. Those in public service careers will have their debt forgiven after 10 years. The Budget also expands low-cost Perkins student loans."

    - Prevent Hunger and Improve Nutrition: "The President’s Budget provides $8.1 billion for discretionary nutrition program supports, which is a $400 million increase over the 2010 enacted level. Funding supports 10 million participants in the WIC program, which is critical to the health of pregnant women, new mothers, and their infants. The Budget also supports a strong Child Nutrition and WIC reauthorization package that will ensure that school children have access to healthy meals and to help fulfill the President’s pledge to end childhood hunger. The President continues to support the nutrition provisions incorporated in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA)."

    - Revitalize Distressed Urban Neighborhoods: "The Budget includes $250 million for HUD’s Choice Neighborhoods program, which will target neighborhoods anchored by distressed public or assisted housing with physical and social revitalization grounded in promising, measurable, and evidence-based strategies."

    - Increase Funding for the Housing Choice Voucher Program: "The President’s Budget requests $19.6 billion for the Housing Choice Voucher program to help more than two million extremely low income families with rental assistance to live in decent housing in neighborhoods of their choice. The Budget continues funding for all existing mainstream vouchers and provides flexibility to support new vouchers that were leased and $85 million in special purpose vouchers for homeless families with children, families at risk of homelessness, and persons with disabilities."

    - Preserve 1.3 Million Affordable Rental Units through Project-Based Rental Assistance Program: "The President’s Budget provides $9.4 billion for the Project-Based Rental Assistance program to preserve approximately 1.3 million affordable rental units through increased funding for contracts with private owners of multifamily properties. This critical investment will help low-income households to obtain or retain decent, safe and sanitary housing. In addition, the Administration requests $350 million to fund the first phase of this multi-year initiative to regionalize the Housing Choice Voucher program and convert Public Housing to project-based vouchers."

    - Promote Affordable Homeownership and Protect Families from Mortgage Fraud: "The Budget requests $88 million for HUD to support homeownership and foreclosure prevention through Housing Counseling and $20 million to combat mortgage fraud. In addition, the Budget requests $250 million for the Neighborhood Reinvestment Corporation’s (NRC) grant and training programs. Of the $250 million, $113 million is requested for foreclosure prevention activities, a $48 million increase (74 percent) over 2010."

    - Fight Gang Violence and Violent Crime: "The Budget provides $112 million for place-based, evidence supported, initiatives to combat violence in local communities, including $25 million for the Community-Based Violence Prevention Initiatives that aim to reduce gun and other violence among youth gangs in cities and towns across the country, and $37 million for the Attorney General’s Children Exposed to Violence Initiative, which targets the youth most affected by violence and most susceptible to propagating it as they grow up."

    - Expand Prisoner Re-entry Programs: "The Budget provides $144 million for Department Justice prisoner re-entry programs, including an additional $100 million for the Office of Justice Programs to administer grant programs authorized by the Second Chance Act and $30 million for residential substance abuse treatment programs in State and local prisons and jails. In addition, the Budget provides $98 million for Department of Labor programs that provide employment-centered services to adult and youth ex-offenders and at-risk youth.."

    - Fully Fund the Community Development Block Grant Program: "The Budget provides $4.4 billion for the Community Development Fund, including $3.99 billion for the Community Development Block Grant Formula Program (CDBG), and $150 million for the creation of a Catalytic Investment Competition Grants program. The new Catalytic Competition Grants program uses the authorities of CDBG, but will provide capital to bring innovative economic development projects to scale to make a measurable impact."




    by Wattree on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 8:28pm

    Like I've said, Obama is our transition president.  If you want a true liberal president, give Obama eight years then we will be a position to convince the general public that a liberal president won;t mean the end of the US.


    by Elusive Trope on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 8:34pm

    Long dead thread, but if you're crediting Obama for job growth, you're off in the weeds already.

    And especially for the black population where it's been job loss.


    by Desider on Sat, 04/09/2011 - 6:26am

    Desider,

    Job creation is being purposely stifled by the corporatists in order to try to restore the GOP to power, and thus, the status quo.  But in spite of that, Obama has managed to create more jobs in his first two years than Bush and his tax cuts for the rich could do in his entire eight years as president.  I'd say that, along with the fact that there hasn't been a Republican president since Ike who has created anything other than economic disaster.  If I'm wrong here, in any regard, please point it out.

     


    by Wattree on Mon, 04/11/2011 - 6:09am

    Artappraiser,

    You obviously missed the following:

    "As I’ve pointed out many times in this column, the primary quality that should set progressives apart from all others is an affinity for humanity, independence of thought, and a fierce determination to remain a seeker of truth above all else, regardless to where that truth may lead."


    by Wattree on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 7:58pm

    Obama keeps trying to appease when he should be playing hardball like the Republicans do. Also I'm really not sure if the Democrats are for the people anymore. Since labor is almost dead in this country, no doubt the Left has to go to Big Money for they're funding. We all know what that means. This might explain the weakness on the part of the Left. If this is the case, we now have two Republican parties. That could be a REAL problem !!!!


    by Tommy Holmes on Wed, 04/06/2011 - 11:06pm

    You are absolutely right, Tommy.

    But the fact is, it's our fault. We've allowed ourselves to become lazy-minded, apathetic, and ignorant.  If we weren't, money would have absolutely no impact on our political environment. Money only serves one purpose in our political system - it's used to influence the thinking of an ignorant, divided, and disengaged electorate.


    by Wattree on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 8:09pm

    And sometimes all playing hardball gets you is a good sweat.  The point is no one knows what the outcome will be to draw the line in the sand.  It may mean stagnation legislatively and continued backsliding in the day to day lives of the "people."  But as long as ideologues are happy who cares?


    by Elusive Trope on Thu, 04/07/2011 - 8:38pm

    So I take it, AT, that you suggest that Democrats simply continue to "compromise" and allow Republicans to drag the nation back into the pre-depression dark ages, because that's precisely their agenda.

    Drawing a line in the sand is exactly what we need to wake people up. That's exactly what's going on in Michigan and Wisconsin, and to great effect.


    by Wattree on Mon, 04/11/2011 - 6:16am

    Latest Comments