President Barack Obama entered the pantheon of Nobel Peace Prize winners Thursday with humble words, acknowledging his own few accomplishments while delivering a robust defense of war and promising to use the prestigious award to "reach for the world that ought to be."There must be some PUMA sympathizers working for the AP. Well, they seem to be everywhere these days -- even on the progblogs.
The Markos zombies are officially turning on their beloved Lightbringer.
Obama spent all year enabling Max Baucus and Olympia Snowe, and he thinks we're supposed to get excited about whatever end result we're about to get, so much so that we're going to fork over money? Well, it might work with some of you guys, but I'm certainly not biting.Actually, Moulitsas has been both biting and sucking for some time now.
(They say over at Corrente that Chief Cheeto's post has evinced some particularly hilarious commentary. I'd offer a few samples, but for some reason, my freshly-installed system froze when I tried to open the comments.)
Jane Hamsher endorses Der Cheeto's anti-Lightbringer views. The first reader comment is noteworthy:
I’ll be giving my time and money to primaries for Progressive candidates against Lincoln, Landrieu, Baucus, Nelson, Reid, and Lieberman.One name is conspicuous by its absence. Why not back a progressive alternative to Obama in 2012?
Here's Arianna Huffington on what she calls Obama's "Sartre" strategy -- as in, no Afghan exit:
What came through loud and clear from Obama's announcement and the subsequent multiple walkbacks of the notion that we might ever leave Afghanistan -- followed by Gibbs' steadfast certainty that we will on or before July, 2011 -- is that this White House has a serious credibility crisis.I like this bit:
Shouldn't decisions that require enormous costs -- in blood as well as resources -- be met with ferocious questioning by the media? Articles sent to academic journals get more rigorous vetting these days than do decisions to escalate wars.Very true. But Ms. Stassinopoulos, you forget one fact: You are the media. For you to adopt a "blame the press" strategy is hypocritical.
Did you do any rigorous vetting of Obama in 2008? During the campaign, did you publish many articles which ferociously questioned the man's claims? For example, did you print anything about his outrageous NAFTA lie -- a lie which told me all I needed to know about Obama's character? Did you vet any of the outrageous commentary you published smearing Obama's opposition?
In 2008, the prog mafia insisted that anyone who opposes Obama must be motivated by racism. Well, look who has joined Team Bigot: The Congressional Black Caucus. They are angry about Obama's inattention to the struggling, jobless poor.
During the stalemate, the lawmakers issued a statement saying they would no longer support public policy "defined by the world view of Wall Street."Here's a particularly telling bit:
Some have sought to pin blame on the president's advisers.Have you noticed the pattern?
"It's not the president. It's his economic team," said Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Fla. "I don't think they're doing their job."
In the early years of the 20th century, reactionaries who didn't like Czar Nicholas' policies blamed Count Witte. Today, those disappointed by Obama keep pointing fingers at someone -- anyone -- other than Obama. The CBC wants to blame the economic team, as if some malign outside force had inserted Timmy and Larry into this administration. Stassinopoulos instructs us to blame za media, dah-link. The progs want to place all blame for the health care disaster on the blue dogs.
Nobody wants to admit that chief blue dog is the top dog.
Obama came to office on the power of the "conversion narrative." His campaign team filled the blogs with how-I-came-to-the-Lightbringer stories -- which, in the accurate judgment of the strategists, were thought to be more compelling than were articles about policy.
Pretty soon we will see a spate of very different conversion stories, as people recount the moment when they finally confessed that Barack bamboozled 'em. Of course, for many people the snapping point occurred months before Obama won the nomination. For me, that moment came during the "darkened video" smear. When the progs refused to apologize or to back down even after the claim had been exposed as phony, I made a decisive break with all Obama supporters.
Was there a moment like that for you?
23 comments:
Yes, in the IA primary, when Obama accused Hillary of having no plan to save Social Security, and about 5 seconds after said that Social Security shouldn't be politicized. That was how I was introduced to the man; hat tip, Atrios for the link. (Not having a teebee, the 2004 greatest speech ever was and is a blank to me.)
Well, after all the hoopla over his stupid speech at the Dem convention, I kept a casual eye on Obama. The moment he got into the Senate and voted with Bush on the war funding I knew he was same old, same old despite all the gushing projection from the antiwar crowd. So I merely dismissed him as anyone of interest to me.
The breaking point, for me, when I realized he was actually a harmful agent to any progressive cause, was when he praised Reagan. It went beyond pandering to the right-leaning newspaper he was giving the interview to...he was actually rewriting history to gloss over Reagan's Southern strategy. That on top of squandering the perfect opportunity to reject the rightwing policies that had highjacked the nation. Why would any Dem running in 2008 want to run on being a *uniter* and "bipartisan??"
And now all the whiners wish Zero would "fight" for the ideals they projected on him, conveniently forgetting that they decried Hillary for being a "fighter." Anyway, after his followers all defended his praising of Reagan, it was all over. Nafta, McClurkin, telecom immunity...they weren't going to look at any of it. the mind still boggles.
Those waking up from their hopium stupor have yet to admit they were hoodwinked, and the few who have tried to come back to the fold are still projecting the "nastiness" on those of us who'd tried to warn them....along with continued snide remarks about Hillary, to justify their poor choice in the past.
When Michelle Obama made her black people will "wake up and get it" comment, it pissed me off. When Camp O and the media ganged up on Clinton twisted her words and meaning about Martin Luther King and Lyndon Johnson's relationship, I was alarmed, and when they followed that up with all the fairy tale shenanigans, I was disgusted. But, when Obama said he didn't know if Bill Clinton was a "brother" because he had never seen him dance, and nobody saw anything wrong with that, I was done.
My deal breaker moment came in two parts on the night of the New Hampshire primary.
First was Lawrence O'Donnell crowing about how the press couldn't wait for Clinton to be trounced because it would be so much cooler to cover Obama.
Second was when Obama brushed off his NH primary defeat with "Don't worry... I'm from the south side of Chicago. We know how to win elections!"
Those two vignettes told me all I needed to know about the media's motivation and Obama's ethical standards.
For me, it was the morning that my radio alarm awoke me with the news that Obama, along with Edwards ("my" candidate at that point) and others had dropped off the Michigan primary ballot. I said then that I would vote for no candidate in the general election who did not appear on my primary ballot, and I followed through.
I did, however, in January of 2008, tour the official websites of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, to be sure I was informed on their positions. At Obama's site, there was no category for women's issues (there was on Clinton's), but there was a category for issues of faith (none such on Clinton's). Obama's faith position paper opened with a statement to the effect that he acknowledged that God plays an important part in our everyday lives. Never looked back.
After the 2004 speech and when he won the Senate his very first vote was to reauthorize the Patriot Act. I knew right then and there. And it went down hill after that with all of the other incidents everyone has mentioned so far, especialy the darkening of the video.
For me it went way back, to the much ballyhooed 2004 convention speech that sent progs the world over into raptures of stupefied wonder. I remember saying, Hey yeah, it sounds great, but what about the content?
The speech was then followed by his scolding, condescending "guest post" at the Giganto Cheetanto itself, where he scolded liberals for not playing kissy-face with Republicans. (Does anyone at the Cheeto remember this?)That was the nail in the coffin for me.
I'm not the sharpest nail in the drawer, btw. If I could figure out, I don't know why all those smartypants progbloggers couldn't.
My "finito" with the Democratic Party occurred at the DNC Rules & Bylaws meeting, of which travesty we all know the ugly facts.
what ever happened to tony rezko?
In particular, I just got told a story about Chicago real estate and the Olympic bid. Shame for Obama's backers that Chi town didn't get the nod. They would have really cleaned up on all the real estate they bought.
Anyway, why did the O dude fly to the Olympic decision on short notice? That's a real gesture of solidarity with his home town.
Harry
For me it came a few months after his Denver speech when he made a public proclamation that went something like: "If Democrats wish to take back the senate and the house then they need to embrace religion and mean it." After the long God bothering years of Bush, I knew if he were elected we were up for some more of this trash.
For me, it was his arrogant declaration that he could get her (Clinton's) voters to vote for him, but he didn't think his supporters would ever vote for her. Combine that with Michelle's vile "can't run your own house," and "I'd have to consider her tone," comments and my heart was once and for all sealed against him even though I started out thinking well of him.
I started out merely worried about his lack of experience, but ended up worried about his lack of conviction.
The breaking point for me was when they accused Bill Clinton of being a racist. This is the man who took incredible amounts of heat early in his presidency because some idiot pundit declared him the 'first black President'. Now (then) he's a racist.
That day I declared I would never vote for Obama.
The CBC wants to blame the economic team, as if some malign outside force had inserted Timmy and Larry into this administration.
Yes, that is how it works.
During the Carter transition, one of Jimmy's Georgian loyalists, the late Jody Powell or the late Hamilton Jordan, forget, memorably said, 'if you find a Michael Blumenthal at Treasury, or a Cy Vance at State, I'll say we failed at what we're trying to do and I'll resign from the administration.' And both men were in fact the original Secretaries of those departments (and no, he did not resign).
During the '80 campaign, a considerable issue was made of GHW Bush's membership in the Trilateral Commission (considering how the TC dominated the allegedly incompetent Carter administration's allegedly bad policies). As a result, Bush the Wiser was forced to make a public display of resigning his director's position at the TC (and maybe the CFR as well), but then the Reagan administration went on to see more appointments to senior policy positions in the administration than the Carter administration. By anectdote and to my belief, Reagan didn't even get to pick his own VP, but had the choice dictated in a meeting with David Rockefeller (TC founder along with Zbig Brz.) By credible evidence, Reagan despised Bush ever since the Nashau, NH debate imbroglio during the primaries, and thought him a weak man (or worse).
So, yeah. Presidents are weak actors relative to the permanent power structure, cannot get there to that office without the power structure, and once there, dance to their tune.
It is no especial mark of shame for Obama, but rather par for the presidential course.
Presidents sometimes explain how the permanent government frustrates their intent and directives, and sometimes their friends allude to it instead (see Webb Hubbell's 'Friends in High Places,' e.g.).
In particular, this explains how 'the fix is always in,' and how Ford pardoned Nixon prior to trial, how Clinton/Janet Reno quickly closed the curtains on the crimes involved with IraqGate, and why Obama is declining to prosecute Bush-era war crimes.
XI
For me the discontent with Obama was immediately after he announced his bid for the presidency. I knew he didn't have any experience to speak of and he had never really shown any moral courage or high ethical standards that I was aware of. I looked at his platform for the presidency and heard him speak about why he should be president. Being a Wisconsin resident the first thing I thought was this: he's running on Russ Feingold's record, but, but that's not his record. He hasn't supported and worked on those issues for years and made the hard votes that Feingold did. He's not Russ Feingold, he's a fake. Further heartache came when I realized none of my friends would give me even a moment to explain why Obama wouldn't, couldn't live up to the hype about who he was, that this was going to be bad, very bad.
1) "Shouldn't decisions that require enormous costs -- in blood as well as resources -- be met with ferocious questioning by the media"-Yes they should...in a Clinton administration.
2) Also for me when he said he could get her(Clinton) supporters but he didn't know if she could get his. I realized he wasn't a Democrat then.
3)The rules and bylaws sham meeting held at the Marriott right around the corner- That's when I knew the fix was in and our Democracy was in trouble.
4)Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Mr. asneukhq, and Mrs. wrrytkjfdsh, all made contributions to Obamas campaign and not an eyebrow was raised.
Either I've misremembered that quote, or all the citations I've found are incorrect. I could have sworn Mike Blumenthal was mentioned, but the following is how many sources cite it, contrary to my memory, mentioning Zbiggy and not Mike:
During the 1976 campaign, Jimmy Carter's aide Hamilton Jordan made a famous prediction in a Playboy magazine interview: "If, after the inauguration, you find a Cy Vance as Secretary of State and a Zbigniew Brzezinski as head of national security, then I would say we failed. And I'd quit. But ... that's not going to happen. You're going to see new faces, new ideas. The government is going to be run by people you have never heard of." When Carter was elected, of course, Vance and Brzezinski got the top jobs (and Jordan didn't quit).
XI
My moment came when I noticed Obama's fans were foul-mouthed Philistines. Bad fans = bad candidate.
It was the Obots that told me everything I needed to know about Obama. With hateful followers like them, Obama was obviously no messiah.
I knew all about Obama when I a) saw him once on the TV, b) carefully read his Education plan and read some speeches etc. where he addressed this topic, - well before the election.
I considered the ‘plan’ vague as it was (which might be considered normal at that stage and not a fault) to be pernicious clap-trap, a medley of vaguely left-smelling boilerplate, containing some bits of advice from different quarters (all of them ancient and well known) cobbled together haphazardly. I also noted disdain for blacks (evident in some passages of his books as well.) Really disquieting. Hard to imagine anything worse, really.
The sad thing to me was that Education is a domain where Obama could really make a difference - it is internal organization, away from the World Stage (the military, the Jewish lobby, etc.), and though this may sound counter-intuitive, good Education need not be costly, and improving Education may even involve budget cuts; lastly, it is relatively free of ‘lobbies’ with large financial interests (text books may be an exception, no matter..)
Now, Bush’s NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND program was dismal, disastrous in a way, and it was criticized, damned even, by all fair-minded ppl in the know. I couldn’t muster a single argument for it, except that it did rest on a certain robotic view of education, very traditional, very worked out, very consensual in a way. Which is still, partly, a plus point. For education to proceed, ppl must agree on how it is to be done.
Obama’s plan is called RACE TO THE TOP.
Says it all really. ;)
(I am not a US citizen or in the US.)
Ana
When I read about Obamas embrace of Donnie McClurkin, and his statement that we need to be "tolerant' of anti gay hate,I knew he was no light bringer.
Then for many of the reasons cited above I just could never warm up to him.
His whole campaign, his whole life story it all struck me as being one giant lie.
I was never an O supporter but I knew I wold never be an O voter of any kind after the Texas primary, which I followed closely on-line. What a disgrace to democracy.
Let's see, a guy who wrote just two books, both about himself. Gee, could this be a sign of an attention whore? Honestly, going into the campaign season for that election, I was so disgusted with both our so-called opposite parties, that I knew whoever got nominated would be the worst possible choice for the American people, on BOTH sides. Turns out I was right.
Obama's campaign was sleazy in so many respects that it indicated to me that he must also be one sleazy character. i remember...
1) the accusations that Obama bussed in supporters from Illinois to caucus in Iowa.
2) the large amount of illegal foreign donations that poured into the Obama campaign.
3) the accusation the Bill Clinton was a racist.
4) the behavior of his deranged "devotees".
5) his inexperience.
6) his obvious disrespect of the candidate that I supported.
7) his "bitter" comments about those who were not supporting him.
There were many, and each one that was added to my list prevented me from voting Democrat for the first time in my life. You may write on this blog that he is not a socialist/quasi-communist, but I beg to differ. There's something about this man and his beliefs that are bothersome. There are a lot of rich marxists, and that may seem to be contradictory, but I believe that Obama is one of them.
My conversion moment came the night of the IA primary when Obama's campaign played Jay-z's "99 problems and a b--ch ain't one" with Barack and Michelle both beaming and bopping along to the song on stage. Having worked on a few campaigns, I know how deliberate the pick of campaign event music is and so how breathtakingly mean, petty and above all woman-hating it showed this man and his staff to be. When Obama's own "southern strategy" rolled out in SC after he lost in NH where he simultaneously smeared both Clintons as racists and invited homophobic, self-hating "cured gays" to black campaign events to appeal to the worst in my ethnic group's nature, I was done with him forever. Of course, he only got worse from there.
Post a Comment