You guys laughed when this didn’t happen by February.
One shouldn’t dismiss the insurgent advantage. Having everything to attack and little to defend energized the liberal blogosphere and left the rightwing blogosphere with
thean awkward choice between defending the government (not a great place under any administration, and most particularly this one) or hurting the movement. More than that I think people realize blogosphere left faces real trouble when when and if Dems sweep government in ‘09. At the very least partisans have to reconsider their relationship with muckrakers like Josh Marshall and Kevin Drum contrarians, and I honestly can’t wait to watch Glenn Greenwald become an intolerable pain in the ass for movementarians on the left.
Does it suck a little less to know that splintering inevitably follows political power? Or to know that the shit sandwich Bush left America would damn any well-intentioned President who tried to clean up after him? I guess not.
General Winfield Stuck
Well, Tim, I figured that Obama’s biggest challenge would be with keeping the peace of various factions in congress. I admit being surprised out in the liberal blogosphere though.
No, but point taken as true.
Quiddity
Splintering didn’t have to happen. Obama has flat out betrayed the electorate with his support for a health care mandate (sans cost controls). And he hasn’t used the political capital he had at the start to get anything much. That’s what people are complaining about.
Let’s stop making excuses for the guy.
General Winfield Stuck
@Quiddity:
@General Winfield Stuck:
case in point. sigh.
Joshua Norton
Kevin Drum contrarians? Puleeeze. Kevin is one of the tamest “lefty” bloggers on the intertubes.
Some people don’t know their ass from page 8.
AB
So, does Federalist #10 lose or win this, I can’t tell.
Brian J
@Quiddity:
I don’t think anyone is making excuses for him. For one thing, he hasn’t “failed” nearly as much as some would like to claim. In large part, he’s simply acting as those who were paying close attention expected him to act. I’d love for him to reverse course and scale down the forces in Afghanistan, for instance, so I can’t say I’m happy he’s doing the opposite, but I’m not surprised.
As far as health care goes, what cost controls are missing from the bill that you’d like to see, aside from some sort of public option?
Seebach
I’m not exactly sure how we’re supposed to “build off of” the climate change bill. How exactly do we add to that over the next 20 years? By then, it’s too late.
And it’s going to be the exact same as this clusterfuck.
CDT
Actually, General, you shouldn’t shrug off comments like those of Quiddity. Obama has been a substantive disappointment on a variety of issues, starting with executive power and accountability. And don’t we want people like Glenn Greenwald to be a pain in the ass when our side screws up? We shouldn’t excuse Obama when he does things that we castigated Bush for. That’s not splintering; that’s ideological consistency. And it’s a good thing.
Joshua Norton
Or to know that the shit sandwich Bush left America would damn any well-intentioned President who tried to clean up after him?
Which was the ONLY reason I even semi-wanted a repiggie to win. One of their own should have had to shovel up after the hoard of elephants came tromping through.
DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
After today, all I can say is Bring on the Brawndo!
mcd410x
Splintered? Over one bill? Really? The funniest part of all this is that essentially no one knows it’s going on.
Don’t worry — we’ll be back to Sarah and the Trike Force soon enough.
Brian J
@Joshua Norton:
They should, but there’s a very good chance they’d make stuff a lot worse.
SteveinSC
Well what has Obama accomplished? Plenty of talk, very little action. He stamps his feet at the bankers and does nothing, he dribbles out a little DOJ action against the bush gangsters and defends most of them in court. He claims he’s abolished torture and defends Yoo. He’s the one who upfronted health reform and then is absent from the fray. War in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush-lite. His inaction and sloth is laying the ground work for disaster in 2010. But ask not for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for the one-term-wonder!
kommrade reproductive vigor
Yeah sorry. I must have been away from my computer during the hour the fRighties struggled to decide between supporting the Mighty Boosh and hurting the movement.
Actually, I wasn’t aware there was a difference in their “minds.”
demkat620
Yeah, I will admit to being completely surprised by the new daily levels of stupidity.
Anne Laurie
Oh, great. Have you guys no pity for the people who’ll show up to read this in the morning before they’ve had their stimulant of choice? Now if Cole’s insomnia doesn’t inspire a late-night pet thread, I may be reduced to posting a GLEE live-action-anime embed.
burnspbesq
Speaking of making heads explode on the left there is Bruce Bartlett’s latest musing on tax policy over at Capital Gains and Games (sorry, no link – stoopid iPhone).
I don’t always agree, but he always makes me think, and I like that.
Davis X. Machina
Any coalition big enough to govern has enough parts that it can be split. You just have to know where to put the axe.
The Democrats in Congress, the moment they were numerous enough to command a majority in both Houses ipso facto have enough fault lines to splinter at the first blow of the axe. The Republican rump is less fissiparous only because it’s smaller. When they had the majority — and they’ll regain it sooner rather than later, given the Democrats’ positive zeal for internecine strife — they were equally easily split.
Labels don’t reflect it, but a sizeable chunk of the old Republican party now has a new home on the right of the Democratic party. Look at the new(ish) Congressmen — Kissell, Shuler, Space, Herseth — they’re essentially a wing of the older, larger GOP coalition, now sailing under the Democratic flag.
jwb
@Anne Laurie: How many HCR threads did we rip through today anyway? Ten, fifteen, twenty? It seemed like John was posting a new one every ten minutes, I’d refresh and it would have 100 comments.
burnspbesq
@SteveinSC:
What you say is annoying and tiresome. It is also wrong. Please stop.
K. Grant
Yes. But there is a difference between being a pain in the ass and screeching that ‘Obama has betrayed us alllllll!!!!!!’. Constructive criticism is a good thing. A very good thing. What we are getting (in the form of folks like Quiddity and a great many Kos kids and Hamsherites(not to mention Olbermann tonight, yikes)) is not constructive, and rarely even coherent. It is not a good thing. It is counterproductive. It also displays a lack of understanding of just how exactly the political and legislative process works. Or an unwillingness to believe that yes, Virginia, compromise actually does have to happen to get a bill passed. Perfection cannot be crafted from imperfect things – and baby, that is us.
Quiddity
@Brian J
I don’t have the answer for cost controls, but if there are none, then I don’t want the mandate.
BTW, I was never a starry-eyed Obama supporter. I saw him as a technocrat, and not particularly liberal. I was not one who poured in progressive dreams into the Obama-vessel.
That said, I am still very disappointed at the failure by the White House to work the political system. The ridiculous attempt at bipartisanship in the summer when it was obvious that Republicans were in total opposition mode. The failure to light a fire under Max Baucus’ ass to get things moving. The failure – like Kerry w/SwiftBoat- to address the Tea Party loonies throughout the summer.
And how about the way Obama is dealing with the banks? “Pretty please, make some loans!” Wow, some presidential heft being used there.
I also don’t like the misleading use of language. Pro-Senate-bill folks are saying that people will “have” insurance or “get” insurance, which is not precise enough. They have/get it because they are forced to have/get it.
The Republicans used the same tricks with language by touting “freedom” and “access” which are nice-sounding words. But “freedom” means an unregulated environment where the powerful dominate, and “access” doesn’t mean you get something (we all have “access” to yacht clubs, but we can’t afford to join).
Finally, I will continue to vote for Democrats. I’m not, and never was, inclined to go Nader or something like that. Nor will I vote for the insane Republicans. But don’t expect me to admire what this mediocrity of a president is doing right now.
arguingwithsignposts
Green Balloon Juice! Enough, already.
Seebach
@arguingwithsignposts: My God, it’s only going to get worse from here. This is going to be the good times.
General Winfield Stuck
@CDT:
I will castigate Obama when if he tortures, invades another country without just cause, illegal renders people to be tortured for info,etc
So funny on Executive Power alleged abuse. On one hand people like Quiddity, and maybe you condemn Obama because he isn’t publicly flogging congress on health care reform and other issues, and that he’s weak, and on the other make vague canned charges of abusing his authority.
And that also goes for him dealing with Bush era lawsuits by letting them run their course in the Judicial Branch without shortcircuiting that process and dropping them because left wingers want him too.
I see all this as strength, not weakness. And the bailouts and such, we just had several very long thread on those and I am not going to rehash them. But, I will just say the money is being paid back and leave it at that.
Not perfect, but pretty good.
and Quiditty got off easy.
SteveinSC
Let’s see was it the John Yoo reference? Right, I missed the prosecution. Maybe it was the withdrawal from Iraq I missed, no, couldn’t be that open-ended commitment. Mmmm, maybe it was the release of the Abu Gharaib pictures, must have missed that, or maybe I dreamed he made a warmongering speech in Norway. I guess you are right, I have just totally missed a year of accomplishments.
Quiddity
@General Winfield Stuck
Wow, what a benchmark! No castigation of Obama until several Geneva Convention provisions are violated!
BTW, there is a difference between abusing one’s authority and using one’s political capital.
I’ve been totally silent on Obama’s handling of Bush era lawsuits and related (Gitmo), so why do you bring it in as a debating point?
DaBomb
@SteveinSC: Such fucking hyperbole. How bothersome and just plain tiring.
Brian J
@Quiddity:
That was point. According to several health care economists on the left and right, like Jonathon Gruber of MIT, they’ve done pretty much everything possible when it comes to cost controls. I’m not sure what else people who are complaining about cost controls–and I don’t necessarily mean you–expect them to do.
How has Obama failed to work within the political system? He’s gotten a lot of stuff passed, even if it’s not as liberal or as amenable to our ideas as we would like. It’s annoying that the stimulus bill’s aid to states was drastically cut back, but the bill was passed.
It’s infuriating that people like Ben Nelson and Joe Lieberman are holding the agenda hostage, but it’s not unexpected that they are the focus. Most of the other Democrats are on board and the Republicans aren’t going to be helpful no matter what. The attention naturally falls to those who might support the bill.
As far as the tea baggers go, I’m not sure what else the White House could have done. If he addressed these clowns head on, they’d be elevating them to the same level as those who worked for the president. So they, as best I can tell, ignored them and waited for the fury to pass. Have you heard about death panels lately? No? Neither have I. Perhaps you can claim that such nonsense contributed to skepticism about the public option or something, but that’s far from clear.
I’m not happy that he’s failed to stand up the banks like I think he should, for instance, but that doesn’t mean he’s without value. Considering the other options, he’s the default choice. I’m going to vote him almost no matter what. Instead of taking out my disappointment on him, I’m going to see what I can do to help elect Democrats more favorable to his agenda. That’s what we should all do.
cat
Let’s say that whatever bill that an get passed is Centrist-Care. It would still be called and understood as Dem-Care.
Why would anyone want these spineless centrist dems to have the cover of calling it Dem-care and having voted for reform?
We should rather settle for Centrist-Care only if that process clarifies the politics. When Centrist-Care passes, its should be clear that Dem-Care was neutered to Centrist-Care by centrists.
It should provide political cover for real Dems who fought for Dem-Care (the centrists neutered it to Centrist-Care) and blow away the cover of Centrists who try to claim they passed reform (you asshole neutered it down to Centrist-Care). Every Tom, Dick and Harry who votes and wants reform should know perfectly who was responsible.
What you have today is that Centrist-Care is passed under the guise of Dem-Care. Centrists get political cover, Dems get screwed. None of the centrist assholes and Obama were forced to take a stand.
All of the apologists for Obama here seems to be saying that in the end both approaches result in Centrist-Care getting passed. But they are not equal. One of them lets centrists escape and screws progressives and the larger Dem side. The other threatens the electability of centrists and add to that of Dems and progressives
It is really critical that centrists be put on the spot and forced to take a stand. They must be made to bear political repercussions.
Obama must be forced to bear the repercussion for not taking a stand. Period. He must pay the price.
MikeBoyScout
Splintered? Or maybe consistently striving for objectives we stood for and worked for, regardless of the party label of the office holder?
Neither the (D), nor the promises, nor hopeful wishes, nor the landmark nature of the heredity of the office holder were what I worked for.
I read Glenzilla, Kos, Atrios, Krugman, Digby, et al for the intellectual integrity and sagacity of slogging day in and day out on the topics and issues that motivate them. I never expected them to quit because of a single election, and if/when they did, I’d stop reading them.
Splintered? It was never the Dems movement to begin with. It is OURS.
SteveinSC
Such fucking hyperbole. How bothersome and just plain tiring.
reiterates the doyenne of the department of redundancy departments.
Quiddity
@Brian J
It’s not proof, but the poll numbers did take a dip beginning this summer and it’s hard not to see that as a result of whatever Obama did (or did not) do.
And I’ll admit that part of my analysis is a reaction to how Obama is presenting his/the case. Yes, we know about his professorial style (as some call it) which lacks fire, but, just to take one example, there were several health care fairs this year where thousands without insurance showed up. Where was the White House focus on those people in need? There was none. (In fact, Obama was doing a western-states tour while a fair was taking place in Inglewood, California. He could have dropped by, but didn’t.)
I don’t think a comment thread is where you want me to start listing the various political opportunities that Obama has missed. I thought it was obvious to Balloon Juice readers. Maybe I am mistaken on that point.
Pat
Bush never had, has, or will have anything to do with the way the health care reform debate produced this nothing of a bill.
You can blame the Bushka for many things, but you can’t blame him for Obama not being the change agent many of us thought we voted for.
JD Rhoades
@cat:
“Pay the price?” Oh, what an excellent idea.
Yeah, let’s all stay home and pound our keyboards about how there’s really no difference between Obama and Bush, and then in the next election, we can give the Rethuglicans the majority back, and after that give them the White House back, too. That’ll show that bastard Obama that we WON’T BE IGNORED!
Heresiarch
At the very least partisans have to reconsider their relationship with muckrakers like Josh Marshall and Kevin Drum contrarians, and I honestly can’t wait to watch Glenn Greenwald become an intolerable pain in the ass for movementarians on the left.
Why do I have to reconsider my relationship with the muckrakers, exactly?
If Obama is feeding us bullshit, he’s feeding us bullshit, and more power to Greenwald and Marshall for pointing that out.
Olly McPherson
@Quiddity:
I agree with you, and given the past week on this site, I think you’re mistaken on that last point.
cleek
@Seebach:
if the predictions are right, then it’s already too late.
i say fuck it; let’s spend our energy trying to figure out how to live on a hostile planet. it’ll be good practice for when we have to move to a new one.
DaBomb
@SteveinSC: And you are not original either.
Touche.
The Raven
One of the things that strikes me about this dispute is that the people who believe they have secure incomes generally support the current Senate “reform,” and the people who don’t have them, or who’ve been working poor, or who have friends and sympathies on the side of the working poor and lower middle class, don’t.
On the average, the Senate proposals are an improvement; for the working poor and lower middle class they are a huge expense. Isn’t this exactly the sort of big government program that libertarians have been warning us about? The kind that does good to people?
Seebach
@cleek: We’re not going to get to move to a different planet. We don’t have the energy or oil enough to do it. I feel sorry for people who have young kids who get to explain to them that Grandpa and Grandma voted for Reagan, and that’s why Billy has to eat mud.
Kryptik
@arguingwithsignposts:
Green Balloon Juice! Sweet Jesus, Green Balloon Juice!
Quiddity
@Olly McPherson
Concede. BTW, I am very aware that much of the problem lies with our center-right governing apparatus (i.e. the Constitution). So don’t take me as a blame-it-all-on-Obama kind of person. But I am amazed that so many bloggers (e.g. Kevin Drum) are so mild in their response to what I see as a substantial failure of Obama to use the tools that he has at his disposal.
OT: Thanks to John Cole, et al for the great comment/edit feature.
J.W. Hamner
Ed Kilgore has an interesting post about the ideological divides that are coming to the surface now. I guess, like Tim F., I should have seen the Clinton Democrats vs. Netroots thing coming a mile away… but I was truly shocked when the cracks started to appear this summer… and still find it fairly upsetting to see people who I’ve read avidly for the last couple years say stuff I couldn’t disagree more strongly with. But when you think about it for even a second, it’s blindingly obvious that HRC reform of the New Dems is going to be a corporate sellout by definition to the Netroots… since regulating private entities to achieve public good is basically the entire philosophy of the former, while the fundamental impossibility of effectively regulating corporate greed is what drives the latter.
Sort of amazing we’ve gotten along for this long. I guess that just shows what a nightmare the Bush years were.
cat
Caving in to Lieberman, Republicans, and corporate interests, on the other hand, sends the message that the Democratic super majorities are irrelevant, and all the hard work from the last four years in electing them was a wasted effort.
Why should we vote for you if you are not advancing the policy and prospects of progressives?
If handing power back to Republicans is the only way to convince the Dems of that, then progressives should do that.
You people do not seem to understand the difference between “trying and failing” and “not trying and failing”. Obama did not try.
J.W. Hamner
@The Raven:
And I’ve seen the exact opposite. Guess which side I’m on? Funny how that works, eh? ;)
But the Netroots is heavily skewed to the young, wealthy, and highly educated. The “working poor” aren’t posting outraged posts on FDL (or here for that matter) in large numbers.
Maybe there is a HCR reform poll out there with crosstabs deep enough to answer it, but I don’t think anecdotes are going to cut it.
zoe kentucky in pittsburgh
When I step back from all of this I can’t help but think that the Bush years have conditioned many of us to be extraordinarily negative, hypercritical, and living in a state of constant frustration and outrage. That doesn’t mean there isn’t room for constructive criticism but it does not mean that *everything* is shit, that Obama is a complete failure, the sky is falling, etc. This bill is a mess but I never thought it would be a cakewalk, especially since dems just don’t exercize power like the GOP– in lockstep with very little diversity of opinion– and thank goodness for that.
Speaking as someone who has an individual health insurance policy (I’m self-employed) I personally need the protections offered in the HCR bill. I’m all on my own when it comes to health insurance and I’d love for there to be some regulation, some oversight, as well as subsidies so I can get something better than the high-deductible, limited insurance that I have now.
Ultimately I think HCR, even what is on the table right now, sets up some new expectations about health care, it will no longer be seen as something optional– it’s something that everyone needs. It will and can be improved over time, tweaked, etc. But doing nothing it all is the ultimate failure, far beyond political lines and factions.
General Winfield Stuck
LOL. @Quiddity:
You are. Olly is right. And I doubt I would agree with a single one of what you think are Obama’s failures, Hence, the subject of this post. It’s splittsville, and I suspect it was inevitable. I am too tired tonight to argue. See me tomorrow though and bring some evidence, and we will parry some.
Bobby Thomson
I’m not sure what’s funnier in this post, the idea that Kevin Drum speaks truth to power, or the idea that movement liberals would be threatened by Glenn Greenwald.
Quiddity
@J.W. Hamner
I don’t have (or need) Medicaid, but know several people who do, and from time to time I’ve been asked to help them navigate the system. I can say this: if you are absolutely destitute, then it’s great. You fall under all the thresholds and get practically everything for free. But, and this is key, for most people who are not destitute but still poor (or very lower middle-class) it is a system that makes you destitute. You cannot have assets above certain values (e.g. a car worth over $4k). You have to spend down your 401K until it’s gone. The only thing you can hold on to is a house, which none of these people have anyway.
There are also problems finding doctors that accept Medicaid reimbursement schedules.
Look, Medicaid is what it is, and I accept that. But to make it a part of a national health care system strikes me as bad policy. You can bet that the end result will be a peculiar tiered system which will just look bad. It’ll be confusing, appear unjust (depending on where you sit), and be a move away from a more efficient, streamlined system that will effectively reduce costs for all.
DaBomb
@J.W. Hamner: This.
@zoe kentucky in pittsburgh: And we are on the same page. Congress and the Voting populace have been so browbeaten by the Bush years, that people are slightly tainted.
At least we are talking about health care. We could still be talking about how Bush is major idiot and just dodged a shoe.
sparky
@zoe kentucky in pittsburgh: i’d really like to agree with your last point, but i just can’t.
what is on the legislative table right now is not health care. it’s not medicaid, medicare, or that other government program people like to point to, social security. it is health insurance legislation. what’s the difference? a big one. unlike those other programs where the government taxes and spends, what this legislation proposes is the allocation of governmental power to a cartelized private industry. so the only thing that is going to be enshrined by action here is a private industry right to force public participation in private profit-making. it’s as if the US treasury gave taxpayer money to banks for free to loan it to others at a profit. oh, wait….
ps: your post suggests that there will be some cap on your insurance payments. as of right now there is no reason to think your premiums will go down. none, zero, zip. in fact, they could go up, quite a bit, once your state loses its power to regulate your carrier.
pps: yes, it is possible that there could be effective regulation. it was also possible that there could be effective financial sector regulation. how’s that turning out?
DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
@JD Rhoades:
Sadly I think this needs to happen in 2010 and 2012, let the
Republicanslunatics run the asylum (into the ground). We need a total disaster at the hands of the ones who want to bring it and only then will people be willing to see things for what they really are.The right wants to destroy the country and unfortunately, for one reason or another, a growing segment of the population wants to let them do it. Ever wonder why 20th Century Fox didn’t promote the movie Idiocracy ? Because the truth hurts, what they promote at Faux Nooz is exactly what they want for our country. Stupid people are the new intelligentsia.
Bring on the Brawndo!
Sanka
Shorter Tim F.: Moderates are…er, sociopaths. Yes, that’s it.
Meanwhile:
As for health care, the poll — which was taken Dec. 11-14 of 1,008 adults, and which has a margin of error of plus-minus 3.1 percentage points — finds that those believing Obama’s health-reform plan is a good idea has sunk to its lowest level.
Clearly, the Tea-Partiers and Sarah Palin and the right are splintering the Republican Party.The answer is obviously to clap louder on health-care “reform” and to demand the single-payer, or at least, the “public option”—a mandate that was so clearly espoused whenour left-of-center nationthe American people went to the polls last year.Oh, the most recent November elections are a non-factor. Clearly, they were rooted in racist obstructionism, what with Tea Partiers and Sarah Palin and all.
DougL (frmrly: Conservatively Liberal)
@Sanka:
I bet you have a high level of electrolytes.
sparky
@Bobby Thomson: ha! almost as good as the alt/GOP bit.
thanks.
sparky
@General Winfield Stuck: well, for once i hafta agree with you, though i think i am normally aligned with Q et al, who apparently as a thundering herd of ummm two, seem to have stoked rage and apoplexy amongst everyone else.
oh well, back for more punishment on thurs!
Joel
This is how democracy works. Not everyone who voted democratic thinks like BJers think. It is what it is. Given the cirucmstances, I couldn’t be happier. Okay, maybe if Lieberman were deported. To mars.
Nick
@cat:
Except it won’t because it didn’t last time and I suspect you know that.
Elie
@SteveinSC:
If you would not mind, draw for us the right kind of leader for right now. Please tell us what this one President would have done to be successful in your view…topic by topic, how he would have behaved – give us the details and how the Congress or opposition would have allowed that success to happen.
All ears now, so give us the goods….I know you are soooo right…
CDT
@ General Winfield Suck:
Obviously I believe that Obama personally is less likely to authorize torture than was Bush. My point, and the problem, is that his positions with regard to the ability of the President (him or another) to so authorize are no different than were those of Bush. Of couse Obama is smarter than Bush, and no doubt nicer. But if his positions in public and Court affirm the right of the executive to trump the constitution, that’s cold comfort. Obama, for instance, has been every bit as aggressive at involing the state secrets privilege as was Bush. Perhaps it’s because I’m a lawyer, but it troubles me greatly that Obama maintains Bush’s legal positions with regard to the ability of the monarch to ignore constitutional restraints. I used to challenge Republican and purported libertarian friends with this during the Bush aministration, and they were able to say onlythat the trusted their guy not to abuse the abusive powers he had been granted. I didn’t like that answer, and don’t like it anymore now that it’s my guy.
Elie
@Quiddity:
Quiddity:
There are some features of the proposed Medicaid expansion that you just may not be aware of. Under the proposed legislation, Medicaid would be expanded to increase its coverage at a higher minimum income. That would mean, as you noted, if you quality, you get first dollar coverage. Now that pertains to poverty level for pregnant women and children only but would cover others if passed. It would be a positive thing for people of lower but not poverty level incomes.
It is interesting to wonder how you thought health reform would work? Did you think we would all wake up one day and just have care and not pay one cent or have any adaptations to make to the whole system?
Though many of your criticisms of Obama and health reform are valid, spell out for me the system you thought would be in place and how that was going to be achieved without busting heads and not a little compromise?
General Winfield Stuck
@CDT:
State secrets use by Bush was used more times than all the other presidents combined. It is not the use of state secrets invocation, it is why that matters. IE using it to cover up illegal acts is the problem. I am not sure how many times Obama has invoked it, I think I read at least once, maybe more. But I am pretty sure there hasn’t been a charge, or evidence he is using it to cover up lawbreaking.
That is my only concern on the SS usage. I do not want Glenn Greenwald or the ACLU getting access to this info unless there is evidence it is being used by Obama for cover of illegal activities. And just being paranoid he could be isn’t a good enough reason for me.
As far as the Bush era lawsuits, I have nothing to add beyond my original comment on this. These legacy lawsuits should not be dropped by Obama just because the left wants him too. They should continue in the Judicial Branch until fully adjudicated and letting judges up to the SCOTUS make that call. Politicizing it for any reason is wrong imo, and goes against Obama’s promise to adhere to separation of powers.
The only way to accomplish undoing Bush’s injection of politics into the judicial system is to stop doing it.
In the meantime, there currently is legislation pending to codify proper usage of the SS claim.
gwangung
Hm. Rage and apoplexy aren’t necessarily bad; focussing on the wrong target or using the wrong tactic is bad. Shouldn’t we remember that we’re ALL agreed on the goal, but we’re having a debate (heated!) on tactics and strategy.
bago
I for one welcome our splintering overlords. Vicious debate and reconciliation tends to produce better systemic results than a top down heirarchy. The heirarchial approach might have a higher efficiency rating, but it is also much more prone to mistakes putting it deeply into the red.
Lolis
@SteveinSC:
I love it when “liberals” start trotting out right wing talking points. Obama is lazy? Obama is dirty? Obama is all talk. One-term-wonder. Yeah, right, teabagger. Obama is practically guaranteed two-terms.
Most people I know have no idea what is going on with the health care bill. Most people I know who voted for Obama are pretty satisfied. The latest AP poll has his approval ratings at 55%. That number is crazy high considering our economy.
bago
Jesus titlicking Christ, these country songs mindlessly spouting out vapid slogans supporting mindless jingoism are supremely annoying. It reminds me of some lobbyist I met in DC. He was talking some bs about media control that was non-factual. As in I googled a politico article that showed his assertions were not true. He brought up Iraq. It took control to not break out a vile insult. He was arguing that my brother the marine did what he did because he “wanted to win” for his country. Trying to explain why you would blow a 12 year old in half with your grenade launcher was completely outside of this guys reality. The mental cost you have when you realize you pulled the trigger launching the grenade that blew some kid in half never entered this guys mind. Fucking glib.
bago
In other words this fucker thought that my brother fought because he wanted to “win”, not that he wanted to ensure his brothers in arms came home. Fucking political moron, probably earning three times my salary, six times the salary of a sargeant, just to send the poor to war.
They fought to make sure their friends wouldn’t die. Fucking politicians are last on their mind.
In other words fuck the fucking fucks in dc who think that it is ok to pay people minimum wage to die for their politics.
Platonicspoof
I made it through only one of the recent HCR threads, so maybe this future obstruction has already been mentioned.
Consider the bush league delaying tactics in the Senate now – asking for amendments to be read out loud, forgetting voting cards, moving the goal posts, etc., – and the money out there for better lawyers than Orly Taitz, then consider what if the insurance mandate is challenged in a Supreme Court of Bush appointees on constitutional grounds.
How long will it take, regardless of merit?
Via Volokh
/Is it green balloons, or red?
Platonicspoof
@bago: @bago:
I appreciate your pointing out your personal stake, and your brother’s, in the need for reality checks for the “deciders”, and the paradox that the people on the ground cannot avoid that reality.
Uriel
@J.W. Hamner:
To shorten a much longer response I was going to post: this, exactly.
In fact, I have repeatedly seen arguments that, while the subsidies will carry the poors through the coming storm, the average worker making $50,000 a year (as if there’s anything resembling average about that level of income) will now be forced- FORCED I SAY!- to pay anywhere from 7% to 398% of their income just to provide insurance for their families.And this is a HUGE concern, because there are tons of people employed at jobs that pay roughly 3x minimum wage, but somehow strangely lack the option for employer based insurance. Walmart and burger king workers, for example.
Although, to be fair, I have to admit that that I have also seen arguments that this bill will send every last person making less than 7,000 times the poverty level directly to jail- forcing them to not only NOT pass go, but leaving them with no choice but to enter the completely rigged thunder-dome tournament bracket to fight tooth and nail for the only “get out of jail free card” in the US, solely to for entertainment of Rahm Emmanuel and Tim Geithner. Only to find out the real prize is actually a cookbook titled “To Serve Man.”
And all that over a bill that won’t even be finalized until after conference, and could (and probably will) emerge from that process in a very different form, while facing a much more streamlined and easier to fight set of final votes. Not to mention the many chances for tweaking whatever final form it takes before it actually takes effect- whether through regular legislation, reconciliation, or executive order
It’s almost as if some people are letting their natural inclination towards outrage carry the day, regardless of the bill’s contents, the processes involved, or even simple consistency and common sense.
Weird- I though only righties did that sort of thing.
Edited to add- Hey! Edit! Cool! And I thought you guys were just funnin’ around…
burnspbesq
@SteveinSC:
John Yoo is a despicable piece of shit who will burn in Hell for all eternity if there is a just God.
Name a provision of Title 18 that you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he violated. If you can.
burnspbesq
@Pat:
Maybe not, but I can sure as hell blame you for being blind to the reality of who and what Obama is, and for failing to manage your own expectations. Your bitterness and disappointment are entirely self-inflicted.
oh really
Not if your Big O cheerleading outfit is all clean and pressed.
Of course, your point is spot on, but that attitude is not reflected in the behavior of many commenters (here and elsewhere). I suspect many of the people who are most disappointed in Obama are those who worked the hardest to get him elected. Even if they failed to recognize his obvious lack of progressivism during his Senate term and campaign — something they should have seen — they still have both the right and responsibility to criticize him and express their disappointment now because he is representing them in a way Bush never did. On the other hand, candidates often behave differently once they’re in office, and I think it’s fair to argue that Obama gave people reason to expect, or at least hope, that he would govern more progressively than he campaigned, given the generally accepted practice of Democrats moving to the center to get elected.
People like Glen Greenwald, who were exceedingly popular for their criticisms of Bush, are now condemned as shrill because they have directed the same standards they used for Bush at Obama. Particularly for people who post multiple times on virtually every thread (hoping for a front page position some day?) it isn’t even necessary to read what they write when the subject is Obama, because it is always going to be the same — Bush gave him a shit sandwich, Obama knows what he’s doing and in the end he’ll deliver the goods, and people who criticize him are just hand-wringing worrywarts. For the unfailing Obama apologists it’s always too early to worry, complain, criticize, or condemn. In fact, if one follows their reasoning, the only time when anyone will be justified in criticizing will be after it is too late for the criticism to have any effect — at which point the apologists will undoubtedly be telling people to just shut up since they are wasting their time complaining about a fait accompli. I suspect most of these people were never politically involved before they got a keyboard, and their real objection is any and all genuine criticism aimed at Obama.
There’s been a lot of silly criticism of Obama on a host of issues, but criticizing him for his role in health care reform seems quite reasonable to me.
oh really
PS I think Feingold is probably right that Obama is getting the bill he wanted all along. He never cared about a public option, which explains why even his lip-service was so weak. In the end, it may turn out that Obama’s ideological twin in the Congress is none other than…
Joe the Lieberman.
MNPundit
@burnspbesq: As I’ve said before, I didn’t expect him to be awesome but I did expect him to build the party and he’s done the exact opposite.
This was the chance, the chance to remove the GOP from the board and grow the Democratic party and that has totally failed.
Nick
@MNPundit:
yeah that was never going to happen, no matter how progressive a healthcare bill was.
Tim F.
@Bobby Thomson: Which post are you talking about? I labeled Drum a knee-jerk contrarian, which he often is.
General Winfield Stuck
@oh really:
PUMA! PUMA!
PUMA!!
LOL
CDT
@ General Winfield Suck:
Any sane person — and I likely still qualify — would agree that Obama is less likely to abuse executive power than was Bush. But the problem is not how often Obama steps over the line; it’s that he insists that we must maintain the unilateral executive powers that are capable of being abused. We’re closing Gitmo, and replacing it with a prison in Illinois at which enemy combatants will apparently still not be granted full due process. The entire enemy combatant justice system has been set up like this: starting with the premise that we must find each one guilty, let’s work backwards and figure out what sort of trial we can give them and ensure that result. Tough cases will be handled with military tribunals. The easy cases we can send to regular District Court. On a whole host of issues, he’s followed Bush’s lead, frequently reversing his criticisms thereof to do so. For instance, little if anything has changed with regard to domestic surveillance, and Obama reversed himself and supported retroacive immunity for telephone companies who had illegally spied on Americans. I am aware of no instance in which Obama has disclaimed any executive power claimed by Bush. Obama may or may not use the state secrets doctrine more sparingly, but his arguments in defense of it are no different than Bush’s. (And, in fact, it’s been employed to kill suits brought to hold the Bush administration accountable for War on Terror abuses). We’re a nation of laws, not men, and that applies when our man is in office, too.
General Winfield Stuck
@CDT:
The current fisa law expires in about 3 years. Then we will see what happens when it is renewed. And you have no idea how it is being used. We have no complaints so far on FBI screwups like under Bush. Or any other fisa abuses. All warrants are going thru the fisa court one way or another, as far as I know. though some may be initiated before that, and later reviewed. I don’t like the fisa law and Obama flip flopping on voting for it was Pelosi’s fault for bringing it up in the heat of a presnit election. His vote would not have changed the outcome and took away an issue the wingnuts would have pounded him with. I am happy he didn’t do the stoopid the left wanted for posturing and optics.
As far as the military tribunals, as long as they meet SCOTUS muster on basic protections, I don’t have a problem with it.
Yes, we are. And so far you have not provided one example of Obama breaking one. Only that he may, so he has failed. As I said, there is a SS legislation pending in congress. Obama has signed a number of executive orders, making Bush type abuses verbotten. And you are upset he hasn’t spent his precious time getting payback for Bush abuses.
Get back to me when Obama breaks the law, then I will be outraged. Till then, you got nuthin”
Da Bomb
@Sanka: And actually that is not true, there is report out this morning, showing his poll numbers holding steady at 56%.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091217/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_ap_poll_obama_afghanistan
And it’s the AP reporting it of all places.
Da Bomb
@General Winfield Stuck: Facts be damned. It won’t make a bit of difference, what you inform some people of…
Obama is EPIC FAIL, a corporate sell-out, and spineless and he shall never succeed. Also too.
CDT
@General Suck:
I think we are talking about two different things. You seem content that Obama (as far as we know) is not a serial law-breaker as was Bush. I agree that’s better than what we had before. What concerns and disappoints me is that Obama has largely not, as he promised during the campaign, dismantled the Bush structures and policies that facilitate executive law-breaking. We’ve just got a better-behaved man serving as elected monarch. As for his precious time, I’m fine if he chooses not to devote his to personally exposing Bush-era abuses. But he shouldn’t spend that precious time on arguing that the courts shouldn’t, either.
General Winfield Stuck
@CDT:
LOL, and so you want him to drop the on going lawsuits that the courts are currently deciding these issues.
This is just wrong. That is all I can say. And it is why I quit reading Greenwald. Most of the Bush’s lawbreaking came as a result of going well beyond structures that have been in place a long time, see fisa, see SS. And the torture structures have been dismantled at least to a large degree. People still get rendered, just not to be tortured. And things like SS, are pending with defining legislation as we speak. You really need to read all of Obama’s executive orders on these subjects. I don”t have time to give a link, but you can find them on the WH website.
I cannot keep repeating the same facts over and over to people who don’t want to hear them and expecting different results in cognition from left ideologues. It is the definition of insanity, and I want to keep what little that is left regarding politics.
But who knows, the Progressive Movement I keep hearing about Obama not following may someday be as successful as the Conservative Movement. We can only hope.NOT
General Winfield Stuck
@CDT:
@General Suck:
mandarama
@oh really:
And you’d be wrong. There are a lot of us out here who busted our asses to elect Obama and don’t regret it one bit. I also supported Kerry, Gore, Clinton…many of my local Dem candidates over the years. And with all of those people, I knew I might not support all their policies or decisions 100%, but that their stated principles were in line with my belief system. I started supporting Obama during the primary. I have not regretted it. His approach is the same today as I’d expect from having read his books and listened carefully to his speeches: pragmatic, patient, understanding of branch limits, sparing in demogoguery, and remarkably able to move forward without getting rattled by all this bullshit.
I am no blind sycophant or political newbie. That’s exactly why I’m not yelling ZOMG FAIL! Years and years of crappy policy will take years to untangle. Just think, the narrative from the Village a few months ago was “Obama’s swinging too hard for the fences!” and now his own voters are yelling “He’s just ambling around in the dugout and letting the other team win!” Great! Let’s trade him!
To think, my biggest worry was that someone would assassinate Obama in his first year. It turns out that what I should have worried about was the circular firing squad. The most painful part is that I know people like Karl Rove are laughing their asses off at this.
Paula
It helps to take the A-list left blogosphere as seriously as I take the MSM, which is to say not seriously at all.
I tried reading DKos during the presidential campaign in 2004 and during the whole Lamont flame-out. Every time, I wanted to reach in, throttle people then go out and vote Republican out of sheer spite. Things haven’t changed much in 2008-09.