Jump to content

Obama worries liberals?


Destroyer33
 Share

Recommended Posts

Liberals voice concerns about Obama

Carol E. Lee, Nia-Malika Henderson Carol E. Lee, Nia-malika Henderson – Mon Dec 8, 4:22 am ET

Featured Topics:

Liberals are growing increasingly nervous – and some just flat-out angry – that President-elect Barack Obama seems to be stiffing them on Cabinet jobs and policy choices.

Obama has reversed pledges to immediately repeal tax cuts for the wealthy and take on Big Oil. He’s hedged his call for a quick drawdown in Iraq. And he’s stocking his White House with anything but stalwarts of the left.

Now some are shedding a reluctance to puncture the liberal euphoria at being rid of President George W. Bush to say, in effect, that the new boss looks like the old boss.

“He has confirmed what our suspicions were by surrounding himself with a centrist to right cabinet. But we do hope that before it's all over we can get at least one authentic progressive appointment,” said Tim Carpenter, national director of the Progressive Democrats of America.

OpenLeft blogger Chris Bowers went so far as to issue this plaintive plea: “Isn't there ever a point when we can get an actual Democratic administration?”

Even supporters make clear they’re on the lookout for backsliding. “There’s a concern that he keep his basic promises and people are going to watch him,” said Roger Hickey, a co-founder of Campaign for America’s Future.

Obama insists he hasn’t abandoned the goals that made him feel to some like a liberal savior. But the left’s bill of particulars against Obama is long, and growing.

Obama drew rousing applause at campaign events when he vowed to tax the windfall profits of oil companies. As president-elect, Obama says he won’t enact the tax.

Obama’s pledge to repeal the Bush tax cuts and redistribute that money to the middle class made him a hero among Democrats who said the cuts favored the wealthy. But now he’s struck a more cautious stance on rolling back tax cuts for people making over $250,000 a year, signaling he’ll merely let them expire as scheduled at the end of 2010.

Obama’s post-election rhetoric on Iraq and choices for national security team have some liberal Democrats even more perplexed. As a candidate, Obama defined and separated himself from his challengers by highlighting his opposition to the war in Iraq from the start. He promised to begin to end the war on his first day in office.

Now Obama’s says that on his first day in office he will begin to “design a plan for a responsible drawdown,” as he told NBC’s “Meet the Press” Sunday. Obama has also filled his national security positions with supporters of the Iraq war: Sen. Hillary Clinton, who voted to authorize force in Iraq, as his secretary of state; and President George W. Bush’s defense secretary, Robert Gates, continuing in the same role.

The central premise of the left’s criticism is direct – don’t bite the hand that feeds, Mr. President-elect. The Internet that helped him so much during the election is lighting up with irritation and critiques.

“There don't seem to be any liberals in Obama's cabinet,” writes John Aravosis, the editor of Americablog.com. “What does all of this mean for Obama's policies, and just as important, Obama Supreme Court announcements?”

“Actually, it reminds me a bit of the campaign, at least the beginning and the middle, when the Obama campaign didn't seem particularly interested in reaching out to progressives,” Aravosis continues. “Once they realized that in order to win they needed to marshal everyone on their side, the reaching out began. I hope we're not seeing a similar ‘we can do it alone’ approach in the transition team.”

This isn’t the first liberal letdown over Obama, who promptly angered the left after winning the Democratic primary by announcing he backed a compromise that would allow warrantless wiretapping on U.S. soil to continue.

Now it’s Obama’s Cabinet moves that are drawing the most fire. It’s not just that he’s picked Clinton and Gates. It’s that liberal Democrats say they’re hard-pressed to find one of their own on Obama’s team so far – particularly on the economic side, where people like Tim Geithner and Lawrence Summers are hardly viewed as pro-labor.

“At his announcement of an economic team there was no secretary of labor. If you don’t think the labor secretary is on the same level as treasury secretary, that gives me pause,” said Jonathan Tasini, who runs the website workinglife.org. “The president-elect wouldn't be president-elect without labor."

During the campaign Obama gained labor support by saying he favored legislation that would make it easier for unions to form inside companies. The “card check” bill would get rid of a secret-ballot method of voting to form a union and replace it with a system that would require companies to recognize unions simply if a majority of workers signed cards saying they want one. Obama still supports that legislation, aides say – but union leaders are worried that he no longer talks it up much as president-elect.

“It's complicated,” said Tasini, who challenged Clinton for Senate in 2006. “On the one hand, the guy hasn't even taken office yet so it's a little hasty to be criticizing him. On the other hand, there is legitimate cause for concern. I think people are still waiting but there is some edginess about this.”

That’s a view that seems to have kept some progressive leaders holding their fire. There are signs of a struggle within the left wing of the Democratic Party about whether it’s just too soon to criticize Obama -- and if there’s really anything to complain about just yet.

Case in point: One of the Campaign for America’s Future blogs commented on Obama’s decision not to tax oil companies’ windfall profits saying, “Between this move and the move to wait to repeal the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, it seems like the Obama team is buying into the right-wing frame that raising any taxes - even those on the richest citizens and wealthiest corporations - is bad for the economy.”

Yet Campaign for America’s Future will be join about 150 progressive organizations, economists and labor groups to release a statement Tuesday in support of a large economic stimulus package like the one Obama has proposed, said Hickey, a co-founder of the group.

“I’ve heard the most grousing about the windfall profits tax, but on the other hand, Obama has committed himself to a stimulus package that makes a down payment on energy efficiency and green jobs,” Hickey said. “The old argument was, here’s how we afford to make these investments – we tax the oil companies’ windfall profits. … The new argument is, in a bad economy that could get worse, we don’t.”

Obama is asking for patience – saying he’s only shifting his stance on some issues because circumstances are shifting.

Aides say he backed off the windfall profits tax because oil prices have

dropped below $80 a barrel. Obama also defended hedging on the Bush tax cuts.

“My economic team right now is examining, do we repeal that through legislation? Do we let it lapse so that, when the Bush tax cuts expire, they're not renewed when it comes to wealthiest Americans?” Obama said on “Meet the Press.” “We don't yet know what the best approach is going to be.”

On Iraq, he says he’s just trying to make sure any U.S. pullout doesn’t ignite “any resurgence of terrorism in Iraq that could threaten our interests.”

Obama has told his supporters to look beyond his appointments, that the change he promised will come from him and that when his administration comes together they will be happy.

“I think that when you ultimately look at what this advisory board looks like, you'll say this is a cross-section of opinion that in some ways reinforces conventional wisdom, in some ways breaks with orthodoxy in all sorts of way,” Obama recently said in response to questions about his appointments during a news conference on the economy.

The leaders of some liberal groups are willing to wait and see.

“He hasn’t had a first day in office,” said John Isaacs, the executive director for Council for Livable World. “To me it’s not as important as who’s there, than what kind of policies they carry out.”

“These aren’t out-and-out liberals on the national security team, but they may be successful implementers of what the Obama national security policy is,” Isaacs added. “We want to see what policies are carried forward, as opposed to appointments.”

Juan Cole, who runs a prominent anti-war blog called Informed Comment, said he worries Obama will get bad advice from Clinton on the Middle East, calling her too pro-Israel and “belligerent” toward Iran. “But overall, my estimation is that he has chosen competence over ideology, and I'm willing to cut him some slack,” Cole said.

Other voices of the left don’t like what they’re seeing so far and aren’t waiting for more before they speak up.

New York Times columnist Frank Rich warned that Obama’s economic team of Summers and Geithner reminded him of John F. Kennedy’s “best and the brightest” team, who blundered in Vietnam despite their blue-chip pedigrees.

David Corn, Washington bureau chief of the liberal magazine Mother Jones, wrote in Sunday’s Washington Post that he is “not yet reaching for a pitchfork.”

But the headline of his op-ed sums up his point about Obama’s Cabinet appointments so far: “This Wasn’t Quite the Change We Envisioned.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its called reality. He cannot raise tax's and spur business and the Rich the left keeps assailing supply jobs. Hello. You cannot cut off your nose to spite your face. Also, he is beginning to understand the Iraq element. Winning and restoring a democracy are HUGE efforts and the payoff is even bigger with another allie in the ME. AQ is on the run and the pedal on the gas needs to remain there. Also, GAS. Drill now, and promote alternatives. Hello again. That all makes sense. SUV's are gonna be Cool again as gas is going down, down and down. IT only took me $25 to fill up my v-8 grand cherokee. That allows me to get far off into the woods and great unknowns. Heck, I now drive around again where I was biking before.

so a couple dollars fluctuation in the gas price rendered you inable to gas up and left you riding around on a bike, and you still drive a V8 SUV? that seems kind of dumb.

i want domestic drilling too, but for different reasons than you. you want it under the misguided notion that it will actually make a dent in world supply and affect consumer prices. i want it just so people like you will be proven wrong and will finally STFU so we can proceed with alternatives in a serious manner.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so a couple dollars fluctuation in the gas price rendered you inable to gas up and left you riding around on a bike, and you still drive a V8 SUV? that seems kind of dumb.

i want domestic drilling too, but for different reasons than you. you want it under the misguided notion that it will actually make a dent in world supply and affect consumer prices. i want it just so people like you will be proven wrong and will finally STFU so we can proceed with alternatives in a serious manner.

Fill up 10 gallons, once a week...

Before= $45.00

Now= $15.50

Savings over one month= $118 buying the same amount of gas at $1.55 versus $4.50

Savings over one month= $180 when riding a bike instead of walking with high gas prices of $4.50

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at Obama's career to this point, he has always been more of a practical centrist than anything. I have said again and again that the most disappointed group of voters, should Obama be elected, were going to be the hardcore progressives and the extremist right wingers, and this article just confirms my expectations.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fill up 10 gallons, once a week...

Before= $45.00

Now= $15.50

Savings over one month= $118 buying the same amount of gas at $1.55 versus $4.50

Savings over one month= $180 when riding a bike instead of walking with high gas prices of $4.50

i think you missed the point. if a change in gas price of a couple dollars is enough to make driving unaffordable for you so much that you have to ride a bicycle, you should either get a more fuel-efficient vehicle or start making more money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i think you missed the point. if a change in gas price of a couple dollars is enough to make driving unaffordable for you so much that you have to ride a bicycle, you should either get a more fuel-efficient vehicle or start making more money.

I got your point just fine. I was just putting numbers out there so that we all could compare the difference with one fill-up of ten gallons only once a week.

What happens when you can't get a more fuel efficient vehicle or people aren't going to buy your less fuel efficient vehicle? He rode a bike versus driving because he A) Didn't want to buy another vehicle for the short "gas rush" in prices B) Didn't feel like he could sell his current vehicle C) Thought it was best to get exercise and save money with high gas prices... He never said, "... is enough to make driving unaffordable..."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fill up 10 gallons, once a week...

Before= $45.00

Now= $15.50

Savings over one month= $118 buying the same amount of gas at $1.55 versus $4.50

Savings over one month= $180 when riding a bike instead of walking with high gas prices of $4.50

it was costing me about $70 every 5 days during the 4.89 days

now $22

I'm now saving $700 - $1000 per month

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who cares what the far left or the far right think? The majority of this country is in the center and are not ideologues..It's just the wackos that make the most noise, get the most attention and make things harder on regular people that love America.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen jack@ss, I have one messiah and that's Jesus Christ. I voted for Obama because he represents my Christian values 100 times more than the Bush/Cheney White House or that McCain/Palin nonsense. Christ set the example of sharing and compassion, not torture and greed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen jack@ss, I have one messiah and that's Jesus Christ. I voted for Obama because he represents my Christian values 100 times more than the Bush/Cheney White House or that McCain/Palin nonsense. Christ set the example of sharing and compassion, not torture and greed.

isnt it kind of ironic that you would call someone and jack@*** at the sime time you are talking about Christ, sharing, and compassion?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Listen jack@ss, I have one messiah and that's Jesus Christ. I voted for Obama because he represents my Christian values 100 times more than the Bush/Cheney White House or that McCain/Palin nonsense. Christ set the example of sharing and compassion, not torture and greed.

Ohhh the irony. Thanks for playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

isnt it kind of ironic that you would call someone and jack@*** at the sime time you are talking about Christ, sharing, and compassion?

:lol::lol::lol:

I was kinda thinking the same thing. And I disagree about Obama sharing the values of Jesus. I just don't see Jesus putting his stamp of approval on same sex marriages or even abortion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

:lol::lol::lol:

I was kinda thinking the same thing. And I disagree about Obama sharing the values of Jesus. I just don't see Jesus putting his stamp of approval on same sex marriages or even abortion.

i'm not sure Jesus would approve of the gov't issuing marriage licenses in the first place, much less denying civil rights attached to said licenses to people because they're gay. we're all sinners, right? why is homosexuality so special?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i'm not sure Jesus would approve of the gov't issuing marriage licenses in the first place, much less denying civil rights attached to said licenses to people because they're gay. we're all sinners, right? why is homosexuality so special?

Why is homosexuality so special? Good question since all sins are wrong. For one thing, God hates divorce and homosexuality (please note that I DID NOT say God hates people who are divorced and people who are homosexual). God must be pro-family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you look at Obama's career to this point, he has always been more of a practical centrist than anything. I have said again and again that the most disappointed group of voters, should Obama be elected, were going to be the hardcore progressives and the extremist right wingers, and this article just confirms my expectations.

Wha????

Centrist? Really?

Pro choice, even regarding partial abortion.

Pro reparations for blacks.

Pro gun ban

pro tax increases on the rich.

Now, I certainly like his fiscal policies more than I did a month ago, but he was never a centrist. About the only thing centrist that I know he supported was tort reform.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess liberals were not so crazy about the Clinton administration then, because all I see Obama doing is filling his cabinet with Clinton re-treads.

'm ok with that. Clinton's policies were fairly centrist (excluding universal healthcare) by today's standards. If Clinton had an ® behind his name, republicans would have loved him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...