Water Doesn't Trickle Down the Middle of the Road, President Obama

Submitted by mark karlin on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 12:09pm.

EditorBlog

THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

By Mark Karlin

BuzzFlash lost a lot of readers when we were highly critical of the Hillary Clinton campaign in the primaries. Then we lost some more readers when we supported her as Secretary of State. (Last spring we had promoted the idea of Clinton as a Supreme Court Justice. We think she has superb skills; she just couldn't run a campaign well.)

It just goes to show you that -- free of advertising, and free of a board of directors who might be pushing their own candidates -- we call 'em as we see 'em. We might be right and we might be wrong, but we aren't bought (because if we were, I want to know why my wife and I owe so much money and live so frugally. Where's Tom Daschle's car and driver when you need a lift around town, huh?)

So, BuzzFlash -- the site that took so much grief for going so hard to bat for Obama -- is ready to admit that we're getting a little anxious that Obama is more concerned about being voted best liked than most effective. He doesn't appear to realize yet that you can't be both when you have a band of Neo-Confederates as your shrinking, but brazen opposition party.

Appointing Judd Gregg as Secretary of Commerce is like putting the Milton Friedman "GOP School of Radical Anarchistic Unregulated Markets" fox in charge of the hen house. And, on top of that, the GOP got to dictate that Gregg's replacement would be a Republican when normally a Democratic Governor (as in New Hampshire) would appoint a Democratic senator (as a Republican governor would appoint a Republican). This isn't just appeasement and giving the losing party (by a landslide) the keys to the safe to continue destroying our economy. It's just plain weak, naive and potentially disastrous to our world trade policy, census count in 2010, and insurance that "free trade" agreements have provisions to respect the environment, unions, and the Amerrican industrial infrastructure.

Obama thinks that he is co-opting the "opposition," but they appear to be the winners who are getting victories even though the electorate dealt them a devastating losing hand.

Basically, the Democrats -- because Nancy Pelosi is pretty good at party discipline (certainly compared to Harry Reid) -- can get most of the "New New Deal" legislation out of the House. But 41 Republican senators -- and a few reactionary Democrats like Baucus and Nelson -- are holding the future of America hostage. They are asking us to resolve a cratering economy by doing more of what led to its downfall in the first place.

Instead of coming in and steamrolling the Republicans -- because unlike Bush, Obama had a clear mandate due to the popular vote and the former Bush states that he won -- Obama is acting like he is more concerned about appeasing the losers and assuring them that he is not beholden to the people who elected him or ready to govern through assertive leadership.

We are grateful for Eric Holder, the reversal of Bush policies, and progressive legislation that is coming down the pipeline, but you don't get a "New New Deal" accomplished by letting the GOP continue their ruinous policies (as in tax cuts for the rich) and appointing fiscal right wingers like Gregg (who voted to abolish the Commerce Department). This is Barack Obama not changing Washington, but Washington changing him.

An economy in its most serious crisis since the Great Depression can't trickle down the middle and survive. The Republicans have given us more than 25 years of trickle down disaster that has led us to into the dumpster. It's time to trickle up by giving the 99% of Americans who are not super wealthy the ability to get back to work, pay their mortgages, and return to being consumers of American goods.

Why is Obama so concerned about the likes of Mitch McConnell and his small minority of GOP senators? Beats us.

I even saw the ideologically derelict minority leader, "Money Bags" Mitch, tell the state RNC chairmen that the Republican Party could not survive as a regional party (i.e., Southern) and that their demographic base was shrinking.

So why is Obama spending more time wooing the party that's trying to undermine him (as they did with Clinton) at every turn (just look at the bizarre unanimous House GOP vote against the stimulus bill)? The bill passed the House; let the GOP suffer the consequences as Americans get back to work (although take the useless tax cuts for the wealthy out first.)

As for the Senate, give Harry Reid (a nice guy, but no party disciplinarian) a spine and remove the filibuster as an option. Then it could be clear sailing to the change that Obama promised, but that he appears timid and obsequious (to a party that is in electoral retreat) about delivering.

We believe Obama has the ability to self-correct. He's brilliant, reflective, and wants to do well.

But his preoccupation with winning-over a bunch of Jefferson Davis descendants whose only real power is their bluster is baffling -- and dangerous to our nation's future.

THE BUZZFLASH EDITOR'S BLOG

Mark, you nailed it

Submitted by Moongoddess on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 7:44pm.

Just want to add my heartfelt agreement with the point of your editorial. You just can't be nice to Republicans. They have no concept of bipartisanship. And they always put themselves ahead of their country's interests. Uh, I was one of the readers who left and then came back. I enjoy BuzzFlash and support it as much as I can, although, unfortunately, I've lost my freelance job. However, I hope we can all weather this awful economic situation if we look out for each other and give one another a helping hand along the rocky road of life. D. M. Read Author of Layoffs http://www.layoffsbook.com

Democratic Hacks

Submitted by rmallett on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 6:04pm.

are better than Republican hacks, but it's just a matter of degree. President Obama seems to be oblivious to the fact that he rode a wave of change into the Whitehouse and is failing to utilize his most potent allies-- the people who elected him. We gave money in unheard of amounts and worked our butts off to get out the vote, and he's more concerned with getting the Republicans to like him than doing what he was elected to do. Even after a smashing electoral victory, it seems as if the Democrats' only desire in life is to be Republican Lite. Was it Grover Norquist who talked about neutered animals becoming very compliant and controllable? Looks like he was right. Where in all of the elected Democratic Party is there a pair? We spent 8 long years in the wilderness, listening to the Dems say, "just wait". I can't believe is what we waited for. If Mr Obama doesn't get his rear in gear-- and get the troops(that's us)involved-- it won't be nearly as disastrous as if Mr McCain won, but that's damning with very faint praise. Expecting the Democratic Establishment to be more than the , well, Democratic Establishment is beyond naive; it's suicidal. RAT

How to Get Obama's Attention

Submitted by mdgr on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 4:42pm.

Well said, but only partially. Betrayal of trust is not due to Obama's stupidity but because he thinks that support from progressives is no longer as important as support from the like of of the right wing of the G.O.P. Instead of kvetching or signing silly online petitions--they make us feel we've done something, but they're fairly useless--progressives should take to the streets. I am not suggesting sedition, but 50,000-100,000 bodies on the White House lawn to protest what Obama has done in the first two weeks of his presidency would not be dismissed, as it was by Bush, as just a "focus group." Now is the time to do that, not in two months or two years, because by then the die would have been cast. Cabinet appointments have already been made, and some of them are terrible. Problem is there is nobody on the progressive side to make ANYTHING like this happen. I would urge Buzzflash to coordinate with the Huffington Post and Truthdig, and get that going. Democrats.com is basically playing pattycake with this, and that goes nowhere quickly.

Mark, Terrific Editors Blog--thanks

Submitted by Cole... on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 4:18pm.

There are a bunch of us who are squirming at these choices. And Obama has yet to feel the onslaught of the hate 'em make 'em fail books to come out from the Scaith/Limbaugh camp. And you can bet they are coming~! Obama has to learn quick that first, protect your ass and putting the chewers behind, in your backside gives them too much tempatation. This is not a time for experimentation in soft inclusion of the loosing opponents it's time for hard driven repeal of the damage they have done.

Reaching out to stubborn mules gets you kicked

Submitted by ernieson on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 3:18pm.

Obama must realize that trying to appease the stubborn southern mules will not change them, but will only end in Obama getting kicked where it hurts. The article is somewhat accurate in stating that Washington is changing Obama, and Obama is not changing Washington. The Confederates in Congress are still fighting the Civil War and are doing the same failed policies expecting different results. There is a term describing that behavior...

Not a Limb

Submitted by timoor on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 3:49pm.

This is not going out on a limb - it's keeping the trunk strong. Commerce is not a minor post. I'd much rather have Governor Richardson. I know that he would be an excellent Commerce Secretary. I've always known him to be an honorable public servant. I also have deepening reservations about Tim Geithner as Treasury Secretary. I can't help but think that President Obama has made a terrible mistake in appointing him. The perception that he's so desperate for republican support is weakening public confidence in his promised agenda of change.

You Hit The Nail Right on the Head

Submitted by jetbes on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 2:59pm.

Thanks Mark, Very well put. Though I whole-heartly supported Obama during the primary/general elections, and I still support him, but I'm beginning to have some concerns about him letting the Repugs dictate who should replace Gregg as well as letting a losing party have any in-put about our current economic disaster. Democrats compromise and give in too much to the Repug. If only the Democrats can stick together in doing whats right for the country unlike the Republicans who bond together in their wrong doing, we can get some things accomplished within a short period of time. Bush got whatever he wanted and didn't give a damn what the Dems thought or said. I think President Obama needs to do the same thing. Stop trying to appease and kiss up to those ass-holes. That's all they want, so they can still kick him in the butt after getting what they want. It's ok to be nice and wanting bi-partianship, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. WE WON, they lost! and I wish he would stop giving them back their power to control what the American people put him in office to do. He promised us that he would change the way Washington is run, so show us some backbone. I don't know what he was thinking when he appointed Gregg, but I guarantee that he won't be under as much scrunty getting his nomination as Tom Daschle and Geithner. I feel it's just another distraction from keeping the country from moving forward. I pray that President Obama doesn't turn the American people back in the hands of those losers. I still have some confidence that he knows what he's doing since he's only been in office for over 2 weeks. Let's give him a chance and see how all of this "bi-partianship" plays itself out.

Water, Trickle, Etc.

Submitted by bluewombat27 on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 2:54pm.

Well said as always, Mark.

Thanks Mark

Submitted by phred42 on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 12:48pm.

Agree!

Repuglickens are Thieving Neo-Confederates

Submitted by Norm on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 12:47pm.

Mark, you left out the word "thieving." We could all live with the racism, the tax cuts, the narrow minded social and economic policies. But the thieving is what has truly brought this country to where we are now. Here's an example, Neo-Con's kick-back taking from Korea's Samsung so they could dump memory chips on our market place driving their American competitors to the edge of bankruptcy.

"But his preoccupation with

Submitted by Barry Schwartz on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 12:37pm.

"But his preoccupation with winning over a bunch of Jefferson Davis descendants (whose only real power is their bluster) is baffling and dangerous to our nation's future."

Stuff like this saves me the trouble of mocking what you wrote. I can just point to it and explain to people that this is what Barack Obama is up against.

Up against it man

Submitted by sulphurdunn on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 4:24pm.

What Obama is up against is a neo-confederate minority party that wants him to be their house Negro and people who bet the farm that he will kick their feudal, Jim Crow, pro corporate, 19th Century, gentlemanly and hypocritically pious, pontificating asses up one side and down the other of Pennsylvania Avenue all day every day until they come to Jesus. Get it now?

You need to be more clear

Submitted by Ken duerksen on Wed, 02/04/2009 - 1:38pm.

The irony that you seem to spot so vividly in your quote is lost on me.

Yes, it does reflect what Obama has put himself up against: an awful lot of his supporters who feel betrayed by his apparent love affair with the discredited cult that wrecked out country.

Get FREE BuzzFlash News Alerts

User login