Obama’s Will
Here’s my three favorite things Barack Obama has done so far:
1) Announce the end of the era of torture with the shutdown of Gitmo.
2) Appoint Hilda Solis as Secretary of Labor.
3) Piss off everybody by asking the right Reverend Rick Warren to speak at his inauguration.
And now I can add a fourth favorite: Having a secret dinner with conservative talking-heads George Will, David Brooks, and Bill Kristol.
I think it’s great, frankly. And a lot more fun than watching a smug Hillary Clinton at her confirmation hearing, bobbing and weaving about how often she will or will not disclose the contributions made to her hubby’s foundation by various Gulf-based Emirs.
The whole Warren thing, plus the dinner with Will and Brooks all add up to the same thing in my mind. Call me pollyannish, But I am betting that Obama intends some big-time Change…if for no other reason than to stave off or mediate the Depression left behind by one George W. Bush & Co. Obama’s strategy seems transparent enough. He’s buying off, charming, seducing, and lining up as many non-traditional allies as possible because, duh, he’s going to need them in the bumpy days ahead. To quote Dubya, it’s called Uniting Not Dividing.
It’s no accident that this guy is now running at something like an astounding 82% approval rating. Natch, a lot of that has got to do with massive rejection of the Bush admin and its serial catastrophes (Iraq, Katrina, Wall Street, the U.S. Constitution etc ). But it’s also a result of Obama’s stated goal of transcending simplistic and unnecessary partisanship, and at just the pitch-perfect historical moment.
We’re in the beginning phase of a major political shift, if not wholesale re-alignment, and the old formulas aren’t just gonna hold. Liberals and pwogs all bent out of shape because of Obama’s footsie with Warren and Will are as out of touch as Republican true-believers who actually think that the GOP lost because it wasn’t conservative enough.
Wrong. The Republicans lost because masses of Americans are just plain tired of conservatives (they tired of liberals long before that). That’s not an argument for a mushy center but rather for a vigorous Something New. Obama understands that. Let’s see who else does.
P.S. As a very, very tiny sidebar, this dinner should taken by the so-called progressive Netroots that Obama might be figuring they’re just not gonna be needed as much as they were this past year. The campaign is over and governing begins. To pass a national health care plan and to pull the troops out of Iraq, Obama is probably going to be more concerned about what the WSJ or the NYTimes has to say rather than the DailyKos.
January 14th, 2009 at 7:17 am
Call me pollyannish, But I am betting that Obama intends some big-time Change
—
You are pollyannish.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:06 am
The thing I find most amusing in the wake of winning is hearing conservatives tell me how Obama is pissing me off, probably deliberately, by governing “from the center.”
Obama IS governing “from the center” but he’s also shifting what is considered “the center” in a significantly more pragmatically liberal direction. This administration is committed to – and capable of effectively pursuing – a broadly liberal agenda, but they can’t become a rubberstamp for some leftie wishlist. Among other things, that would be a dumb way to make policy. The difference between the Bush debacle and the Obama promise is evident in the appointments, most of which have been very good – and some, like Solis, excellent. Keeping a broad-based group of advisors in national security and key economic positions is shrewd and useful, practically and politically. Especially since Obama is committed to some major new initiatives in both areas – in fact, unprecedented on the economic front.
Conservatives whose last gasp is that Obama hasn’t had them for lunch yet, but in fact smiles and waves in their direction – and therefore his base supporters are pissed off or feeling blown off – are reveling in their own impotence and absurdity. I’ve been a strong Obama supporter since around Day One of his campaign, gave him a significant chunk of money and worked more than I ever have for any candidate, and he’s turning out to be even smarter and more effective as a leader and as a politician than I thought – and my early hopes for him were very high. It’s early, but so far he’s delivering precisely the kind of smart, innovative, inclusive leadership I wanted to see.
But Marc – dissing the Dem netroots, especially coming from someone who has moved over from the Nader camp to supportiing Obama after watching the Bush disaster unfold – is also total bullshit. The netroots don’t for a minute expect Obama to follow their dictates, but the netroots have over the years significantly helped build that progressive Dem base that Obama was able to tap and grow. Don’t kid yourself. Obama wasn’t a predictably populist creature of the netroots – that was Edwards’ only shot and I never found him compelling – but there was a lot of overlap as he built his own organization and net-communications. Just as there’s an organic connection between what Dean achieved in ’04 and what Obama bulit in ’08. Also, the netroots will play an absolutely crucial function in providing Obama with critics on his left – which he obviously needs. Contrary to your implication, the netroots never thought Obama was going to simply check off their wishlist or that their gadfly role would end as they “crashed the gates.” Your rap on the netroots says more about your own spotty relationship to the Dem base that’s been pressing change within the party than it says about them, frankly. But, hey, welcome aboard.
Solis is a great example of effective change in the direction of government. And Obama’s disarming of the right that was promotiing a smear campaign against him just a few short months ago is very, very politically saavy. He’s walking around with their balls in his pocket and they know it, not vice versa. It also shows him to be so much bigger than these clowns.
I talk to quite a few folks who were active in the campaign in the Bay Area – which is obviously a more liberal base than most – and nobody’s up in arms because he didn’t appoint Jamie Galbraith Secretary of the Treasury, or even about the Rick Warren blip. (IMHO the choice of Warren handed the anti-prop 8 folks a great opportunity to push the issue once more in the public arena. They should be – and probably are – secretly thanking Obama for shining a bit of light on Pastor Rick in the media.)
RIghtwingers are welcome to gloat over Obama’s “centrism” – it’s a measure of their absolute dishonesty and stupidity. The reaction to this dinner at Daily Kos, incidentally, was a chuckle – and pretty much the same observation you make. If these creeps can be charmed and disarmed a bit, by playing to their egos and opportunism, all the better. It’s just too bad that Obama had to spend an evening away from the wife and kids to break bread with these reptilian types.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:16 am
You missed the presence of Charlie Krauthammer at this funfest – who is second only to Kristol as a smarmy purveyor of high wingnuttery.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:21 am
Reg, I think we need to define netroots more broadly. We have Daily Kos and Marc and others who are pretty sane. We also have Jane Hamster at Fire Dog Lake who is totally whacked out. So, Obama couldn’t please the far left netroots if he began his inaugural address by asking marshals to arrest Bush and Cheney for war crimes, because they would claim there doesn’t even need to be a trial.
I agree with Marc. More to the point, Obama has nothing to lose except an evening of his life by dining with them. Two points:
1. Ronald Reagan went to a party at the home of Katharine Graham of The Washington Post, either before he took office or early in his term. Right-wingers were beside themselves. In the end, I doubt that this affected The Post’s coverage or positions nearly so much as Meg Greenfield and Fred Hiatt being traitors to logic in their editorials.
2. What fun it would have been if, on this occasion, Will’s current wife had done what his first wife did and kicked him out of the house!
January 14th, 2009 at 8:36 am
I am defining netroots broadly – Marc is just engaging in smarm, frankly. And the reason for his disdain is more rooted in his own “totally whacked out”‘ political history (i.e. voting for Nader!) Let’s get real.
You’re agreeing with me as well on the particulars, incidentally because I have no problems at all with this stuff, including the Rick Warren thing. But there’s a bit of dishonesty here, as well as among rightsers, because I checked Kos, who is a Netroots Kahuna, and he’s just fine with this, as is Americablog. I’m sure one can dig up a criticism.
Also Marc isn’t part of the “netroots” – he’s just a leftie blogger. And, for the record, Marc was touting Edwards – who never impressed me and always seemed like a contrived character – along with the biggest chunk of the “whacked out” netroots during the early Dem campaign season. Edwards was churning out the predictable left-populist rhetoric that Marc now claims he believes is obsolete in the wake of Obama’s broader victory.
As I said, welcome aboard, but leave most of the leftover bullshit and cheap snark behind.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:41 am
Obama’s biggest problems might come from right-wing Democrats. He has already had to threaten them with a veto:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/01/13/transition.wrap/index.html
Another thing Obama will have to deal with is the war in Gaza, and I mean in six–count them–days:
http://michael-balter.blogspot.com/2009/01/chosen-people-or-jewish-barbarians.html
January 14th, 2009 at 8:44 am
This “Obama is pissing off his base” bullhshit is nonsense. It’s generally promoted without any evidence, as rightwing and lazy MSM memes invariably are. He may be “pissing off” Paul Krugman – but the Krugster was hardly Obama’s base. In fact, he was an incoherent critic (“Obama’s not progressive enough! Vote for Hillary!)
Will there be a “tension” between Obama and liberal-agenda types ? Of course. Anyone who didn’t foresee that is a blithering idiot. But liberals are elated at his election and generally very, very pleased with the way the administration is shaping up. That said, nobody is required to make a fool of themself and engage in the kind of hero-worship that the Right did with mini-man George Bush, who was such an obviously lame, marginal type that he need to be pumped up and promoted and treated with inordinate deference – it’s called overcompensation for a “leader” who was obviously deficient and needed massive image-buffing by sycophants.
January 14th, 2009 at 8:53 am
Roger Cohen, who is hardly a “netroots whacko” and someone I rarely expect much insight from, wrote an excellent column that tweaked Obama on a strategy for Gaza diplomacy, but more to the point, exposed fundamentally the skewed nature of discourse and policy-agendas in the US on Israel/Palestine:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/opinion/12cohen.html
January 14th, 2009 at 9:01 am
That was an unusually good column by Cohen. Just plain naked American self-interest would dictate that the US get real about Israel’s madness.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:10 am
“RIghtwingers are welcome to gloat over Obama’s “centrism” – it’s a measure of their absolute dishonesty and stupidity.”
Sounds an awful lot like maybe he is pissing off at least some in his base.
Maybe Obama really is serious about bipartisanship, a different kind of politics, a change in the way Washington does business, and not just using it as a ‘political’ ploy for a partisan agenda, as reg suggests…..and is ‘hope’ing.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:25 am
In fairness to Marc, I realize the “Obama’s leaving his base behind and they’re apopleptic” wasn’t his main point and was only implied in a footnote, but it’s a relentlessly recycled theme, particularly among Righties who have been rather resoundingly rejected and have little recourse other than to try to carve out some new “clever” niche confirming their supposed relevance and dig ever deeper for evidence that “liberalism has no future”, no matter how dishonest or tendentious.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:27 am
It would seem like the madness lies with Hama, Michael.
To be lobbing bombs on a daily basis into the cities of another country much more militarily capable than you would seem like madness to most unmad people..
But there is always a method to the madness of monsters, and Hamas has theirs. Using their own innocent population as fodder to generate world opinion for a cause they are happy to announce, and we have all heard a thousand times.
Leftists like Michael are just cool with that. It’s working for them.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:35 am
Jim R – “maybe he is pissing off at least some of his base.”
Since when does someone get elected President and pursue the total agenda advocated by the most partisan and ardent of their “base.” I think that would be, like, never. Also, you guys are so clueless and cranked out, I think you believe your own propaganda and have a twisted perspective on what liberals want and who we are. Meanwhile, the rightwing is in a shambles. The GOP “base” is actually touting Sarah Palin in certain quarters (God’s gift to Dems!) And the “rightroots” have sent Joe the Plumber off to Israel as a “war correspondent” where he lecture Israeli journalists that they’r not pro-Israel enough. This is wonderful IMHO, but very bad for conservatives who aren’t morons. Not good times for characters such as youselr. But you’re still dithering about some alleged disarray on “the left.” The truth is, we’re partying this week.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:38 am
“Righties who have been rather resoundingly rejected and have little recourse other than to try to carve out some new “clever” niche..”
Uh….reg. I believe the popular vote spread was something like 5%. The biggest mistake a political leader can make is thinking they have been given a mandate by the voters where there was none. Obama is where he is because he hasn’t made many mistakes.
The days of mandates are over. We are a centrist nation, and it is the left and the right mandaters that stop ‘progress’.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:44 am
Jim – at 9:27 you prove my point that you guys are twisted and pretty much believe your own delusional bullshit. It’s one thing to disagree about Gaza, and quite another to assert that someone who thinks Israel’s invasion is, at best, counterproductive is “cool” with suicide bombing. You’re full of your own crap.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Also, this “centrism” nostrum is the product of the laziest minds. Don’t lecture me about Obama – you were one of the creeps sliming him when I was helping him get elected. He’ll do what he does and he’ll do it well. But on these threads I’ll continue to tell morons on the right they’re scum. Go fuck yourself.
January 14th, 2009 at 9:48 am
“The GOP “base” is actually touting Sarah Palin in certain quarters (God’s gift to Dems!) And the “rightroots” have sent Joe the Plumber off to Israel as a “war correspondent” where he lecture Israeli journalists that they’r not pro-Israel enough. This is wonderful IMHO, but very bad for conservatives who aren’t morons.”
I agree reg. You finally found something we can agree on, then go right ahead and ruin it by believing your own propaganda and having a twisted perspective on what I want and who I am.
OK. I’ve used up Marc’s 3 comment mandate.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:04 am
Who you are is evident from your sliming of Michael B. That was peverse.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:09 am
“..to assert that someone who thinks Israel’s invasion is, at best, counterproductive is “cool” with suicide bombing.”
Jeezus reg. I didn’t mention suicide bombing. I was referring to Hamas’s stated agenda to destroy the state of Israel. But thank you for reminding the unmad among us that in fact Hamas did use innocent people of their own population for their madness, and are training kindergardeners now in case they’re service for the cause is needed later.
No I certainly don’t believe Michael and leftist are ‘cool’ with suicide bombings.
Man, your grumpy today. Sorry Marc, I’m done.
January 14th, 2009 at 10:18 am
I’m not “just cool” with Hamas firing rockets into Israel and killing three human beings. Is Jim R “just cool” with Israel killing 300 Palestinian children in response? Sounds like he is.
January 14th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Sorry if there was imprecision. You didn’t specify that Michael was “cool” with the suicide bombings, just “Using their own innocent population as fodder.”
I think it’s perverse to impugn a critic of Israel’s Gaza invasion as being “cool” with the actions of Hamas, rather than taking on the broader question, which Michael raised, of whether this “madness” makes any sense even as “naked self-interest”, regarding both the US and Israel. Obviously I don’t speak for Michael – and he’d probably disagree with me on various aspects of the Israel/Palestine thing – but if Israel could pinpoint Hamas leaders and kill them I could, frankly, care less. The question, which lots of Israelis raise themselves, is whether this cycle of kill-overkill is leading the Israelis anyplace they really will want to be over the longterm. So far Israel has done their best over four decades to humiliate the Palestinians and make any peace overtures look as dubious as their enemies’. People who reduce Israel’s agenda regarding the Palestinians to poor Israelis simply defending themselves are supremely dishonest, ahistorical and – worst – not helpful to either side finding a way out.
What I’m sick of most, however, is creating some singular identity of interests between the US and the Israeli government (see Olmert quashing a US vote for a UN ceasefire resolution crafted by…Condaleeza Rice!), and of wackos who target Israel’s critics as anti-semitic and/or admirers of Islamic nutjobs and murderers. This is standard issue garbage from the Right and from the Likudnik elites in the US.
January 14th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
I think you’re right on Marc. We on the left/lib/pwog side of things tend to forget that it’s going to be hella hard to get ANYTHING good done even with Obama’s victory. The forces arrayed still and forever against any diminution of ruling class power and privilege are awesome, and we/Obama will need every smidgeon of support we can garner to make even preliminary inroads in the areas of health care, energy, foreign relations, and wealth distribution. Since we can’t even count on all dems, Obama/we would be fools not to try to include some reps, inds, evangelicals, etc.
It still remains the appropriate activity of the left to try to build popular support for what we want–unions, fairer taxes, health care, etc. This has always been the priority and always will be.
January 14th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
http://blogs.tnr.com/tnr/blogs/the_plank/archive/2009/01/14/why-liberals-aren-t-angry-over-obama-s-dinner.aspx
January 14th, 2009 at 1:14 pm
I know Marc doesn’t like the Clintons. They bug me, too. But was Hillary “smug” at her hearing? I didn’t think so.
January 14th, 2009 at 3:34 pm
Reg, don’t you think you can find the time to post more? I really look forward to your pearls of wisdom. I mean your 12 comments on this post is almost penurious. Couldn’t you find it in your heart to post at least 36 comments for each of Mr. Cooper’s contributions? I find you almost as interesting as him.
January 14th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
“I find you almost as interesting as him.”
But you spend precious moments of your life reading this shit…
Very odd. Explain that to me the next time you stop me on the streetcorner trying to sell a copy of “Revolution.”
January 14th, 2009 at 10:55 pm
reg, 12 of the first 26 comments are from you. In general, I like reading your comments, but come on.
January 15th, 2009 at 7:50 am
Did it ever occur to you that maybe reg is going for a record, that it’s a new year and he’s shoting for the stars. We should applaud that kind of moxie, not moan about it. We may be witnessing something we’ll tell our grandchildren about. “Is it really true, grandpa”, they’ll say, wide-eyed and full of innocent wonder. “Tell us more about reg — tell us more. Did he really post a much as they say? Did he really exist?”
January 15th, 2009 at 9:30 am
evets is right…reg’s very verbosity is a thing of wonder
January 15th, 2009 at 11:32 am
reg: Obama IS governing “from the center” but he’s also shifting what is considered “the center”
I see. Rather than taking a position and saying this is where I stand–on the left, Obama stands on the left and redefines that position as center. Well, I’m in the center.
January 15th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
Marc Cooper – Progress
(See this site for your own “Change”: LINK)
January 15th, 2009 at 12:35 pm
Here’s a larger one of Marc>>>> LINK
…and one of reg, Balter, Randy, etc: LINK 2
January 15th, 2009 at 1:36 pm
It’s not just the verbosity, it’s the frequency that really boggles the mind. Extracting them from the HTML source yields:
When he’s “on”, a new comment comes roughly every 10 minutes.
January 15th, 2009 at 2:05 pm
When the spirit is upon him, he blogs like no other man. Warp-speed, unrelenting, yet still coherent. It’s like watching Michael Jordan in the early 90′s when he lived above the rim. He’s blogging for us all.
January 15th, 2009 at 4:21 pm
Agreed, evets, except Michael Jordan was fun to watch and and did something he knew.
January 15th, 2009 at 4:23 pm
Unless one is under the impression bloviating coprolalia is fun to watch.
January 15th, 2009 at 4:43 pm
Wow, that’s a dilly of a word Sergio just taught me.
Not sure I’ll ever be able to use it in a sentence, though.
January 15th, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Not sure if these chatterings about reg are mostly critiques or awestruck observations, but I’m going to have to chime in and say that reg puts y’all to shame when it comes to insightful comments. Snipe all you want, but reg has been cranking out informative comments on this blog for years, now. So maybe instead of whining you can try adding something of value yourselves? Just a thought.
And Sergio’s just a KPFK-esque troll. He’s taught us a lot about how the evil empire Amerikka is headed for destruction.
January 15th, 2009 at 10:07 pm
I, for one, find reg’s comments much more interesting than these comments about reg.
January 16th, 2009 at 6:55 am
Actually, I was just joking around. I’ve always enjoyed his comments and must admit I’m sometimes “awe-struck” at how much he can turn out while remaining quite cogent.
January 16th, 2009 at 7:00 am
I therefore do not agree with Segio, though being from the east coast I’m not sure exactly what a “KPFK-esque” troll is (though it sounds worse than “Kafkaesque”).
January 16th, 2009 at 7:23 am
It’s the latter, Samuel.
January 16th, 2009 at 7:26 am
Reg is the most interesting commenter here. I never miss reading his always articulate, and sometimes passionate, arguments.
Hope he’s just too busy to comment lately.
January 16th, 2009 at 11:13 am
We need to take a moment to be thankful about the plane that landed in the Hudson River. I’m thankful that Ted Kennedy wasn’t at the controls.
January 16th, 2009 at 11:23 am
Thanks for ending this on a classy note.
January 16th, 2009 at 2:24 pm
http://michael-balter.blogspot.com/2009/01/chosen-people-or-jewish-barbarians.html
January 16th, 2009 at 6:16 pm
Great post, Michael.
January 16th, 2009 at 6:19 pm
Reg can comment as much as he damn well pleases, unless I get a migraine and cut him off.
Nice post Michael.
January 16th, 2009 at 7:01 pm
You can send me your Advil bills.
January 16th, 2009 at 8:46 pm
Don’t get cheap! Make it Imitrex.
February 28th, 2009 at 11:51 pm
We may be witnessing something we’ll tell our grandchildren about. “Is it really true, grandpa”, they’ll say, wide-eyed and full of innocent wonder.
April 6th, 2009 at 12:59 am
Great site! Nice to see others sharing these ideas
July 6th, 2010 at 5:02 am
Oh boy, I love The President . Anyone see his latest approval ratings?