Maybe We Can't

Obama Lone Ranger

What do you mean 'we' Kemo Sabe?

Hat-tip on the title to The Daily Show's live show last night. As for the sub-title, that's all me, but the idea behind it is out there on the Professional Left. The short story goes like this:
  • People want to punish those in power
  • because they are afraid
  • because the economy sucks
  • because of foreclosures and lack of jobs
Up until this point, the narrative fits both angry liberals and conservatives. But for the next part, the reasons diverge:
because Obama didn't do enough because Obama did too much
Since President Obama isn't going to get anybody on the right - calling somebody Hitler is usually a sign of unfriendliness - he should realize his political problem is with angry liberals and try to satisfy them. Katrina vanden Heuvel expressed it very well on The Colbert Report, also live, last night (at 2:50):
Here are the three reasons I think we are in this place right now, besides 30 years of shafting the working class. One is the original sin that he bailed out the big banks without demands on them and without getting heads rolling. He was too kind, he played footsie with Republicans who wanted to destroy his presidency and he demobilized a base that was out there at your great rally ... you dance with those that brung you. And those people - young people, African-Americans, young women, working people - brought Obama to the White House and instead he demobilized that base in favor of an inside the White House governance.

...

I say that the Democrats must regain their role as a party of the people, by the people and for the people because money in this election has been a dagger directed at the heart of our democracy and we need once again, and progressives can play this role. We need to stand tall and insure that this is a party of political courage, not political contributions, because otherwise, we are in deep ....
Yes we are!

UPDATE: Just too good to not post:
The DCCC constantly works to prop up the most "centrist" or conservative candidates -- i.e., corporatists -- on the ground that it's always better, more politically astute, to move to the Right. ... With that strategy, the Democratic Party now reaps what it has sown. Its message and identity are profoundly muddled, incoherent, unclear, uninspiring, and self-negating. Worse, its policies are mishmashes of inept half-measures that, with a handful of exceptions, produce little good for anyone (other than Wall Street, the Pentagon and other corporate interests). They are perceived as -- and are -- beholden to Wall Street, special interests, and the corporations they vowed to confront. They are without any ability to confront the massive unemployment crisis and financial decline the country faces. And as a result of all of that, they lay in shambles. Anyone who can survey all of that and cheer for the strategy which Democrats have been pursuing -- let's build our majorities by relying on GOP-replicating corporatist Blue Dogs -- or who thinks that this election loss happened because "Democrats are too liberal," resides in a world that has very little to do with reality.

0 comments: