A Lexicon of Disappointment

[Rajiv]

A Lexicon of Disappointment (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090504/klein)

All is not well in Obamafanland. It's not clear exactly what accounts for the change of mood. Maybe it was the rancid smell emanating from Treasury's latest bank bailout. Or the news that the president's chief economic adviser, Larry Summers, earned millions from the very Wall Street banks and hedge funds he is protecting from reregulation now. Or perhaps it began earlier, with Obama's silence during Israel's Gaza attack.

Whatever the last straw, a growing number of Obama enthusiasts are starting to entertain the possibility that their man is not, in fact, going to save the world if we all just hope really hard.

This is a good thing. If the superfan culture that brought Obama to power is going to transform itself into an independent political movement, one fierce enough to produce programs capable of meeting the current crises, we are all going to have to stop hoping and start demanding.

The first stage, however, is to understand fully the awkward in-between space in which many US progressive movements find themselves. To do that, we need a new language, one specific to the Obama moment. Here is a start.

Hopeover ...........
.
.
Hoper coaster ..........
.
.
.
.
.
.

[Spartacus]

we need a lexion of

"saw through him from the beginning ... instead of looking at the so-so voting record and hoping things would change ..."

and

"told you so ... (but I won't say "I told you so" ...)"

and

"you shoulda worked & voted for the only one whose record showed a real chance for change, RP ..."

A Lexicon of Disappointment (http://www.thenation.com/doc/20090504/klein)

[Rajiv]

"you shoulda worked & voted for the only one whose record showed a real chance for change, RP ..."

I worked for and contributed to the DK campaign -- the other side of RP

[D-Mack]

I worked for and contributed to the DK campaign -- the other side of RP

DK had Hudson and RP had Schiff as an economic adviser.

Can you imagine Schiff running the Treasury or soemthing like that?



The Obama camp knew what is coming, see Biden's Seattle speech.

[cjppjc]

DK had Hudson and RP had Schiff as an economic adviser.

Can you imagine Schiff running the Treasury or soemthing like that?



The Obama camp knew what is coming, see Biden's Seattle speech.

Dr. Paul might have picked Donald Luskin.

[iyamwutiam]

It wouldn't matter who he picked. Ron Paul broke the internet record for fund collection -for one day. But he , Gravel, Kuchich were sidelined from the first debate and basically removed as soon as possible.

You are given the 'false' choice of 'two' candidates -both of which are screened thoroughly by the elie to ensure their continued hegemony of US citizens secondarily and global objectives primarily.

[rj1]

It wouldn't matter who he picked. Ron Paul broke the internet record for fund collection -for one day. But he , Gravel, Kuchich were sidelined from the first debate and basically removed as soon as possible.

You are given the 'false' choice of 'two' candidates -both of which are screened thoroughly by the elie to ensure their continued hegemony of US citizens secondarily and global objectives primarily.

I forget where I read this, but pre-election by a couple weeks to a month one person was pointing out the abysmal failure of Bush pretty much guaranteeing a Democratic victory, and that the candidate the Democrats picked was pretty much fronted financially behind the scenes by the party's Eastern Elite, all these people that supposedly their defeat was representing with the defeat in the primary of Hillary Clinton.

I don't see how you can improve the candidate quality or get them outside the purview of an elite subclass. People are not going to entertain third parties at all unless we're talking:

-regionalists (George Wallace in 1968, Strom Thurmond in 1948),
-views that are dying in a party and represent a last gasp of sorts (Ralph Nader in 2000 representing the left that felt ignored by Clinton and Gore, John Anderson in 1980 representing the Rockefeller Republican wing that did not like the party's shift to the right, Henry Wallace in 1948 representing the far left of the Democratic Party, George Wallace again kinda in 1968 representing conservative Democratic interests),
-intra-party civil wars (Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, John Breckenridge in 1860),
-or independents that are very well-funded in weak candidate years (Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996).

None of those proceed themselves to producing a likely third-party candidate capable of winning. The best of the bunch is maybe a stronger version of Perot or Wallace in 1968 where Wallace was almost capable of throwing the election to the House by no one getting a majority of the electoral votes. However, we then have the two major parties, and the powerbrokers in both of them are going to make sure the party does not produce a candidate they abhor. This past election saw that with how the Republicans treated Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee.

If we go into 2012 in worse shape though, I don't know what this country does. I'm kinda young but the opinion of the Republican Party in this country is as low as I can ever remember, and if Obama and the Democrats can't improve things, what options are left at that point? I think it could produce a sort of Huey Long-style candidate to challenge.

[Raz]

I forget where I read this, but pre-election by a couple weeks to a month one person was pointing out the abysmal failure of Bush pretty much guaranteeing a Democratic victory, and that the candidate the Democrats picked was pretty much fronted financially behind the scenes by the party's Eastern Elite, all these people that supposedly their defeat was representing with the defeat in the primary of Hillary Clinton.

I don't see how you can improve the candidate quality or get them outside the purview of an elite subclass. People are not going to entertain third parties at all unless we're talking:

-regionalists (George Wallace in 1968, Strom Thurmond in 1948),
-views that are dying in a party and represent a last gasp of sorts (Ralph Nader in 2000 representing the left that felt ignored by Clinton and Gore, John Anderson in 1980 representing the Rockefeller Republican wing that did not like the party's shift to the right, Henry Wallace in 1948 representing the far left of the Democratic Party, George Wallace again kinda in 1968 representing conservative Democratic interests),
-intra-party civil wars (Teddy Roosevelt in 1912, John Breckenridge in 1860),
-or independents that are very well-funded in weak candidate years (Ross Perot in 1992 and 1996).

None of those proceed themselves to producing a likely third-party candidate capable of winning. The best of the bunch is maybe a stronger version of Perot or Wallace in 1968 where Wallace was almost capable of throwing the election to the House by no one getting a majority of the electoral votes. However, we then have the two major parties, and the powerbrokers in both of them are going to make sure the party does not produce a candidate they abhor. This past election saw that with how the Republicans treated Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee.

If we go into 2012 in worse shape though, I don't know what this country does. I'm kinda young but the opinion of the Republican Party in this country is as low as I can ever remember, and if Obama and the Democrats can't improve things, what options are left at that point? I think it could produce a sort of Huey Long-style candidate to challenge.

Unfortunately, I think you're correct. Obama has sold out to the bankers and the unions. We just might get a Huey Long type in 2012.

It helps to remember that the Republican Party was a Third (or Fourth) political party in 1860. Lincoln was elected and the Republicans dominated American politics for the next 72 years!

Unless we get a viable candidate representing the great majority of Ron Paul's political views I don't see much hope. :(

[cjppjc]

Unless we get a viable candidate representing the great majority of Ron Paul's political views I don't see much hope. :(











How about the real thing. It is alot to ask. He may say he did his part already.

[nitroglycol]

Just came across the Obameter (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/browse/). It tracks Obama's promises, and rates the progress (or lack thereof) of each:
PolitiFact has compiled about 500 promises that Barack Obama made during the campaign and is tracking their progress on our Obameter. We rate their status as No Action, In the Works or Stalled. Once we find action is completed, we rate them Promise Kept, Compromise or Promise Broken.
Of course, it merely attempts to track them, not assess whether keeping a given promise is in the long term interests of the country or the world.

[D-Mack]

Just came across the Obameter (http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/browse/). It tracks Obama's promises, and rates the progress (or lack thereof) of each:

Of course, it merely attempts to track them, not assess whether keeping a given promise is in the long term interests of the country or the world.

Oh boy....

No. 502: Get his daughters a puppy
"The pledge is (Sasha and Malia) will get their dog, win or lose.">>More


Promise kept

[iyamwutiam]

Its all a puppet show-and the only way you will see the puppeteers is if the 'stage' is exposed as such and not if one sees the stage as the setting for a 'story'.