home

Obama and the Dem Agenda

By Jeralyn, Section Elections 2006
Posted on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 09:11:24 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

(Guest Post by Big Tent Democrat)

SusanG at dailykos takes apart Barack Obama's Latest quite nicely. As I wrote before, Obama is not helping Democrats in this cycle because he has bought into the Lakoffian 'appeal to Conservatives' approach. But it is worse than that now. 60 days from an election, he is lecturing Dems that they 'need an agenda.' I can tell you the agenda we don't need - this one:

What Democrats have to do is to close the deal. We have got to show we have a serious agenda for change.

Show the agenda Obama. Don't tell people Dems do not have the agenda! Honest to Gawd. 60 days from the election and he says stuff like this? Just incredibly stupid.

More on the other side.

But my biggest bone with Obama remains his Lakoffian belief in appealing to Republicans:

Obama said he and other Democrats want to take the nation in a different direction, but he vowed not to "demonize" Republicans. He said a carefully cast message could lure moderate Republicans who are uncomfortable with the White House's hard-line conservative stance.

Ugh. Just ugh. Lakoff is killng us.

And this beaut:

We've got a lot of self-important leaders who are long on rhetoric and short on ideas.

No kidding. Looked in the mirror lately Senator Obama?

< Moving Days | Swift Boating Baron Hill >

  • Premium Ads

  • Blog Ads

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

    donate to TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Obama and the Dem Agenda | 8 comments (8 topical)
    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#1)
    by jaf on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 09:58:38 AM EST
    Isn't this exactly what it proposes to be: an appeal to the Repugs. They need an authoritarian Daddy figure who sternly lectures. So what if that figure offers no direction, didn't Dad always say: ' do it because I say so'. This seems to me to be more DLC crap; the 'we need to be more centrist' line that results in Repug-Lite type candidiates who will fall into line with the Biden-Bayh-Clinton wing and ignore the polls and the voice of an increasingly disillusioned and dispirited working/middle class. Obama is just slighly left of Colin, Condi, or Michael Steele. To continue to hope for him as an electable future candidate for the Presidency is as misguided as (and I was guilty of this) seeing John Kerry's war record as qualifying him for the Presidential nomination. We need to return to the best days of the Democratic Party the social democracy of FDR.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#2)
    by jimakaPPJ on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:07:50 AM EST
    jaf - If the current bunch of Demos were as active as FDR on the subject of national security you'd actually have a chance of winning.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#4)
    by soccerdad on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:33:47 AM EST
    jaf - If the current bunch of Demos were as active as FDR on the subject of national security you'd actually have a chance of winning.
    ROTFLMAO The policy of the Dem leadership is no different than the Repub. In fact that they are just like Repubs insure their defeat since if you are going to vote Repub you vote for the real thing and if you are looking for a real alternative - you stay home because one doesn't exist.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#3)
    by Dadler on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 11:55:11 AM EST
    The Dems need to be pitching the idea of social stability. A very simple notion to grasp. Do we want a government that contributes to a more stable and equitable society (and world)? Or one that is dominated by the needs and interests of the wealthiest individuals and their narrow realms? In plain talk you say "Rich people can stay filthy rich, that's great for them, but they're merely going to be asked to once again be part of a more progressive taxation system. For the simple reason that levying an additonal one percent on someone making 30 grand actually impacts that person's life in a real way negatively; while that same one percent from someone making ten or twenty or a hundred times that barely makes a wrinkle in their sheets." That's a basic and just truth. We punish the poor for being poor, while we reward the rich with what they already have in abundance. With Iraq, it's a similarly disturbing paradigm -- this adminstration continues the failed policies of its failed leaders, while marginalizing those whose knowledge and insight and planning work turned out to be almost clairvoyant regarding what Iraq would really turn out to be. The Bush Admin. went to war with ONLY a best-case scenario strategy -- which means with NO STRATEGY AT ALL. The Dems should simply state they will reverse that equation entirely. The failed and their policies will be removed from power, and that valuable work and insight which was ignored will not be. Period. We will learn the ugly lessons and make changes. If we eat crow in the short term in Iraq, so what? It is the long-term that matters. Basically, if the Dems could stop sucking monied c*ck like Jr. Repubs for a few elections, then maybe they'd realize the advantages of being the equivalent of a stand-up, honest, intelligent, generous, humble, funny person -- the kind almost everyone wants to be friends with, hang out with, rap with...and work for. Clinton was an individual personality and got a lot of miles out of it (good miles or not is another argument), but it's the Dem party itself that needs to get a real personality, to paint the ship with tangible and lasting marks of genuine identification. Talk about religion in terms of the undeniable mystery of existence with which we are all burdened as rational creatures. How everyone is free to practice or not practice whatever religion helps them live with that burden. How that brings all people of all religions together, along with those who don't practice any religion, because we share the same curiosity and longing for meaning. Be smart. Be better the next time than you were the last. And always be funny. The Dems need to speak and present ideas freely, unbound by the fear of failure. But that's a hard thing for individuals to do on their own, even harder for orgainzations of millions. That's what leadership is for. And saying a segment of the party shouldn't speak THEIR minds because it might offend a segment of the OTHER party, well, that's called "playing not to lose". It is not "playing to win".

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 03:14:53 PM EST
    I'm guessing Obama doesn't fit in the big tent now. Moniker does not fit.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#6)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 06:23:42 PM EST
    Obama has Liebermanitis. It's a deadly and often fatal political disease that usually lies relatively dormant in most Democratic Senators, unless they begin getting a lot of media exposure, and people start openly speculating and suggesting that they should make a run for president. This causes the virus to break out of dormancy, and compels Democratic Senators to move sharply to the right politically, in some crazy and irrational effort to woo conservative voters. Ultimately and inevitably these Seanators lose their political base, but they are so caught up in this mad delusion of becoming president, they never notice. Joe Lieberman is currently in the final stages of this disease in Vermnot. Joe's had a difficult go of it, but may he find some peace after he loses his seat in November.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#7)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 06:39:34 PM EST
    Does it take death camps on American soil for someone in the Democratic Party to get a f*&^ing clue and rise to the occasion? Or lapel patches for us all to wear (and chips in licenses and passports) to broadcast who's a loyal American and who is not??? It is time to fight and fight hard. After all we've been through, does the Democratic party honestly believe that they can offer up MORE Republican-Lite nonsense and expect to win elections!!!??? Placing Hillary or Obama on the ballot ain't gonna cut it, folks. And where the hell is the Feingold For President crowd!!!??? You remember Feingold, don't you? The only Democrat with the nads to stand up to this insanity. The view from here is such that the Dems STILL haven't shown that they deserve to win ANYTHING. They need to EARN it. And other than currently being comatose, there is little that distinguishes them.

    Re: Obama and the Dem Agenda (none / 0) (#8)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Mon Sep 18, 2006 at 09:52:50 PM EST
    I've got nothing against Obama. I see great things in his future. I just don't see Obama as being the vanguard against the current opposition. Frankly, I see NO ONE in the vanguard. And THAT is exactly my point: who and where are the leaders among the Democrats RIGHT NOW!? Obama is too new and Hillary has waaaaaay too much baggage. And they both treat "being liberal" as some sickness to be avoided instead of a badge of honor to be worn proudly. Someone else stated it earlier in one of these posts: unless and until the Dems jettison their collective fear of failure, they don't stand a chance. In fact, until then, they stand for nothing. Newsflash, Dems: YOU'VE FAILED MISERABLY!!!!! Get over it and come up with something bold and BELIEVE IN IT! I do not think that that is asking for much at all.

    Obama and the Dem Agenda | 8 comments (8 topical)