Obama: Make Me Do It?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Fri May 22, 2009 at 04:46:18 PM EST
Tags: (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

Glenn Greenwald links to Ambinder:

[Obama] was blunt; the [military commissions] are a fait accompli, so the civil libertarians can either help Congress and the White House figure out the best way to protect the rights of the accused within the framework of that decision, or they can remain on the outside, as agitators. That's not meant to be pejorative; whereas the White House does not give a scintilla of attention to its right-wing critics, it does read, and will read, everything Glenn Greenwald writes. Obama, according to an administration official, finds this outside pressure healthy and useful.

(Emphasis supplied.) Earlier today, I disagreed with a post Glenn wrote today on "preventive detentions," but Glenn's work, like Krugman's work on the economy, is invaluable. Not only to the policies, but to Obama politically as well. Glenn puts it well:

Ambinder doesn't mean me personally or exclusively; he means people who are criticizing Obama not in order to harm him politically, but in order to pressure him to do better. It's not just the right, but the duty, of citizens to pressure and criticize political leaders when they adopt policies that one finds objectionable or destructive. Criticism of this sort is a vital check on political leaders -- a key way to impose accountability -- and Obama himself has said as much many times before.

It has nothing to do with personalities or allegiances. It doesn't matter if one "likes" or "trusts" Obama or thinks he's a good or bad person. That's all irrelevant. The only thing that matters is whether one thinks that the actions he's undertaking are helpful or harmful. If they're harmful, one should criticize them. Where, as here, they're very harmful and dangerous, one should criticize them loudly. Obama himself, according to Ambinder, "finds this outside pressure healthy and useful." And it is. It's not only healthy and useful but absolutely vital.

Precisely.

Speaking for me only

< Our New Drug Czar on Legalization: An Emphatic "No" | Preventive Detention And The Supreme Court >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Obama: Make Me Do It? | 17 comments (17 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

He likes me, he really, really, (maybe) likes me. (5.00 / 2) (#2)
by kidneystones on Fri May 22, 2009 at 06:12:50 PM EST

Ambinder is Sullivan's sock-puppet and has been for a while. Obama, we are told reads Sully. I personally find that far from re-assuring.

It is, of course, entirely plausible that the non-closing of Guantanamo, the non-withdrawal of troops from Iraq, the non-repeal of 'Don't ask, don't tell, the non-ending of military tribunals, etc. etc. is all high kabuki wherein policies Obama secretly supports are 'forced upon him' from below.

Could be true. Or, it could be that Michelle really, really does like that great big house in Hyde Park, really enjoys living the lifestyle of the rich and famous, and really, really likes the idea of being the richest, by a country mile ex-first lady in American history. And, that her husband is motivated by similar needs.

BTD most definitely does not fall into the category of those hoping to be noticed by the American Idol (we hope!). But Mr. 97% voting with the majority has always been a conservative politician voting first and foremost to ensure re-election. Just like all the others.

But maybe, Obama is reading this blog, too! Could be. Wouldn't that be AWESOME!

Er, the "non-closing of Gitmo"? (5.00 / 2) (#10)
by gyrfalcon on Fri May 22, 2009 at 11:15:33 PM EST

What on earth are you talking about?

Michelle will be the "richest ex-first lady in history"? What on earth are you talking about?


The prize for winning the WH goes to both (none / 0) (#12)
by kidneystones on Sat May 23, 2009 at 04:20:42 AM EST

the President and the First Lady. The only question is which Obama will earn more, from books, speaking tours, etc.

It seems to come as news to you that Gitmo is still open. Let me repeat that: Gitmo is still open. And if we're talking about being 'forced' to adopt positions, it seems Dems may 'force' Obama to keep Gitmo open longer.

You've probably forgotten his remark that failing to close Gitmo in his first term is something he 'hopes' to avoid.

In your head, the prison is a museum. Sorry, still open and in no immediate danger of closing.

I usually enjoy your comments. Scary.


I wonder if you remember (none / 0) (#14)
by gyrfalcon on Sat May 23, 2009 at 02:35:09 PM EST

a former first lady named Jacqueline Kennedy. I wonder if you remember one named Eleanor Roosevelt. I wonder whether you remember Nancy Reagan. How about Barbara Bush? Laura Bush?

Michelle Obama would need to win the megabucks every year for the rest of her life to compete with these ladies' wealth.

So I repeat, what on earth are you talking about?

As for Gitmo, do you bother to follow the actual news of what's going on or just make up stuff that pleases you more?


Gitmo is open (none / 0) (#17)
by kidneystones on Sat May 23, 2009 at 06:50:46 PM EST

And you're obtusely missing the point, which is: Obama is a centrist who is interested principally in getting re-elected. The other Obama clearly enjoys wealth and the trappings of power.

Gitmo is open, not one combat brigade is out of Iraq, military commissions have been re-instated, Obama is protecting the secrecy of the Bush email program, Wall St. bankers are writing the laws that 'regulate' their industry and hundreds of billions of dollars of tax-payer money are going to special interest groups.

In the midst of the pillaging of the public purse and the relaunch of the WOT under a new name, you and Ambinder find a people-power revolution from the bottom-up.

The Obama's will doubtless set-up all kinds of charities to dispense the cash as it piles up.

Then you can point to their selflessness.

We're done.


: So what's your point? (none / 0) (#18)
by lambert on Sat May 23, 2009 at 08:36:01 PM EST

[rimshot. laughter]
Irony alert! Irony alert!

Obama Wants Us Now to . . . (5.00 / 2) (#4)
by Doc Rock on Fri May 22, 2009 at 08:17:49 PM EST

. . . bail out Bush, too?

Not a scintilla of attention? (5.00 / 8) (#5)
by lambert on Fri May 22, 2009 at 09:08:23 PM EST

So, if Obama isn't listening to his right wing critics, that means he's not adopting their positions out of, er, calcuation, but because he genuinely believes them?

: Like FISA. (5.00 / 2) (#9)
by ghost2 on Fri May 22, 2009 at 10:43:04 PM EST

He is NOT capitulating. He is delivering to those who brought him to the dance. Is that hard to understand? Or just too sad to admit?

: That's probably why he keeps debating Cheney. (none / 0) (#7)
by Jacob Freeze on Fri May 22, 2009 at 10:20:20 PM EST

How long has it been? Two minutes?
Obama gives a national security speech on national TV that's basically a reply to Dick Cheney, and Cheney's all over the networks, too, and now...
Obama and his spin doctors think they can sell the ridiculous idea that Obama ignores his right-wing critics!
Harharharhar!!!
How stupid do they think we are?
Maybe stupid enough to buy "Hope and Change" as if it were a program, instead of hypocritical blather.
And now they think they can even make the suckers believe that...
Obama ignores his right-wing critics!
Harharharhar!!!

With all due respect: (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by ghost2 on Fri May 22, 2009 at 10:37:37 PM EST

I put "make me do it" on the same level as "Obama is playing 11 dimensional chess".

Both ideas only exist in the mind of the delusional fans and supporters.

There are many ways to play the hero (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Militarytracy on Sat May 23, 2009 at 07:58:22 AM EST

of the people. "Make me do it" by removing my risk for acting heroic is my least favorite way. I have always overpriced the market value of courage though and I have several life experiences that have proven that :)

"Make me" (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by Anne on Sat May 23, 2009 at 06:08:25 PM EST

sounds too much like a passively resistant rejoinder by an adolescent - it for sure is not the response of someone who ran a campaign by presenting himself in a certain light and promised to deliver some long-sought changes to a government corrupted by eight years of Bush rule.

Why are we now engaged in a game of "how bad do you want it" or "prove you want it more than these other guys?"

Is this supposed to be leadership? Is this community organizing writ large? Is this all Obama knows how to do - or is he ever going to summon up some actual core beliefs and act on them?

Dumb questions; feel like I already know the answers. Hugely disappointing.

Obama seems to like debate... (none / 0) (#1)
by Jerrymcl89 on Fri May 22, 2009 at 06:07:02 PM EST

... and to prefer only moving left (at least in the foreign policy arena) after a signifcant amount of it. He wants to be seen as being in the middle, and with Dick Cheney reliably defining the right, somebody needs to provide a counterweight.

Frankly, I think (none / 0) (#3)
by dk on Fri May 22, 2009 at 07:24:17 PM EST

Obama's actions are more likely to be influenced by the "Greenwalds" then the "Krugmans."

Good Idea from Glenn (none / 0) (#6)
by blogname on Fri May 22, 2009 at 10:03:43 PM EST

Glenn's a great guy. Inspired honesty.

D. Hutchinson

Maybe Greenwald and Krugman (none / 0) (#11)
by oldpro on Sat May 23, 2009 at 12:12:58 AM EST

together will add up to our version of the Alsops, influential pundits of wide experience and big-picture interests, although I can't picture either of them holding dinners and hobnobbing with the village people. That, of course, is a plus.

I read both religiously, along with a half dozen others. The cream is rising...