Jonathan Capehart in the Washington Post is the latest pundit to tell us to stop pining for Hillary and give Obama some slack. He agrees with Rebecca Traister at Salon who just wishes the rest of us would STFU already. Capehart puts the blame on the Republicans who thwarted Obama’s first term, even though he started said first term with a solid majority in one house and a filibuster proof majority in the other. But these are the two paragraphs that caught my eye because they border on the absurd:
By agreeing with Traister, though, I’m not giving Obama a pass on some of the anger and frustration the base has with him. The president has made mistakes. He pursued priorities that I believe will be judge kindly by history but are being judged negatively right now by the American people. And Obama hasn’t been as effective weaving the narrative of his administration as he was at reminding us of who we were as a country at the 2004 Democratic Convention.
The president needs to do a better job of focusing on the near-term priorities the American people have been clamoring for and the long-term issues that will leave this country better than he found it, fighting for those issues and story-telling. With Obama trying out themes on his bus tour that we’re bound to hear in the fall, delivering those themes with a snap in his voice that surely thrilled his supporters hungry for him to fight and leaking news of a post-Labor Day speech on jobs and the deficit, it appears he has already begun.
Obama’s going to try out “themes” with a “snap in his voice”. Has Capehart been paying attention to the less than thrilled supporters who have abandoned Obama lately? They’re not coming back. They’ve finally seen the light like I did three years ago. Once you see what’s going on, it’s hard to unsee it. If there has been one thing Obama has been good at it’s disillusioning the leftist activists who worked so hard for him last time. I’m hoping we can get the band back together and reunite the two coalitions of the party before Obama rolls out too many “themes”.
Does anyone really believe that just because Obama tests out some campaign themes that he’s going to rally the troop? How come he didn’t test those themes out in January of 2009? I’ll tell you why. He didn’t believe in using the force of government to head off a lingering Lesser Depression. He had his chance to do it and … he didn’t.
This is why the calls for Hillary Clinton to jump in are not going to go away. The buyer’s remorse has to do with the very reasonable expectation that Hillary would have been a lot more proactive than Obama was in January 2009. Do we really believe that she would have taken office and let the economy languish during her first year in office, that she wouldn’t have aggressively championed a bigger stimulus package and a mortgage program to help struggling homeowners? Can any of us see her getting the news from Christina Romer to ask for $1.2 trillion in stimulus and have her say, “Ehhh, that’s probably too hard to get through Congress. Let’s go with what Tim proposed and the market will take care of itself”
No, nobody who has been paying attention to the way Hillary and Obama conduct business that she would have been as passive and inept as this president has been. And the thought of what might have been is deeply frustrating and maddening to those of us who have lost our jobs and are about to lose everything else.
Now, a lot of political party operatives will tell you that it is impossible to change the nominee, that’s it’s unheard that an incumbent is not entitled to a second term. But to leave Obama in place risks losing the White House. And I suspect that he has very short coattails. I sure as hell don’t want to see him campaigning with any of my Congressional delegation members. I live in an area where high tech jobs have been smashed to smithereens and all I ever hear about is how we have to retrain ourselves to take the jobs of the future. How much more futuristic do we have to get???
What the political environment needs right now is something completely unpredictable. Voters are getting really tired of not having a choice. If Hillary jumped in, she’d be where all of those pent-up, frustrated votes would go. It could be electric. She is the most logical candidate to field, seeing as she appeals to a large number of voting constituencies. But if there is another candidate with her viability and appeal, I’d consider him/her.
But all I ever hear is how I should stop whining about it because we’re stuck with Obama, who if he wins, will have even LESS incentive to take on the Republicans or do anything that will put government to work for us. Yes, I’m supposed to just suck it up while my savings dwindle and my family falls out of the middle class while he tests his “themes” and makes more promises he does not intend to keep. (We’ve been paying attention) This campaign is not about the success of Obama’s “themes”. It’s about correcting inequity, writing new rules and getting people back to work. That Obama responds to our plight with a series of “themes” does not thrill me or make me want to vote for him any more than the first time he rolled out his marketing campaign in 2008.
I’m not voting for any of the candidates presented to me so far. I will choose a third party candidate. And I’m not shutting up or going away.
Filed under: General | Tagged: Jonathan Capehart, Obama, Rebecca Traister, themes |
The Confluence 
RD … brilliant post. I saw the light and I cannot shut up until others in my circle start seeing the light too. And act accordingly with their vote and voice. I’m probably going to vote “none of the above” in ’12.
“How much more futuristic do we have to get???” LOL. Isn’t it just being reported that more cuts will occur in federal agencies that support scientific research? Perhaps Obama is waiting until some scientist produces a George Jetson pack for him to sail above us high in the clouds, until he makes science a priority? Research dollars employ people too.
The very idea that we need more education to prepare us for jobs is just bull. As states are facing huge cuts in their budgets, those who teach and work at state-owned universities are facing huge cuts as well. The trend has been for departments to offer less opportunities for tenure and more lectureships, which are temporary and contract dependent, usually paid per course, to incoming professors. Do people need more than Ph.D.s in Obama’s view to be successful?
Also, have you seen the Petition to Draft Hillary Clinton Facebook page? Much discussion going on there about those pols, leaders, websites, etc. coming out against Obama. John Smart posts there. Perhaps katiebird could leave The Confluence posts. {Yours and John Smart’s blogs were the first ones I encountered who were actually vocal with your questions about Obama in 2008 and provided persuasive arguments and facts to support it. I’ve found them both to very valuable in my arsenal to fight the misperception that Obama is a Liberal.}
Indeed.
If the paymasters of these authors didn’t know Hillary would be much, much BETTER for the American people than Obama , the said paymasters would not have moved heaven and earth and twist every arm to stop her.
Obama is there because he’s a cipher. Why else would he be installed? To project Social Security?
These authors hate seeing others exercise a choice…because they have none. They must do/write as they are told. Who knows what they think? What they think isn’t paying the bills .
A press ” narrative” to counter the draft Hill sentiment is afoot
Obama’s not passive and inept. He’s active and malevolent.
Amen, brother.
+10000
Active, malevolent and Machiavellian (cunning and and duplicitous).
and more 😦
Marta Evry:
I don’t understand why Marta wants to elect Democrats to the House. We had the House and 60 votes in the senate. Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, and other leaders, along with Obama gave away the powers to the Republicans. The Democrats didn’t make a mistake, they knew what they were doing. I worked my ass in 2006 to help the Democrats, and the thanks I got was watching my vote along with 18 million voters go into the trash in Denver. The left is like Oddie the dog, always being kicked and abused by Garfield because Oddie always comes back for more.
I think the point of electing more Democrats to the House is to eventually reduce the number of Republicans to such a small number that they can no longer do any more trouble. That’s what happened in 1964 and that’s how we got Medicare. Of course, this is probably already well known to you.
It doesn’t have to be Democrats. Any congresscritter sufficiently left of center will do, but he/she can’t be a Republican.
It can be done. We have the data. Give it up already.
But being a Democrat isn’t good enough anymore. The strategy of supporting Blue Dogs because it’s so easy in a Republican district cut the Democrats down the middle.
We are not “pining”. Is that the only pathetic female bashing language this jerk can utter?
I believed since the election that it was over, and that Hillary would never be president. Obama brought this on himself with his complete ineptitude, particularly in the past several weeks.
I’ve cut him plenty of slack. No more. The only decent thing for Obama to do now is pull an LBJ.
It won’t happen, imo until the left abandons the Democratic Party, not just Obama. Let’s not forget that it was the Democratic Party that shoved Obama to the voters. The Democratic Party pines for the “center voter”, whoever that voter is. Since the defeat of George McGovern the Democratic Party has worked diligently to shove out the left.
Our intention is to pull the Democrats back from the right. Right now, they aren’t even centrists. If it means we have to elect more third wing candidates, so be it. The Democrats will eventually get the point. The money is no good if the power doesn’t come with it.
You knew this was coming:
Obummies–breakfast of chumps! 😈
Part of an unbalanced breakfast with a tall, frosty glass of Kool-Aid! 😛
That’s funny because all I read is how Obama whines. According to Obama, he’s mistreated as much as Lincoln was.
When Obummer Kool-Aid sits around too long, it ferments into whine.
🙂
HONK 😆
I heard Capehart today question the effectiveness of a Constitutional Amendment to forbid outside money in the political arena [this isn’t whether you could get it passed but the very idea of it–public financing] as opposed to a Balanced Budget Amendment.
Excuse me but why would a presumed Democrat take up and favor a Republican, Tea Party wish balloon over a push for public financing and eliminating the corrosive effects of waves of money and influence infecting the system?
For anyone thinking a Balanced Budget Amendment wouldn’t wreak havoc on everyone, I’d suggest reading Dak over at Skydancing–she’ll give you the what for.
As for Miss Rebecca, she has an article in the NYT:
in which she claims to have been a Hillary Clinton supporter in 2008. Liar, liar. Just like the man she still shills for.
The Obama folks are becoming more and more transparent. They don’t even do lying very well anymore. Maybe if we’re lucky they’ll get so thin and vaporous, they just blow away.
One can dream.
I’ve always admitted that I voted for “him” because my choice for President and her husband told me I had to do so.
He will never get my vote again.
Hillary wont’ primary “him” because she cares for her husband’s legacy and can’t primary the first AA president even though said AA president is destroying the Democratic party and the middle class.
My state’s governor is making sure that the Green candidate won’t appear on the ballot because the Greens haven’t garned enough signatures according to the fascist who runs my state.
So,I’ll vote to re-elect Senator Sherrod Brown and that’s it.
I voted republican for the first time in my life. Not because I was for John and Sarah but I don’t reward bad behavior. Yes, I know Bill&Hill went on the stump for Obie but I just couldn’t do it. I would have felt dirty voting Democrat.
As SecState Clinton surveys the political and institutional and economic damage wrought by Judas Horse Obama, the Manchurian Democrat; would she even want the poisoned chalice of being President in 2012 or 2016? Would she even want to be in the same room with it?
If Disgruntled Democrats want a primary challenge, they may have to create the vacuum needed to suck challengers into that vacuum. Perhaps they could form a loud and proud ABO (Anyone But Obama) movement and announce that they will not vote for Obama no matter how scary the alternatives . . . but they will pick from among a menu of primary challengers. Could such a movement be ramped up and organized fast enough to drive Obama out of the nomineeship before Primary Season begins?
I’m shocked that there’s anyone still defending Obama. But I have to say that when I hear anyone defending him, my hackles go up the same way they did in 2008. I don’t like thinking that I can’t forgive or will never forgive, but I guess that’s where I still am. I still believe that the party I loved for 40 years was taken over by a bunch of aliens and thugs and I will never go back. I am actually enjoying being an Independent. I can see now what idiots both parties are, and I can also see the ideas from both parties that I like. Let them fight for my vote—–I won’t be giving it away easily ever again. I’m not whoring for either side…..
If on the very outside chance Hillary runs again, here’s some stuff we need to be ready for and do a better job with than in 2008:
http://womenwintoo.blogspot.com/2011/08/any-woman-just-not-that-woman.html
I also was a dim for 40yrs….no more. Agree completely with your comment.
Yes, 40 years here–I stuffed envelopes for George McGovern as a child–and I feel exactly the same way about 2008. And I know other women of the same profile.
Real Dems, blue collar working stiffs and their educated offspring that know their parent’s good paying union jobs paid for their upbringing and possibly education will sit 2012 out. Some might vote for a centrist republican like John McCain but thats about it.
The Cheeze-thugs that overran the caucuses for Obama while living off mommy and daddy’s dime think they were owed their parents blood sweat and tears just because they were born. Them and the Tree Huggers that got all sappy for Obie managed to elect a guy that is doing what it took George the Lesser eight years to do to the GOP in less than two.
Jerks.
I used to check in at politico44 to get updates on Obama’s doings – and get a laugh out of his “propped up” schedule – but quit as it became too nauseatingly uncritical. But now it seems that even there the adoration has turned into mocking. Like this Date night/ Obamas’ sunset dining:
😀
And the article linked to in that piece, reveals that despite the mocking ‘back then’ Obama is yet again back in Mom/ Dad jeans, heh.
That’s Raycist!
“Time to get your butt to Abercromie & Fitch”
Well, I’ve just run across some rumors that Obama is considering not running for reelection and that’s the decision that he’s rumored to be making while he’s on vacation. If this rumor is true, it will certainly be interesting to see what he “decides”. What this makes me wonder is if the party sees a “bloodbath” coming in ’12 and is trying to talk Obama out of running for reelection.
do not think so because as everybody knows, he has already started his reelection campaign.
So what? I hear he’s behind in fundraising and his numbers are showing that he’s not going to be reelected right now. He can change his mind on this like he’s changed his mind on almost everything else he has done.
If the party came to him and said you’re guaranteed to lose do you think he would still run?
The numbers don’t show he won’t be re-elected. They show that he’s unpopular — but less so than the Tea Party. If Obama is going to be a one-term president, it will only be because somebody started a fight. We have an adversarial political system (which is one of the things Obama has failed to grok). Somebody will have to challenge him — and as riverdaughter points out, that’s entirely possible (though not yet probable). I’m hoping for someone, anyone, to open the door. I don’t think Hillary will do that herself, but if some Gene McCarthy equivalent cracks it open, then Hillary can walk through it as Bobby Kennedy did in ’68.
Actually if you look at the state by state matchups Obama is losing a lot of states in those polls.
The tea party is about as popular as a case of the clap.
I would love for someone to primary him but here it is August and the primaries start in what? 5 months and no one has stepped up to the plate so I just don’t see it happening.
John Smart has a pretty good theory that Obama’s job now IS to lose. Turns out he wasn’t as effective a spokesmodel for his elite looting masters. Only by staying in the race can he block out any real Democratic challengers and at the same time pass power back to the Republicans (meaning, the ones who call themselves Rs, as opposed to the DINOs) to keep up the pressure to cut all the social welfare programs and fake freakouts about the deficit. Smart:
Makes sense to me. 😦
More important, by staying on he assures Wall Street that the Democrats in congress will be decimated again in 2012. We’ll see if the true liberals, the ones RD thinks will eventually take over the House and the senate tell Obama to go back to Chicago.
It seems to me that this theory would be easy to test. Let’s say that the politically active base called his bluff and announces that they are going to throw their support behind whoever the Republican nominee for president is while working only for down ticket democrats with proven progressive credentials. several things could happen:
1.) Americans, fearing a Republican juggernaut, will elect more Democrats or third party politicians to Congress. The left activist base’s time and money could be better spent working for local Democratic races
2.) if Obama really intends to lose, he’ll keep up the hippy punching.
3.) if he wants to win, his campaign will become alarmed and should start pandering. Obama’s camp is really convinced that the left will fall into line. But what if they don’t? What if we all started donating money and time to Huntsman or some other less wing nutty Republican? If we do it early enough, there could be some real concern.
Sometimes when you want to win the game, you have to be prepared to sacrifice a piece.
And, if you do vote for 3rd party candidates, there just might be a chance that Obama will win a 2nd term..think about that..
If he does, it won’t be due to any mandate. It will be over the objections of voters of both parties. He won’t get my help.
These liberals — the 43 Congressional Black Caucus members — are exasperated with Obama’s latest lurch to the right (the budget defeat) and blame the Tea Party for it. The African-American community suffering the most as a group in the unemployment numbers wants the CBC to fight against the new Super Committee slashing federal spending this fall. They plan to start a Tea Party of their own.
Good luck with their grumbling sparking anything because they’ve said and Obama knows that they will be voting for him regardless in 2012. They, like many others, have given Obama too much slack, so much, that we’re suspended over that cliff.
They’re only speaking out now because of the real and present threat that Obama may be a one-term president.
Reference for my above comment is the Daily Beast post, “Obama’s Black Backlash”, August 19. And Obama is sooooo worried about this group!
Yup. Obama’s biting his nails, almost to the roots. (snark)