Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Add to My Group
November 12, 2008 at 00:13:30

View Ratings | Rate It

Promoted to Headline (H3) on 11/12/08:

Progressives Have Leverage NOW: Use It Or Lose It

submit to twitter
submit to reddit
submit to digg
Tell A Friend

By Bernard Weiner (about the author)     Page 2 of 3 page(s)

opednews.com     Permalink

We simply don't know how Obama will act in this regard. One would think his better liberal instincts would prevail (and already his staff has made a list of 200 executive actions that should be overturned soon after Inauguration Day). ( www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/08/AR2008110801856.html ) But earlier this year, he voted to support the revised FISA bill authorizing warrantless eavesdropping on and surveillance of American citizens. Not a good sign.

Obama needs to make clear at the outset that he will not be following the authoritarian impulses of the CheneyBush era, and we need to help him move in that direction. Remember what FDR told Democratic activists after he was elected in 1932: "I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it." In other words, demonstrate enough citizen support for the reforms that need to be made so that I can be seen as responding to public clamor, not just pressure from a self-interested faction of party activists. Smart.

3. FOREIGN POLICY DANGERS

My biggest worry about Obama has to do with his foreign/military policy. Judging from his statements during the campaign, he seems to accept the "American exceptionalist" frame that is largely responsible for the mess we're in abroad: That the U.S., because we are so morally pure and especially blessed by God, has the right, and duty, to intervene wherever and however it wants in order to bring the "bad guys" and other recalcitrant leaders into compliance with American desires. 


True, Obama also has said, in the context of Iraq, that he wants not only to bring the troops out of there but also deal with the faulty "mindset" that sent them there in the first place. 

That's a hopeful sign, along with his assertion that diplomacy would come first and military action be employed only as a last resort. But Obama's bellicose statements with regard to Iran and Afghanistan and Pakistan do make me nervous, wondering how much more the U.S. will be sucked into how many other quagmires in the Greater Middle East. He certainly needs to be more even-handed when dealing with the Israelis and Palestinians, so that seminal problem can be moved toward solution.  

In this, and in his overall military and foreign policy, Obama needs to be much more clear where he stands, and we on the progressive left need to be prepared, in advance, to oppose him if he continues the CheneyBush's neo-con policy of the U.S. as world policeman.

4. REPUBLICANS IN SHOCKED CONFUSION 

After eight long years of CheneyBush, which seemed more like decades given the amount of damage they did to the economy, body politic, the Constitution, and America's good will abroad, we are in a time of major realignment in almost every aspect of our society. 

The Republican Party, for example, is essentially in a state of leaderless chaos after its major rejection by the American voting public. Their entire philosophy, resting on greed, rapaciousness, voluntary ignorance and legalized looting of the treasury, was soundly repudiated. 

The Republicans now have to figure out whether they want to continue their Karl Rovian approach to electoral politics, which counts on their fundamentalist and HardRight conservative base to bring them victory, even if only by a single vote. To continue this approach risks continued GOP defeat at the polls for years to come. The alternative for the GOP is to shed much of that extremism, perhaps even push that beyond-the-mainstream thinking out of the party, and move to capture the growing ranks of moderates and Independents. In other words, a center-right party in opposition to the center-left one offered by the Democrats.

We'll know which way they're going by how the party deals with the rightwing firebrand Sarah Palin. If she's treated as a respectable potential leader of the party, that would be great for the Democrats, who can demonize her forever and continue to win elections (aided by Palin herself, who is, how can one say this delicately, perhaps equipped to lead a successful city council but in no way qualified to lead a national political party, let alone a nation). But what's good for the Democrats in this regard may be terrible for our democratic system, which needs a good, strong, intelligent party in opposition.

If the traditional core of the Republican Party, probably coming from the U.S. Senate, recognizes that the Palin brand of extremism and demagoguery is what helped take them down to an ignominious defeat, they might agree on the need to broaden their base to win elections. At which point, no doubt someone will have to step forward to lead that development.

Colin Powell, even though a bit long-in-the-tooth, could do it, but would he? Probably McCain is just sullied goods at this stage. Maybe Mitt Romney or Newt Gingrich or Mike Huckabee, but they're tainted by their far-right positions and tactics. And Ron Paul is too far out there in Libertarian land for them.

The longer there's a hole in the GOP leadership, the more the Palin-type throwbacks in and out of the Senate can feel free to fill the vacuum with their vitriol, ignorance, incendiary accusations and underlying racism. (The Republican Party is so desperate for fresh ideas that last week it launched an online invitation to ordinary members to write in with suggestions for the future.)

The Republicans probably need new, younger leadership, similar to what the Democrats latched onto with Obama and what they have waiting in the wings with a number of talented young Dem governors and senators. We'll just have to wait to see who moves to the GOP fore in 2009.

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3

 

www.crisispapers.org

Bernard Weiner, Ph.D. in government & international relations, has taught at universities in California and Washington, worked for two decades as a writer-editor at the San Francisco Chronicle, and currently serves as co-editor of The Crisis Papers (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "Civil Liberties Constitution In"
Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of National Security, Revised and Updated Edition
by David Cole

$15.95
Lowest New Price $6.72

Number of pages: 302
Publisher: New Press, The

Religion and Education Under the Constitution (Civil Liberties in American History)
by James M. O'Neill

$57.00

Number of pages: 338
Publisher: Da Capo Pr

Terrorism
by James X. Dempsey

$20.00

Number of pages: 232
Publisher: First Amendment Foundation

Terrorism and the Constitution: Sacrificing Civil Liberties in the Name of Natio
by David Cole~James X. Dempsey


Number of pages:
Publisher: New Press

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
3 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
 

progressives,use it or lose it. by sommers on Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008 at 2:11:07 PM
"Pragmatic centrist" according to the Right of center MSM! by Richard Lee on Wednesday, Nov 12, 2008 at 9:20:26 PM
Progressives are held hostage by enablers. by John Hanks on Thursday, Nov 13, 2008 at 12:08:22 PM

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

 

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum