Back   OpEd News
Font
PageWidth
Original Content at
https://www.opednews.com/articles/Blame-conservatives-and-Ob-by-Don-Smith-100929-575.html
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

September 29, 2010

Blame conservatives and Obama, not all the Dems

By Don Smith

Can progressives punish Obama and defend their honor without helping the Republicans?

::::::::

The outcome of the November elections will depend on whether Democrats and Independents trust Obama and on whether they understand that the Republicans are much worse.

Will there be an insurmountable enthusiasm gap due to the unwillingness or inability of Obama and the Democrats to effect reform?

Will voters appreciate the subtle and technical achievements of the Obama Administration, especially with regards to avoiding an economic depression?

Furthermore, will Independents believe conservative talking points about the supposed evils of government? Specifically, will they realize that we need regulation, Social Security, entitlement programs, government-funded research, progressive taxation, and periodic stimulus programs?

It all comes down to marketing. Which side can sell their story to the gullible and not always smart American people?

But to market a product, it's best if you have a good product to sell. And in November this means: did the Democrats deliver good legislation -- or at least try?

For sure, a lot of the blame for the Dems' failures to pass progressive legislation lies with the intransigence, venality, and evil skill of Republicans. They've blocked most bills in the Senate. Moreover, they've been masterful at misleading the public about political choices, making it very difficult for Democrats to market their ideas to the American public.

But Democrats can't pretend that at least some of the blame doesn't lie with President Obama, his lackluster and bipartisan (conservative) leadership, and the corporatism and corruption of some Democrats.

By refusing to prosecute Bush-era criminals, and by repeatedly welcoming conservatives and Bush holdovers into his Administration and into his policy negotiations, Obama has largely erased the differences between Democrats and Republicans. He's hidden the truth from the public and failed to educate Americans about the dangers of conservatism. His bipartisanship directly aided the enemy and also made it much harder to convince Independents that the Dems are better. So he largely has himself to blame for the enthusiasm gap. If Republicans take over the House and subpoena him for impeachment, it'll be hard not to laugh and cry.

Most progressives understand the need for government and the evils of the Republicans. But for them, a main topic of discussion has been: what to do about President Obama's conservatism and unwillingness to lead? Many progressives actively want to punish Obama and the Democrats for their betrayals. This bodes poorly for the Democrats' chances in November.

I too share that desire to see accountability for Obama, as I've discussed here and here. Indeed, just as George W. Bush caused depression, anxiety, and sleeplessness for millions of progressives during the previous administration, Obama's mysterious sellouts have caused renewed distress and despair for progressives in this election cycle.

On the other hand, I sure don't want the Republicans to win in November! Bloggers, columnists and facebook acquaintances keep asking progressives like me to lay off on Obama til after the election. Should I do it? Can I do it?

I understand that the Republicans really are much worse than the Democrats, especially on women's rights, tax policy, regulation, and corruption. The Republicans would actively try to dismantle the New Deal and would eagerly turn government over to the corporations. The Democrats at least have some conscience.

Moreover, the Democrats are not monolithic! There are many good and middling Democrats, in addition to all the Democrats-in-Name-Only. In contrast, the Republicans are pretty damn near universally bad; witness their almost perfect record of unanimous opposition to Democrats' reform bills in the Senate. On numerous issues, even on war funding, many Democrats oppose Obama. See this article.

Punishing all the Democrats for Obama's betrayals is unwise and uncalled for. It would be akin to Bush's misdirected invasion of Iraq as punishment for the 9/11 attacks.

Or it's like libertarians who see government waste and corruption and want to get rid of the SEC, the EPA, and the FDA.

Anyone who says the Democrats are as bad as the Republicans is either a Republican plant trying to incite division on the Left, a radical leftist trying to seduce progressives into giving up on the Democratic Party, or a deluded blockhead. (rhetorical excess)

Still, one possible valid reason for punishing the Democrats would be if you believe that things have to get worse before they get better. "Let the Republicans take over and destroy things completely. The American people will find out pretty quickly what they've voted for, and then true progressives will win."

That would be pretty powerful medicine indeed. It might kill the patient. It might lead to radical right wing populism, not to the moderate left wing populism that progressives want.

Another possibly valid reason for punishing Obama and the Dems is to teach them a lesson. "Don't ignore us progressives ever again! We know that our refusal to support Democrats will likely aid the Republicans, but we're willing to pay the price as a matter of principle and as a point of honor, so that in the future we won't be ignored."

Sometimes in life we're willing to take a hit like that -- lose some money or destroy a relationship -- even though we know it hurts us too, all because of principle. In war, in love, on the playground, or in a tough neighborhood, you have to show that you refuse to stand for abuse. If people know you'll fight back and cause them harm, then they won't mess with you in the future.

The thing is, if the Republicans win one or both houses of Congress in November, they'll no doubt say that it's because Obama and the Dems were too socialistic. Knowing Obama, I fear he might agree and might become even more conservative. Democrats will likely blame progressives for their losses, and the country will move onward and rightward.

Teaching the Dems a lesson by allowing the Republicans to win makes some sense, and part of me wants to do it. But it's not really a winner's strategy. It's not constructive, really.

A far better strategy would be to become highly active in the Democratic Party, starting at the local level. That's how religious conservatives took over the Republican Party starting in the Reagan years, and that's how Tea Partiers are now taking over the Republican Party -- for sure, with a lot of help from the Koch brothers and other wealthy benefactors. Some of the Tea Partiers, by the way, are sincere (but deluded) libertarians who really want to see an end to government corruption and waste (as well as pretty much all government-funded regulation, research and services). The mainstream, corrupt Republicans fear the Tea Partiers, in much the same way that mainstream Democrats fear progressives.

Angry progressives stay home or vote for Nader. Angry conservative take over the Republican Party.

So, in this unpleasant situation, our choices aren't good. But choosing not to vote or choosing to give up on the Democrats is a loser's strategy. America's non-parliamentary political system makes it very hard for third-parties to win. (The Tea Party is not a real third party; it's a sub-movement within the conservative movement.)

Still, given all Obama's betrayals, I can't pretend to like or trust Obama. I'm like a yo-yo: I hate conservatives but can't ignore Obama's betrayals. His appointment of Elizabeth Warren to lead the Consumer Finance Protection Agency didn't change my opinion of him, since he waited til before the election to do it and since he made her report to Timothy Geithner. (If I were a cartoonist, I'd draw her chained.)

So how can progressives punish Obama without aiding conservatives?

I say: it's OK to criticize Obama for his failures. But when you do criticize Obama, please make sure you start by saying how bad conservatives are. Accuse Obama of acting like a conservative. And accuse Obama of aiding and protecting conservatives. Make sure that you don't over-generalize and blame all Democrats for Obama's mistakes.

Do acknowledge the good that Obama and the Dems have done -- saving the economy from a likely depression, reining in some of the worst abuses of the insurance companies, extending health insurance to millions of uninsured, increasing funding for regulatory agencies, and helping student borrowers instead of banks, for example. See ObamaMeter for a list of Obama's promises kept and broken (not all of the kept promises are good -- like escalating the war in Afghanistan). Think of all the bills in the Senate that died due to (near) unanimous GOP opposition.

What's so depressing and perplexing about all this is that it wouldn't have taken much to make feel progressives feel loved. Couldn't Obama have at least ordered a few token prosecutions of Bush-era officials so that the American people would know the truth about what happened? Or forgone a backroom deal with Big Pharma? Or agreed to tax Wall Street bonuses? Or selected Paul Krugman as Treasury Secretary instead of Timothy Geithner? Or defended some progressive appointees who were hounded from office by conservative distortions? He seems to have gone out of his way to piss off progressives. Even if Obama had failed in some of his initiatives, it would have been enough if he had tried. But it seems he didn't even try.

Blame conservatives and Obama, not all the Dems.



Authors Website: http://waliberals.org

Authors Bio:

Democratic Precinct Committee Officer, activist, writer, and programmer. My op-ed pieces have appeared in the Seattle Times, the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, and elsewhere. See http://WALiberals.org and http://ProgressiveMemes.org for my writing, meme images, musical creations, and animations.


Back