The answer is blowin’ in the wind

I don’t think it’s going to happen – for a long list of reasons – but Clarence Jones makes a compelling case:

You don’t have to be a rocket scientist nor have a PhD in political science and sociology to see clearly that Obama has abandoned much of the base that elected him. He has done this because he no longer respects, fears or believes those persons who elected him have any alternative, but to accept what he does, whether they like it or not.

[…]

The pursuit of the war in Afghanistan in support of a certifiably corrupt Afghan government and the apparent willingness to retreat from his campaign commitment of no further tax cuts for the rich, his equivocal and foot dragging leadership to end DADT, his TARP for Wall Street, but, equivocal insufficient attention to the unemployment and housing foreclosures of Main Street, suggest that the template of the 1968 challenge to the reelection of President Lyndon Johnson now must be thoughtfully considered for Obama in 2012.

There have been some voices, most notably Black Agenda Report, that have sounded the alarm on President Obama for a while. Jones had just added his voice to the chorus.

Advertisements

8 thoughts on “The answer is blowin’ in the wind

  1. We should all keep President Obama in our prayers; his success as President is our success as a society.

    Of course, that does not mean we must agree with his every utterance. I refer to him as Obooboo, when he screws-up on issues, such as stopping the exploration of oil, at a time when we need to make immediate progress towards energy independence.

    Jim Webb would be an ideal challenger for Mr. Obama in 2012. Win or lose, the challenge would help illuminate the issues that the Democratic Party should be working for.

    As Jim Webb has said, America’s current view of the Democratic Party, is that it is a fractious collection of special interest groups (gays, feminists, Charlie Rangel, trial lawyers and teachers’ unions).

    The majority of our citizens really do not want to support the multinational corporate controlled Republican Party; the party of torture and who trampled our Constitution during the Bush regime.

    However, they need to have a unifying alternative; a Party that will fight to restore our strategic industrial base and focus on job creation for all of OUR citizens.

    Our Democratic party needs to return to its roots as the champion of the typical working man.

  2. “He has done this because he no longer respects, fears or believes those persons who elected him have any alternative, but to accept what he does, whether they like it or not.”

    The Democrats in power do not want people to be able to support themselves, so they put in policies that give the poor fish.

    1. Jim Webb is one of the Democrats who has made a career of teaching his fellow citizens to fish, and to serve others.

      I especially like his efforts to reform our “justice” system, and how he is leading the Democratic party back to its roots as a Champion for the working man.

      I read Creigh Deeds’ opening speech of the election season. Jobs were never mentioned. I like Creigh, a lot, so i am going to remind him to get back on the job creation path; and fast!

      I would say that most Democrats, rather than just handing out fish, are handing out bait, rods and reels, but much more needs to be done to rebuild our industrial base and to make this country energy independent.

  3. So I’m not happy with the tactical approach the White House has utilized in pursuing some of their goals, and I think that it has in some cases undermined their ability to meet their objectives. But I also think it’s important for everyone on the left to remember what the President’s signature legislative initiative of the first two years of his term was: health care reform.

    And here’s the thing: if a Democratic President is systematically abandoning his base, HCR isn’t the thing he makes a priority. You don’t make a drive to the center with HCR; you do it with a combination of populist stuff like tax rebates and trivial nonsense like violence in video games. Or you zero in with laser-beam intensity on veterans — because who doesn’t like Veterans? Or you talk a big game about small businesses being the economic engine of the United States while simultaneously making sure that you’re catering to big businesses with the same tax breaks you’re creating for the small ones, just to be on the safe side.

    Or the short-hand way of explaining it: you’d try to do everything Glenn Nye did, right? And like I said, Obama’s got some execution issues. But abandoning his base? Glenn Nye he ain’t.

  4. Both the Republicans and Democrats are dependant on special interest funding in order to win elections. Because of that, both sides supported the bailouts of the big banks, neither has taken on big pharma or oil companies, and both pass regulations that help big business while harming small business.

    Because of these problems you have two political parties that talk the populist talk while walking the corporate walk. President Obama is no different in this than President Bush or Clinton was. The real differences are a matter of degrees leaning one way or the other, and not a difference of true radical change.

  5. I agree with the first portion from Clarence Jones, but not the second. Ironically, in the second Jones makes the very same mistake as Obama.

    The election of Barack Obama wasn’t as much about a liberal agenda as it was a rejection of politics as usual. Those new voters came out because the Obama Campaign held the promise of a new political era in Washington. Change they could believe in was primarily to the national political structure, not the Federal programs mix.

    Obama needed to empower those voters in order to avoid appearing to be just another politician. Instead, we got Pelosi and Reid piling on more spending. One of the centerpieces should have been an aggressive civil rights (especially voting rights) blitz, which Eric Holder would have been happy to do.

Comments are closed.