« Is it me or are Republicans trying to take claim for any future success of Barack Obama's administration? | theone718's Blog | Josh asked a very good question earlier. Where in the hell is Joseph Stiglitz? »

For all the hand wringers, complainers, and the progressive purists...


This is the article you need to read. With all due respect to long well thought out threads........ nothing else needs to be said. My favorite part could help though:

 

One reason that President Obama is going to be a very successful President is precisely because his understanding of the cosmos is that his ideas (political, philosophical or theological) do not define it. That's called wisdom. That's called humility. And that is the very wisdom lacking in Obama's ideologically driven left wing critics, who never seem able to complete and paragraph with the words, "But I could be wrong." That is why their posture is already a crouch of disappointed expectation, even before President-elect Obama has been sworn in!

When President-elect Obama said that he will try to do what works, regardless of the ideological label or where a good idea comes from, he was telling the truth. Most Americans know how lucky we are to have this remarkable, pragmatic, subtle, thoughtful man for our President-elect. Most of us also know how lucky we are that our next president -- unlike our current White House occupant -- is more interested in being a good president than in proving his "side" right about everything. And most of us also know that the stakes are sky high and that now is a time to stand with our new President-elect, come hell or high water or, perhaps, because of the hell and high water we're already neck deep in.


36 Comments

| Leave a comment
user-pic

Amen! Great article, thanks for bringing it to our attention.

I find it interesting that at a time when I would expect that I would be unable to sleep because the country is in such a mess, I am uncharacteristically calm, knowing that the best man for the job has been elected, is quietly going about the business of getting his "army" together, and will, in a the blink of an eye, set off to slay the dragons that beset our country. I am under no illusions that all will be right with the world on January 20th, but at least we will be heading in the right direction, and we will, for the first time in a long time, have a real LEADER leading us.

It is an exciting time.

user-pic

I'm with you, stillidealistic. I've put my trust in Obama. And unless he proves me wrong, I'm going to let him pursue the course he deems best, based upon where he's sitting.

Indeed, I think most people on this blog are not joining a chorus against Obama. Mostly, I've seen comments suggesting we're too trusting and where's the rage. Well, where is it? Not among us, for the most part.

It seems to me that certain elements on the right "pose" as lefties, enraged at this or that - and even castigating us as too idealistic. When I see comments like that, I just assume it's poseurs trying to stir up divisions among us Dems.

We all see that we're in a crisis situation in this country. And we're, most of us, simply hanging on for dear life. And grateful that a man as stable and judicious, empathetic and pragmatic, bright and wise as Obama is our leader.

user-pic

Sorry, Thera, but I am afraid you do have the ideological twins of the far right around here.

They are too consistent in their critiques to be simply stirring up trouble as agent provocateurs. I don't think the republicans who are capable of such subterfuge would be likely to engage in such behavior, if only because it is a complete waste of time. That makes as much sense as smart, articulate democrats posing as far right loonies on conservative sites.

Unfortunately, the ideologues on both sides of the fence need no help in making fools of us all. I sense we have finally figured out a way to mitigate the damage, but only if we remain clear-eyed and steadfast ourselves.

user-pic

Theories we can't prove. But obviously we can hold!

user-pic

Of course! I was simply offering a different explanation. Occam's Razor is usually a good rule of thumb.

user-pic

But the razor doesn't answer this one! Cheers!

user-pic

Sure it does - the simple explanation is that the far left can be as stupid and inane as the far right. Doesn't take a conspiracy to make an ass of one's self. :O)

user-pic

Sorry but this Frank Schaeffer guy is on crack:

Moreover many of Obama's legion of young and energetic supporters have not heard of, nor do they care about, the Noam Chomskys or James Dobsons of this world. History is moving on. Obama is bigger than the pundits. He's bigger than the movements that have divided us. Believe it or not -- this is a new day.

Frank Schaeffer is the author of CRAZY FOR GOD-How I Grew Up As One Of The Elect, Helped Found The Religious Right, And Lived To Take All (Or Almost All) Of It Back. Now in paperback..

Yes Frank, and you obviously live in a fantasy world where unicorns run free.

user-pic

I have read much of what Frank has written during the election and fantasy is not a word I would use.

He is actually trying to right many of the wrongs he caused during his time in the Rapture Right. Given the changing tones on both sides of ideological divide, I think people like Frank are making a difference. As are he is counterparts on the left, arguing for a new language to describe our common challenges and opportunities.

Simple fact of the matter is the quote you supply is exactly what is happening. Many of Obama's supporters are not ideologues and were not formed by the Culture Wars of the last forty years.

Did you have something that contradicts this idea?

user-pic

Did you have something that contradicts this idea?

I don’t think you have to be an ideologue or see politics solely in terms of wedge issues to reject Schaeffer’s false equivalence between left and right. His superficial definition of what actually constitutes ideology and the interests that impose it I addressed downthread.

Do you have a response to those points.

user-pic

I say he is not comparing the relative insanity or efficacy of right versus left ideology, just that ideology in whatever form usually accomplishes very little in the way of sustainable results. History seems to bear that out.

user-pic

I say he is not comparing the relative insanity or efficacy of right versus left ideology, just that ideology in whatever form usually accomplishes very little in the way of sustainable results. History seems to bear that out.

First of all if our goal is avoid the potential pitfalls of ideology it’s necessary that are able to identify it and understand who’s interests are being served by perpetuating it. Schaeffer contributes nothing useful, instead he launches a misdirected attack on the very idea that Obama’s actions are subject to debate. The general tone of his writing is shallow, confrontational and inflated with the sense of superiority he wants to project on others.

President-elect Obama does not bring the emotional and psychological baggage of my boomer generation's schoolyard fights with him. He meant it when he said he doesn't see a "red" or "blue" state America but the United States of America. He's of the left but without the I-told-you-so smarminess of we boomer culture warriors.

Apparently he can’t change his own character as easily as he changes his alliances.

user-pic

The left still practices that tone, even in absolute victory, so I am not sure what you are objecting to. I have commented extensively on these very pages about that tone and how it is counter-productive to the very progress it claims to promote.

Frank has quite clearly repudiated the far right policies and processes he was a part of. I think it gives him a credible position from which to critique the same tendencies on the far left and why Obama is avoiding those same pitfalls.

He is critiquing the tone> of the criticism and not the criticism itself. He is speaking in support of Barack's more pragmatic approach, as a rebuttal to some of the more ideological-driven complaints by some on the left.

You seem to object to the very criticism you claim Frank is trying to shout down.

user-pic

.

Well . . .

With all due respect I'm just wondering if Frank Schaeffer has ever met Ballam's ass?

~OGD~

ps: recommended

*Wandering' and wonderin' in the Café since Jusne 2005*

user-pic

.

One more thingie . . .

1500+ words?

And that doesn’t include the cribs of quotes from other’s.

Maybe Frankie the Scribe should pen another book. And since he quite apparently digs long. long titles, how about:

“Let Me Tell What I Think Everyone in the Universe Thinks About How Barack Obama Will or Should Preside … But You Be the Judge.

Yow . . .

~OGD~

user-pic

Humility and wisdom all in one, sit back and behold in awe!!!

Perhaps there's a Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh commune near you, not to insult Bhagwan.

user-pic

Thank you. I wonder when they are going to run out of Kool-Aid.

user-pic

This article is spot on. I read it prior to seeing this thread.

user-pic

Okay, so tell me... what are progressives wrong about, as a matter of policy? I totally agree that Obama should support policies that work. But I think that those are progressive policies.

Tell me where the progressives who shouldn't be criticizing Obama are wrong on the issues.

user-pic

That's the thing, if the progressive policies (global warming, health care reform) Obama will implement them.

user-pic

Exactly. I think the progressive point of view will win Obama's support on the merits.

user-pic
Tell me where the progressives who shouldn't be criticizing Obama are wrong on the issues.

What issues? He hasn't been inaugurated yet = what issues has he been mistaken on, so far, and you have been right?

user-pic

Well, none. But I'm not criticizing the guy, either!

user-pic

I have a feeling that we're not arguing about anything in particular yet . . .

But when we *do* start arguing, I'm pretty sure that I'll be right.

user-pic

This cloud of dust being raised by people critical of Obama is both funny and annoying. He isn't in power yet. Frankly the anger at his lack of progressive appointments is just more of a reason to like his approach.

Ideologues got us into the huge hole we are in. From Reagan to Bush we have suffered through a right wing social experiment: from domestic to foreign policy right wing think tanks and their political fellow travelers drove the country off a cliff in pursuit of their ideological vision. The last thing we need is a sudden swing in the opposite direction.

What we need is a steady and persistent demonstration to the electorate that progressive solutions to our problems are superior to the failed experiments of the past thirty years. The way to build a sustainable center-left coalition is to begin by being obviously competent. Make government work. Re-build trust in government. Implement solutions that deal with immediate problems. Re-assure the electorate that the left can be trusted with security; trade; economics etc. Then eventually the left will be not just trusted but preferred.

That seems to be where Obama is headed.

I imagine the worst dream that a Republican politician can possible have is of a competent, sensible, and workably progressive administration. Such an administration would lead the country to a sustainable center-left future. That would mean the current GOP is unworkable and irrelevant. The progressives carping at Obama now could hinder rather than help in the construction of that future.

user-pic

True that. Thanks.

user-pic

The ideology problem is not confined to left vs. right. This is a false premise that implies a simple “post partisan” solution. To the contrary, there is a vast reservoir of problematic ideology that both parties are stuck with. For example, neoliberal economic theory and the “Washington consensus” have been uncritically absorbed by both parties to the exclusion of pragmatic analysis. Economic appointments rooted in the Rubin, Greenspan tradition may enjoy bipartisan approval but this is not due to an absence of ideology, far from it.

Legislation written by lobbyists and passed by a congress financially beholden to the interests that hire them does not represent the triumph of common sense over partisan bickering.

user-pic

.

Monday morning announcement. . .

No doubt we all have a stake in the agenda.

We can only go on the words of the President-Elect until further developments.

Good morning. Last week, we announced our economic team, which is working as we speak to craft an Economic Recovery Program to create jobs and grow our struggling economy. Today, Vice President-elect Biden and I are pleased to announce our national security team.

The national security challenges we face are just as grave -- and just as urgent -- as our economic crisis. We are fighting two wars. Old conflicts remain unresolved, and newly assertive powers have put strains on the international system. The spread of nuclear weapons raises the peril that the world’s deadliest technology could fall into dangerous hands. Our dependence on foreign oil empowers authoritarian governments and endangers our planet.

America must also be strong at home to be strong abroad. We need to provide education and opportunity for our citizens, so every American can compete with anyone, anywhere. And our economic power must sustain our military strength, our diplomatic leverage, and our global leadership.

The common thread linking these challenges is the fundamental reality that in the 21st century, our destiny is shared with the world's. From our markets to our security; from our public health to our climate -- we must act with the understanding that, now more than ever, we have a stake in what happens across the globe. And as we learned so painfully on 9/11, terror cannot be contained by borders, nor safety provided by oceans alone.

Last week, we were reminded of this threat once again when terrorists took the lives of six American among nearly 200 victims in Mumbai. In the world we seek, there is no place for those who kill innocent civilians to advance hateful extremism. This weekend, I told Prime Minister Singh that Americans stand with the people of India in this dark time. And I am confident that India's great democracy is more resilient than killers who would tear it down.

And so, in this uncertain world, the time has come for a new beginning -- a new dawn of American leadership to overcome the challenges of the 21st century, and to seize the opportunities embedded in those challenges. We will strengthen our capacity to defeat our enemies and support our friends. We will renew old alliances and forge new and enduring partnerships. We will show the world once more that America is relentless in defense of our people, steady in advancing our interests, and committed to the ideals that shine as a beacon to the world: democracy and justice; opportunity and unyielding hope -- because American values are America’s greatest export to the world.

To succeed, we must pursue a new strategy that skillfully uses, balances, and integrates all elements of American power: our military and diplomacy; our intelligence and law enforcement; our economy and the power of our moral example. The team that we have assembled here today is uniquely suited to do just that.

In their past service and plans for the future, these men and women represent all of those elements of American power, and the very best of the American example. They have served in uniform and as diplomats; they have worked as legislators, law enforcement officials, and executives. They share my pragmatism about the use of power, and my sense of purpose about America's role as a leader in the world.

I have known Hillary Clinton as a friend, a colleague, a source of counsel, and as a campaign opponent. She possesses an extraordinary intelligence and toughness, and a remarkable work ethic. I am proud that she will be our next Secretary of State. She is an American of tremendous stature who will have my complete confidence; who knows many of the world's leaders; who will command respect in every capitol; and who will clearly have the ability to advance our interests around the world.

Hillary’s appointment is a sign to friend and foe of the seriousness of my commitment to renew American diplomacy and restore our alliances. There is much to do -- from preventing the spread of nuclear weapons to Iran and North Korea, to seeking a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, to strengthening international institutions. I have no doubt that Hillary Clinton is the right person to lead our State Department, and to work with me in tackling this ambitious foreign policy agenda.

At a time when we face an unprecedented transition amidst two wars, I have asked Robert Gates to continue as Secretary of Defense, and I'm pleased that he's accepted. Two years ago, he took over the Pentagon at a difficult time. He restored accountability. He won the confidence of military commanders, and the trust of our brave men and women in uniform, and their families. He earned the respect of members of Congress on both sides of the aisle for his pragmatism and competence. He knows that we need a sustainable national security strategy -- and that includes a bipartisan consensus at home.

As I said throughout the campaign, I will be giving Secretary Gates and our military a new mission as soon as I take office: responsibly ending the war in Iraq through a successful transition to Iraqi control. We will also ensure that we have the strategy -- and resources -- to succeed against al Qaeda and the Taliban. As Bob said not too long ago, Afghanistan is where the war on terror began, and it is where it must end. And going forward, we will continue to make the investments necessary to strengthen our military and increase our ground forces to defeat the threats of the 21st century.

Eric Holder has the talent and commitment to succeed as Attorney General from his first day on the job, which is even more important in a transition that demands vigilance. He has distinguished himself as a prosecutor, a Judge, and a senior official, and he is deeply familiar with the law enforcement challenges we face– from terrorism to counter-intelligence; from white collar crime to public corruption.

Eric also has the combination of toughness and independence that we need at the Justice Department. Let me be clear: the Attorney General serves the American people. And I have every expectation that Eric will protect our people, uphold the public trust, and adhere to our Constitution.

Janet Napolitano offers the experience and executive skill that we need in the next Secretary of Homeland Security. She has spent her career protecting people -- as a US Attorney, an Attorney General, and as Governor of Arizona. She understands the need for a Department of Homeland Security that has the capacity to help prevent terrorist attacks and respond to catastrophe -- be it manmade or natural.

Janet assumes this critical role having learned the lessons -- some of them painful -- of the last several years, from 9/11 to Katrina. She insists on competence and accountability. She knows firsthand the need to have a partner in Washington that works well with state and local governments. She understands as well as anyone the danger of an unsecure border. And she will be a leader who can reform a sprawling Department while safeguarding our homeland.

Susan Rice will take on the crucial task of serving as Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations. Susan has been a close and trusted advisor. As in previous Administrations, the UN Ambassador will serve as a member of my cabinet and integral member of my team. Her background as a scholar, on the National Security Council, and Assistant Secretary of State will serve our nation well at the United Nations.

Susan knows that the global challenges we face demand global institutions that work. She shares my belief that the UN is an indispensable -- and imperfect -- forum. She will carry the message that our commitment to multilateral action must be coupled with a commitment to reform. We need the UN to be more effective as a venue for collective action -- against terror and proliferation; climate change and genocide; poverty and disease.

Finally, I am convinced that General James Jones is uniquely suited to be a strong and skilled National Security Advisor. Generations of Joneses have served heroically on the battlefield -- from the beaches of Tarawa in World War II, to Foxtrot Ridge in Vietnam. Jim's Silver Star is a proud part of that legacy. He will bring to the job the dual experience of serving in uniform and as a diplomat. He has commanded a platoon in battle, served as Supreme Allied Commander in a time of war, and worked on behalf of peace in the Middle East.

Jim is focused on the threats of today and the future. He understands the connection between energy and national security, and has worked on the frontlines of global instability – from Kosovo to northern Iraq to Afghanistan. He will advise me and work effectively to integrate our efforts across the government, so that we are effectively using all elements of American power to defeat unconventional threats and promote our values.

I am confident that this is the team that we need to make a new beginning for American national security. This morning, we met to discuss the situation in Mumbai and some of the challenges that we face in the months and years ahead. In the coming weeks, I will be in close contact with these advisors, who will be working with their counterparts in the Bush Administration to make sure that we are ready to hit the ground running on January 20. Given the range of threats that we face -- and the vulnerability that can be a part of every presidential transition -- I hope that we can proceed swiftly for those national security officials who demand confirmation.

We move forward with the humility that comes with knowing that there are brave men and women protecting us on the front lines. Troops serving their second, third, or fourth tours. Diplomats and intelligence officers in dangerous corners of the world. FBI agents in the field, cops on the beat, prosecutors in our courts, and cargo inspectors at our ports. These selfless Americans whose names are unknown to most of us will form the backbone of our effort. If we serve as well as they do, we will protect our country and promote our values.

And we move forward with respect for America's tradition of a bipartisan national security policy, and a commitment to national unity. When it comes to keeping our nation and our people safe, we are not Republicans and we are not Democrats: we are Americans. There is no monopoly of power or wisdom in either party. Together, as one nation, as one people, we can shape our times instead of being shaped by them. Together, we will meet the challenges of the 21st century not with fear, but with hope.

Now, before I take questions, I'd like to invite my team to say a few words, starting with my friend Hillary Clinton. Thank you.

Further info here.

~OGD~

user-pic

Glad that I can eliminate Frank Schaeffer from my reading list. Equating Noam Chomsky with the likes of lightweights like Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin is not helpful to a serious discussion of what we want our future to look like. That's what politics is; a discussion. Only by looking at all sides of a problem can you begin to see new ideas. The Schaeffer piece just throws dirt in our eyes.

The speech by Prof Chomsky that Amy Goodman aired on "Democracy Now" was interesting. He compared this election to the democratic movements of Haiti and Bolivia. It's well worth the read.
http://www.alternet.org/workplace/108964/chomsky%3A_is_there_truth_in_obama's_advertising/?page=3

I'll stick to reading Glen Greenwald, Chalmers Johnson, Naomi Klein and Nomi Prins for now.

user-pic

Excellent point. Chomsky is not to be confused with Fox newsers and dead enders.

user-pic

Thanks for your post. Recommended.

Schaeffer's article, while lacking in editorial discipline, is substantively on target. From the beginning, Obama's apparent lack of ideological pretense has surprised, impressed, and at times utterly confounded me. It may be the true genius of "change we can believe in."

user-pic

Have to rephrase my objection to this -- who are these critics we're all so worried about? I just don't see it. Most of us are hopefully awaiting the transition and are pleased to see him demonstrating to much poise and competence as he approaches Jan 20th. Is Obama criticism from the left really a problem or just something Schaeffer made up?

user-pic

What I took away from the article isn't concern over the criticism but an attempt to explain where it's coming from. I'm no historian, but this seems to me to be the most scrutinized transition in history. Hard to believe the election was less than a month ago and the man has yet to take office.

BTW, I think it's a healthy part of robust political dialogue and something we need more, not less of. Obama so far seems to making good on his pledge of openness and transparency. His campaign basically created 3 million shareholders in his administration. That's change I can believe in.

user-pic

as the title of theone's post declares, the "problem" apparently is "hand-wringing"...

anyone who bothers to worry about any of the potential implications of whatever decisions obama might make are a threat to the sanctity of the obama presidency. it is not enough to have hope, we must also profess faith.

what i'm confused about is what "progressive purism" is in this context... beware the "progressive purists"! they might insist on adopting policy based on efficacy instead of expediency... oh no... ??? these folks who are so eager to get out ahead of any potential criticisms of obama from the left apparently can't tell their radical left-wing ideologues from the policy-wonk progressives.

user-pic

It is particularly amusing that all these non-ideological folks treat Obama like he is a prophet if not a deity.

user-pic

Criticism from those of us on the left is hardly a problem unless you are member of the cult who believes in him because they believe in him and trust him because they trust him and don't allow for ideology because that might require critical thinking.

Leave a comment

theone718

user-pic

Following: 2
Followers: 9

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address