General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHave we been too critical of President Obama and the Democratic Party??
Some might argue that we have not been critical enough?
When a politician, any politician, is surrounded by "yes men", they tend to lose touch with what the people want or need. The same goes for cheering throngs. They begin to live in a bubble.
In my opinion, many in the Democratic Party have bitten their tongues since the first election of Bill Clinton and the rise of the DLC. Even union members were told to not criticize the President over NAFTA because it might cause him to lose the next election.
It was always the same old story. Don't criticize the President. It will let the Republicans win. It was the same story with the Welfare Reform Act, the Telecommunications Bill, the repeal of Glass-Steagal, etc. It would only hurt the Party if you criticized the President.
It is my opinion that we should have been much more vocal and much more critical in several instances. Because if we are not critical, we get shit we do not want and do not need. Politicians do great harm when not reigned in by their supporters. It is a fatal mistake to trust any politician to always act in your best interest. It is foolish.
edit: correction
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)kentuck
(111,051 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)tblue
(16,350 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)We have allowed Republican extremists to grab the political agenda with their "social issues" that don't really affect the lives of the people who vote against Democrats on those specific things.
We need to get the focus of the country back on social injustice, on the perpetual war machine and on economic issues. These issues are harder for people to understand and not as sexy as same-sex marriage and which politician is having an affair, but these issues make a difference in people's lives.
So we have to try to learn as much about them as we can and talk about them with our friends and families and change the political agenda to our lives and not those of all those shocking people who do all those shocking things.
It's utter nonsense or heterosexuals to be so worried about homosexuals' personal lives that the heterosexuals vote against money for public schools for their kids to make sure homosexuals can't get married.
That is what is happening because we have allowed our party to be taken over by businessmen instead of working people. Let's start educating voters about economic, environmental and wages and other issues that make or break them and us.
Let's talk about chained CPI, and the gun legislation will take care of itself. It really will.
And we wonder why our Party has drifted so far to the right? Because we did not hold our leaders accountable.
madfloridian
(88,117 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)xtraxritical
(3,576 posts)kentuck
(111,051 posts)It was not the base that did not get out to vote. It was the young and the minorities that had voted for the first time in 2008 and did not feel obligated to get to the polls again in 2010. Also, the Republicans had the Tea Party rebellion that inspired a lot of opposition to the President's healthcare plan, with charges that he was going to destroy Medicare. Remember the signs warning the "government to keep their hands off my Medicare"?
Yes, the voters did not get to the polls in 2010 but how much do you hold the President and Democratic leaders responsible for that? Most folks need a good reason to go to the polls. The Democrats did not give them one - at least, not one that was good enough.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)dawg
(10,621 posts)Last edited Sun Apr 14, 2013, 08:44 AM - Edit history (1)
Everyone else realizes that it is part of the Democratic dialogue and a part of what makes America great.
randome
(34,845 posts)That includes offering criticism where warranted.
But statements like these are bogus:
"There is no difference between Democrats and Republicans now."
"Obama is only a tool of corporations."
"I give up."
"I'm sorry I ever voted for him."
Short-term outrages that fail to look at the other side of the coin.
Pushing for gay rights.
Pushing for gun control.
Covering pre-existing medical conditions.
Covering contraception.
Expanding Medicaid coverage.
Pushing for equitable taxation.
Pushing for immigration reform.
Violence Against Women Act.
Lily Ledbetter Act.
If the criticism was confined to the Chained CPI issue, I doubt we would be having much in the way of disagreements on DU. And I doubt we would have 35 threads all discussing the same thing.
kentuck
(111,051 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)How nice...
But things that put money in Wall Street peoples pocket he did not have to push at all...it just happened...
Every time you get a letter looking for donations it is so they can "fight" for something....and the fighting never results in a win...gee I wonder why that is?
randome
(34,845 posts)I, too, want Obama to be more Progressive and more fiery instead of playing politics. I'm not satisfied with where things stand but I think it's important to recognize what progress we've made as we push for MORE progress.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)Or power or democracy or anything like that...
The PTB don't give a shit about gay marriage or gun control...there is no profit in that for Wall Street....(and ACA is a big gift to the insurance and drug companies not a solution to health CARE)
Through the dogs a bone and keep them quiet while they feast on the steak and drink their wine.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)People may overstate things sometimes, but it is also important to appreciate WHY they feel that way.
"There is no difference....." yes there is a difference. Democrats are much better than Republicans.
BUT too often over the years, too many Democratic leaders have tried to act like Republicans. The so-called "centrist" Democrats purposely blur those lines by either endorsing or offering pale imitations of GOP policies and messages....These Third Way "Democrats" want to be "kinder and gentler" Republicans.
---So naturally this leads to a perception among some people that there is no difference. That's how the Democratic centrists want people to feel.
"Obama is only a tool of corporations."
Obama is not only a tool of corporations. But he sure isn't challenging their entrenched power and their obscene wealth on any fundamental level....He merely chips around the edges and calls it "reform" -- but often this is further aiding and abetting their attempted takeover of everything.
"I give up." "I'm sorry I ever voted for him."
Not a surprising response when people continually vote for politicians who claim to be one thing -- but then they are continually disappointed when the politicians turn out to be different than their claims.
randome
(34,845 posts)Especially now, with the Republican brand weakened, I want him to try and put the finishing touch on ousting them forever from having an obstructionist majority.
Have we made that message loud and clear to him yet? I'm not sure we have. A million people surrounding the White House might do the trick.
forestpath
(3,102 posts)zeemike
(18,998 posts)When Obama started appointing Wall Street and conservatives I said nothing and made excuses for it....oh he is just trying to bring us together I reasoned.
But the proof came after the election when I again voted for him and he then, not needing my vote any longer, threw seniors under the buss...that is when I finally realized I did get fooled again....and it is shame on me.
robinlynne
(15,481 posts)kentuck
(111,051 posts)and still do.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)conservatives, the "Group" gives the most asinine rationalization ever. "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer." Yes you want to keep your enemies close to keep an eye on them, but you dont give them positions of authority.
robinlynne
(15,481 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)It was the 2009 purging of the liberals from his first cabinet that sealed the deal.
-Laelth
robinlynne
(15,481 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)finger in their direction. They were gone before anyone had time to uncover the lies, which with Breitbart, never took long. Anthony Weiner, Shirley Sherrod, fired as she drove home after Breitbart lied about her, had to be apologized to, was offered her job back. But the speed with which she was fired was incredible. They apparently don't do Google as the rest of us did, especially seeing it was Breitbart. But this WH seems to cater to Republicans, wants to please them for some reason.
But when millions of Dems asked the President to remove Alan Simpson from his Deficit commission for his nasty remarks about Seniors and Veterans, they were completely ignored. Groups across the country demanded his resignation, but to no avail. He IS a Republican so maybe that was the reason.
Armstead
(47,803 posts)bigwillq
(72,790 posts)We need to be critical. These politicians are playing with our lives.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)Because there seem to be lots of people who are critical of Obama for all the wrong reasons.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)On just what those wrong reasons are?
I have not seen it myself but then I don't see everything here.
Coyotl
(15,262 posts)kentuck
(111,051 posts)I do not consider trolls part of the DU community.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Coyotl
(15,262 posts)jsr
(7,712 posts)After all, President Obama is still new in his second term of office.
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)that our strategy is not effective.
We seem to be in two camps on DU.
The enemies of Obama camp,
and the supporters of Obama camp.
I must admit to failure, huge failure.
When I "attack Obama" it is mostly about "trying to get Obama to do something". The big thing for me was that I wanted Obama to eliminate about 80% of the Bush tax cuts.
I spent over two years on that.
And failed.
Obama kept 85% of the Bush tax cuts.
But many people here do not seem to care, and no amount of my posting facts seems able to make people care. The spin gets a lot more love and attention than the facts, and when you are in a camp, you are loyal to the camp, apparently.
"Obama's a great progressive" 33 recs, 156 replies, thousands of views
"Obama betrayed the working class" 14 recs, 22 replies, hundreds of views
The RWNM and the DLC not only control the message in the M$M, they seem to control the message on DU.
But as I said before, when I was defending Obama, how do we move Obama and the Democratic Party to the left? http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/127
zeemike
(18,998 posts)You are ether with us or against us...you love Obama or you hate him....nothing less will do.
And they use that false dichotomy as a cattle prod to move us to the right, one step at a time.
dflprincess
(28,071 posts)"The enemies of Obama camp,
and the supporters of Obama camp"
You're turning the whole thing into a personality cult.
How about "believers in traditional Democratic (New Deal/Great Society) values" and "Third Way/Corporate" Democrats?
hfojvt
(37,573 posts)the one thread says "I feel betrayed by Obama" and the other says "I love Obama"
but the spin defenders of Obama are like a Hydra with a million defenses. First that Obama is not gonna extend the Bush tax cuts, then that he does not have any choice except to extend the Bush tax cuts, then that extending the Bush tax cuts is actually a victory.
All I am doing is describing what actually happens. Naturally people who wanted the Bush tax cuts eliminated are going to be mad - at Obama, because he failed to eliminate them. And naturally others have too much hope invested in Obama to be able to admit that they've been screwed by their hero. So it becomes sorta - some people attack Obama, either for past, or future betrayals of traditional Democratic values, and other people attack those who "only attack Obama no matter what".
I can see arguments on both sides, since I have, in fact, been on both sides. I spent two years defending Obama from constant attacks, many of which seems unfair (and some keep getting remembered and I still do not think they are fair attacks http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/131 or http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2654106)
And I was told, a number of times, that "you will defend Obama no matter what", but my own Rubicon was not Rick Warren, or the cabinet, but the Bush tax cuts, and Obama crossed it http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/138 TWICE.
With that knife in my back, I don't have much nice to say about him for anything. I don't like him, and I don't trust him. I have the knife wound that still hurts, and it seems to constantly be twisted.
Yet the support of Obama does seem cult-like. Just like when Bush was President, he seemed so awful to us, and we used to wonder "What does he have to do to make some of these people stop supporting him?" The way they swallowed all his BS, it was like he could take a dump on their dinner plate and they would just say "yum, chocolate pudding" and lap it right up, while we scream in vain "my god, don't you see what you are eating?"
But so often, the attacks would be on Bush, rather than on Bush policies, and there was some hype there too. Remember when he was gonna invade Iran? Remember his executive order which allowed him to arrest demonstrators?
And it seems that some people only pretended to hate the Bush tax cuts, because they came from Bush. When Obama keeps 85% of them, they are cool as cucumbers about that. Still massively favors the rich, but hey, he's on our team, on our side. That dump on my plate? It's gotta be chocolate pudding.
dflprincess
(28,071 posts)Having recently been accused of hating Obama and being compared to Fox viewers because I said I don't trust him I'm a little sensitive to the personality cult.
99Forever
(14,524 posts)Every politician is OUR employee and answers to US. If they don't like it, they should resign and get into another line of work, "cuz we ain't goin' away and we ain't shuttin' up. And that includes ALL of them, without exception.
MotherPetrie
(3,145 posts)sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)enjoys angering the left. Maybe if the Left praised him for cutting SS benefits, he would not do it. Who knows?
Frankly I don't care too much about politicians on a personal level. Most of them are doing fine and will be rewarded financially one way or another after they are out of office.
My concern is for the people, especially those who have worked hard, are not being paid enough, are facing being unable to retire until they die, cuts to the one program that they paid into in order to ensure they will not starve if things go wrong and they have no other income, like the Enron retirees.
This country would not survive without its working class. We would survive just fine without politicians.
tblue
(16,350 posts)Policy and people are the bottom line for me and are nonnegotiable to a large degree. I disagree with a lot of what our POTUS does. How I feel about him is irrelevant.
I have relatives who say they're worried about Obama because of all the criticism he receives and they just want to support him. When I ask, 'Why?' they have no answer.
woofless
(2,670 posts)It is the only option left to me. We MUST tell the President when he is screwing the pooch. The more voices he hears, the better.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)woo me with science
(32,139 posts)Criticize the President? We should not even be having serious conversations about this.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022666913
Your last two sentences are spot on. K&R
zentrum
(9,865 posts)....being highly active and organized and part of movement politics.
Read Chris Hedges on his analysis of the failure of what he calls the liberal class. That would us.
indepat
(20,899 posts)it: any regressive tax scheme; any tax scheme substantially benefiting only the wealthy and/or large corporations; any welshing on promised obligations to the elderly, fragile, or poor; any scheme bestowing person-hood to corporations; any failure to prosecute major crimes of the too big to fail or well-connected; any war or act of aggression illegal under international law; any breach of equal justice under the law; any subversion of the Constitution, including its amendments; any discrimination based on race, color, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, economic status, and the like; any violation of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness in the absence of due process; any punishment not befitting the crime; and add your own.
kentuck
(111,051 posts)Hold them all accountable.
Marrah_G
(28,581 posts)AverageJoe90
(10,745 posts)Yes, some people have been too critical of Obama & the other Dems. Way too critical, in a few cases.
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"In my opinion, many in the Democratic Party have bitten their tongues since the first election of Bill Clinton and the rise of the DLC. Even union members were told to not criticize the President over NAFTA because it might cause him to lose the next election. "
...I disagree. No one is holding their tongues. President Obama has been the subject of criticism since day one. Remember the stimulus? Dump Obama?
As I said here (http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=266808)
...there are up to a dozen posts or more criticizing the President every day, calling him everything from a complete disaster to a MFer.
Whenever anyone disagrees on point, you get these kinds of post.
Maybe the problem is too much navel-gazing.
kentuck
(111,051 posts)Just curious?
"Can you think of an instance where you were critical?"
...I criticized him for choosing Hillary over Kerry for SOS.
Still, is there a rule that I have to criticize the President? I mean, I don't have to agree with everything he does, but is there a litmus test that people must pass in order to prove one capable of disloyalty (as opposed to "loyalty"? Is there a committee that decides who is engaged in "blind loyalty to and adoration of a Dear Leader"? http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2668081
What happens to people who fail the test? Does that mean the person can no longer push for things like the minimum wage and other policies to address inequality?
What if I decided I'm more interested in posting mostly positive news and supportive pieces? What if I choose to post pieces critical of Republicans and their enablers? Is there something wrong with that? Am I stifling your free speech? If I post a photo of the President, is that infringing on your First Amendment rights? Do I lose my progressive license?
This is what I mean by navel-gazing. It has nothing whatsoever to do with getting the President, Democrats and Congress to support good policies. It's only purpose is divisiveness: I better than you. You're a tool.
I much rather posts about policies, whether critical or supportive, at least then the discussion will be about policy, not other posters.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)WillyT
(72,631 posts)DCBob
(24,689 posts)The President is being pulled in a hundred different directions... he is not going to respond to every compaint he gets.. no matter who it comes from. The only way you will get anything done is by changing public opinion on a particular issue or changing congress to those who are more favorable to your cause or by electing a President who more represents your issues.
BrainMann1
(460 posts)GeoWilliam750
(2,521 posts)Rosa Luxemburg
(28,627 posts)he is in a difficult position. He has to work with poisonous snakes (GOP congressmen).
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)started heavy criticism of our party leaders several years ago.
Here we are tho, stuck with two options, one a fascist evil, and one a rebranded Conservative lesser evil.
Perhaps our relative silence has been what allowed our party to veer so sharply right. I know we are fighting for survival now and we need to speak out as loudly as we can against against harmful right wing policies.
They are ignoring our polls, we need to raise the volume if possible and try to be heard over the wealthy and their bipartisan bribery that has become such loud "speech" that it can purchase policies.
davidpdx
(22,000 posts)Neither Bill Clinton nor Barack Obama are perfect.
Some people are going to see different issue in a different light.
Clinton's mistakes were the Telecommunications Bill and the repeal of Glass-Steagal. Both led to massive industry wide fraud. I'm not so sure welfare reform was that bad, nor was NAFTA. In terms of trade I've seen studies that have indicated NAFTA has really not made any difference with either of its trading partners. The jobs we thought would go to Mexico actually went to China.
Obama's mistakes have been appointing too many wall-street types to cabinet positions, agreeing to the sequester, and not pushing harder for some of the other issues. Someone stated they thought appointing Hillary Clinton SoS was a mistake. I strongly disagree. Despite the fact that I didn't vote for her in the primary, I think she did an excellent job.
Both men have accomplished a lot. Bill Clinton was dealt a much better hand with mostly economic issues from 12 years of Republican rule. I also think the greater time that has passed since Clinton has left office, he has benefited in becoming more popular. We don't know what history will say a dozen years after Obama leaves office. He has found himself in holes before and dug out of them.