How liberal apologists torpedoed change, helped make the Democrats safe for Wall Street

[RiverLover]

It’s not just Fox News: How liberal apologists torpedoed change, helped make the Democrats safe for Wall Street
1/11/15

As the Obama administration enters its seventh year, let us examine one of the era’s greatest peculiarities: That one of the most cherished rallying points of the president’s supporters is the idea of the president’s powerlessness.

Today, of course, the Democrats have completely lost control of Congress and it’s easy to make the case for the weakness of the White House. For example, when Frank Bruni sighed last Wednesday that presidents are merely “buoys on the tides of history,” not “mighty frigates parting the waters,” he scarcely made a ripple.

But the pundit fixation on Obama’s powerlessness goes back many years. Where it has always found its strongest expression is among a satisfied stratum of centrist commentators—people who are well pleased with the president’s record and who are determined to slap down liberals who find fault in Obama’s leadership. The purveyors of this fascinating species of political disgust always depict the dispute in the same way, with hard-headed men of science (i.e., themselves) facing off against dizzy idealists who cluelessly rallied to Obama’s talk of hope and change back in 2008.

It is, in other words, a classic apologetic. The pundit, a clear-thinking, reality-based fellow (and yes, they are almost always fellows), knows that if you paid attention back in 2008 you understood that Obama wasn’t promising anything great. Plus, the president has delivered all kinds of subtle but awesome stuff that his soft-headed fans overlook. Besides, there are those awful racist Republicans. Good Christ! Would we rather have one of them in the Oval Office?

This theme has been so elaborately developed over the last few years that it would be possible to write a decent history of the Obama administration entirely in terms of the various apologetics deployed on its behalf, savoring all the different grades of literary style, noting all the catch phrases and in-jokes the pundits share with one another, enumerating all the clever put-downs they use to deride the unrealistic liberal masses.

...The recent episode in which the ugly reality of our new Gilded Age manifested itself most clearly was the financial crisis and the investment-bank bailouts. Together, these made up the greatest economic and political debacle of our time, the perfect expression of everything that has been going wrong with this country for decades.

Yes, everything that is wrong with the USA in one episode, and still the Democrats couldn’t figure out how to handle it in a way that was much different from how those despicable Republicans handled it. Not only did our Democratic administration leave Wall Street standing after Wall Street plunged the nation into a slump without parallel in most people’s lives—but our government allowed Wall Street to grow more concentrated and more powerful than ever. Our government made it plain that there are to be no consequences for Wall Street’s misbehavior—that the bonuses will always flow, that the obvious fraudsters will never be prosecuted, that this one industry essentially stands above the law.

To say that Obama fumbled this most critical issue is to understate the matter pretty dramatically. More to the point is the great unasked question of why he fumbled it so dramatically. Again, let’s review the historical record as it actually exists—not as Obama’s apologists like to imagine it:...

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/11/its_not_just_fox_news_how_liberal_apologists_torpedoed_change_helped_make_the_democrats_safe_for_wall_street/

[roseBudd]

1. How Salon pretends that 60 is not the new 51 in the Senate for page views

I was following the passage of Dodd-Frank on The Hill, Roll Call and Politico.

I also know that the left failed to turn out in 2010, a fatal error.

[Adrahil]

4. Accurate. +1 n/t

[Fumesucker]

8. Wanna bet that 51 is the new 60 in the Senate now that Republicans hold it?

[xocet]

11. It might even be a 2/3 supermajority. It is still too early to know to what condition of weakness

will be aspired.

[stillwaiting]

12. Upper Down vote! Upper Down! Up or down!

It will be all over the media brainwashing tuned out idiots, and the Democrats will NOT push back with any historical truths.

[jeff47]

29. Being just as much of an asshole as someone else isn't a win. (nt)

[Fumesucker]

35. Exactly, blocking Republican initiatives would be an assholish thing to do

They have the majority and deserve to set the agenda.

[jeff47]

38. No, bills in general should be voted on.

I think the filibuster should be done away with. Abusing the filibuster in order to thwart Republican insanity would be hypocritical. Especially while the White House can block anything.

[frylock]

21. the left DID NOT fail to show up in 2010..

how many times do people need to be corrected on this bullshit?

[Marr]

52. One more time, as ever. /nt

[Scuba]

66. +1

[sabrina 1]

34. Wrong, the Left did turn out in 2014, but unlike their past 'hold your nose and vote for the lesser

evil' behavior, they concentrated on where they can actually change things, outside of DC. They got Progressive issues on ballots across the country, worked hard to get that done, then went out and voted for them, AND WON.

They and people across political lines VOTED FOR PROGRESSIVE ISSUES!

They voted for Progressives wherever they were running, which is why they are still there. The did not vote for those who have not stood up for the Working Class and many of them lost their seats.

Iow, after several election cycles of holding their noses and 'hoping for change, but getting very little of it, watching Wall St and the War Machine not being held accountable no matter how egregious the crimes, they finally took matters into their own hands, starting in their local and state communities, voting for THEIR issues, not waiting for DC anymore, and voting for Progressives wherever they could find them.

Iow, there is a populist wave sweeping the country with voters rejecting the policies of the Third Way which are so similar to Republicans that one Democrat in Congress finally got the courage to say this week 'it makes you wonder if they are actually Republicans'.

The party has a chance right now to listen to the voters rather that the 'pundits'. Pundits are not going to win for them in 2016, VOTERS will, but only if they are provided with candidates they can vote FOR.

[George II]

41. NO one turned out in 2014 - less than 38% of registered voters went to the polls....

....and republicans got less than 55% of those who voted, meaning the great republican "landslide" of 2014 consisted of about 20% of all registered voters. I hope people are reminded of that for the next two years!

[jwirr]

50. 60 is the new 51, the fillibuster is not longer what it used to be, one person can hold up a bill

or nomination they do not like........

[L0oniX]

2. ***

[Andy823]

3. Total BS!

Just another president bashing thread.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

22. Everyone is cheering the President's new vitality in the wake of the 2014 midterms.

If that is what it took to motivate Obama we should have consigned by chambers of Congress to the GOP years ago.

[Teamster Jeff]

5. Kick Rec.......Nailed It!

[midnight]

6. I don't know why Salon didn't focus on statements Obama made about taking the keys from those

who drove our economy into the ditch. This is a an article about Wall Street. I wonder why the article didn't focus on trickle down tarp deals and who engineered those. Or better still how those were engineered.


"Obama elicited laughter in making the same point, saying Republicans "want the keys back" after putting the economy in the ditch. "When you want your car to go forward, what do you do?" he asked. "You put it into 'D.' When you want it going backwards, what do you do? You put it into 'R."

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2010/08/19/obama-u-s-on-right-track.html

[Fearless]

7. it is also a failure of liberals on this board and in real life to hold the President accountable

As he requested.

Are we really now the party of the TPP, of Keystone, of democratic-lite Congresspersons?

It is the fault of everyone who has uttered any version of "well the morally correct action isn't politically feasible" that is also at fault, as well as the president, as well as Congress, as well as every "liberal" pundit and politician from Main St. to Pennsylvania Ave.

[RiverLover]

14. Right? And these are things that are happening right now, in front of our eyes. TPP, that's going to

be the worst. Democrats in congress have stopped him from this up to now. But with Rethugs in the majority, he'll probably finally get fast-track like he's been trying for years.

And there's the exporting of oil and whipping up votes along with Citi CEO for the budget with Citi's own deregulating rider on it.

How can this be explained away, its not like he wasn't talking anti-Wall Street all that long ago~

July 2014
Obama Launches 'Populist Bombshell' At Wall Street

President Barack Obama declared Wednesday that "an unfinished piece of business" is to crack down on banks that accept "big risks because the profit incentive and the bonus incentive is there for them."

Obama made his remarks in an interview on the "Marketplace" radio show in which he struck an unusually fiery tone addressing Wall Street and the banking industry. Potomac Research Group labeled the interview a "populist bombshell" in its Thursday-morning briefing.

"Now, it's a great strength of our economies that we've got the deepest, strongest capital markets in the world, but what has also happened is that as the financial sector has grown, more and more of the revenue generated on Wall Street is based on arbitrage — trading bets — as opposed to investing in companies that actually make something and hire people," Obama said, according to a transcript...

http://www.businessinsider.com/obama-launches-populist-bombshell-at-wall-street-in-new-interview-2014-7

December 2014
Inside Wall Street’s new heist: How big banks exploited a broken Democratic caucus

...After wounding the provision, the banks employed their allies in Congress to disappear it entirely. A bipartisan coalition, including Jim Himes, D-Conn., a former vice president at Goldman Sachs, introduced a host of bills to weaken derivatives rules as far back as 2011. HR 992, the “Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act,” sailed through the House Financial Services Committee 53-6 in spring 2013. The language of this bill, written by Citigroup lobbyists, is virtually identical to what passed in the CRomnibus. Rep. Maxine Waters, the ranking member on the Democratic side, waged a fairly lonely battle to limit Democratic support. On the House floor, 70 Democrats voted for the final bill, far fewer than was initially expected. This enabled Senate Democrats to ignore the bill as a stand-alone entity.

House Republicans, egged on by Wall Street lobbyists, tried another tactic. Kevin Yoder, R-Kan., a two-term member of the House Appropriations subcommittee overseeing financial services, stuck HR 992 into the financial services appropriations bill without a formal vote, pitching it as an aid to “the farmer in your district who wants to get a loan,” rather than Jamie Dimon or Lloyd Blankfein. Nobody ever tried to strip it out, and the rider easily advanced through the process.

...But it’s just as likely that the establishment didn’t mind the outcome, letting them look like the sensible centrists “getting something done.” That was probably the motivation behind President Obama ultimately endorsing and even whipping for the bill.

Whatever the outcome, we know that Wall Street exploited a fractured Democratic caucus to restore a big subsidy to its profits. And if Democrats don’t contend with that – or worse, if they don’t want to – you can expect many more congressional victories for the financial sector.

http://www.salon.com/2014/12/16/inside_wall_streets_new_heist_how_big_banks_exploited_a_broken_democratic_caucus/

[Fearless]

16. As I said, it is EVERYONE'S fault

Not just the President's.

[zeemike]

33. Not in front of everyones eyes.

What most see on the TV is terrorist attacks and movie censorship by bad people...and a whole bunch of garbage news...and there is a reason for it.
The average person knows nothing about this.

[cascadiance]

15. I tried to get people to question he and Clinton on their corporate ties then...

As this photoshop I made then shows...



Wish we pushed him more then, especially when he started building his cabinet with someone like Rahm Emanuel, who was known for using epithets for pushing back on many of us...

[Fearless]

18. The problem is that it's not the person that matters

It's the ideal. People see images like that as attacking the character of the person. Powerful though they can be, angering supporters of any politician isn't the way to sway their opinion on the issues. I suggest an issues based approach. It isn't any one person or group's fault. It is everyone's fault for not standing up for what is ethically right.

[cascadiance]

19. You are right. Back at that time, it was more the absence of specifics of issues...

... that was the problem with Obama's campaign of "Hope and Change" that didn't define the details of what this would mean then. You could see the manipulation and corporate ties, but it was hard to define specifics what each candidate really wanted.

People wanted hope and change, but no one pressed him on it from the press, and people voted more on hope that what defined hope would be to their liking then.

Clinton defined herself more on certain issues, which is probably why she lost the nomination.

We need to make sure this time around in the primaries we get clear stances on what candidates will do for the progressive solutions we are looking for.

[Fearless]

20. ...

"We need to make sure this time around in the primaries we get clear stances on what candidates will do for the progressive solutions we are looking for."

Agreed 100%

[Phlem]

51. Some people sure did it make it seem like it was my fault for

being critical of him. So hold his feet to the fire=getting dinged by you know who. It's anti productive. And I do believe it's the Commander and Chief's decision alone to sign off on legislation or NOT. :/

The Centrists and Third Way have done some serious damage to the Democratic Party for a long ass time. It's time to ignore or sideline them for a long ass time, period. They DO NOT control the party anymore!

If ya'll like conservative views, move the fuck on then, this is not your party.

[randys1]

27. Some of us try to hold him accountable but we need everybody to show up and vote to do that

If we give him an actual majority with no obstruction, you may not get everything you want but you get much of it

[Phlem]

54. "If we give him an actual majority with no obstruction,

you may not get everything you want but you get much of it"

I thought that was what we gave him first time around even if for a few months. I showed up to vote, I got nothing and so did a whole lot of other voters. I would say stop blaming the voters and point the finger at the real issue. A party that didn't fire anyone up and derided voters instead. A party with nothing to offer but "look, we're like them".

People showed up when he pitched his populous views during his campaign. I wonder why they didn't stay? I actually don't wonder, I know.

[Peregrine Took]

40. Do you mean that line that BO likes to use about we can't hold out for the "perfect"

so we should only go for the best we can get (the mediocre?)

[Fearless]

43. He is a politician, we are not.

Let him talk about compromises. Let us fight for what is ethically right.

[Phlem]

55. not even that.

The least evil is less than mediocre.

[Doctor_J]

60. what would you suggest we do? We marched, occupied, wrote, emailed,

complained, voted him huge majorities in congress, expressed our displeasure of his republican policies before he signed them....

Your post is complete nonsense

[Fearless]

61. Actually I would suggest that EVERYONE do EXACTLY that.

[NYC Liberal]

9. It's not about "powerlessness"; it's about the realities of our political system.

Too many anti-Obama diatribes place all blame at his feet and consistently fail to blame the right-wing obstructionists in Congress. They seem to not understand the very basics of the Constitution and our system of governance.

The president's largest support base is liberals, not "centrists". (Of course, mention that and you'll probably get a response that they must not be "real" liberals.) The extremely small fraction of liberals who really don't like Pres. Obama do NOT get to claim to represent all liberals. They are NOT "the masses"; they are a tiny minority, though a loud one. When those people talk about all the amazing things a President Sanders would do but fail to explain exactly how he would get them through a right-wing Republican Congress (just hand-waving that minor detail away), they deserve the ridicule they get. And again, I am talking only about the small minority that does this but the vast majority of liberals are very smart, reasoned, and well aware of political realities.

[stillwaiting]

13. The problem is that very few Americans pay close attention to D.C.

LOTS of Americans identify as conservative, moderate, or liberal, but they just don't pay much attention to specifics and details that come out of Washington.

This makes them HIGHLY susceptible to propaganda and speeches.

Until Americans begin to exercise their civic duties as CITIZENS of this country, most opinions just won't hold that much weight. They are built on straw.

[jeff47]

30. Why would they pay close attention?

Most Americans get shit on, or get shit on with an apology as a result of what comes from DC. Why pay attention when the results are essentially the same?

"We are not as evil" does not win. Stand for something, and you'll give people a reason to pay attention.

[stillwaiting]

56. I don't disagree with that. But,

if Americans don't start paying attention then there really is no hope of us ever getting a country that works for average people.

That would require paying attention so that people would know when the Republicans attempt (and succeed) to pass legislation that hurts most people or legislation that helps the financial and corporate elite. Most people have no clue. This becomes dangerous because their propaganda machine can put the blame on the wrong people (scapegoats) which will usher in even more harm. And, I feel like this is happening in this country. So, people HAVE to start paying attention again. Or, we'll continue to be screwed, and then screwed even worse.

Of course if we don't clean up the Democratic Party in a major way we'll continue to be screwed as well. We have a lot of work to do, and that includes waking a lot of people up from their comfortable (but becoming less and less comfortable) slumbers.

And hell yes to ---------> "We are not as evil" does not win. It's a huge problem that so many Americans think that the Democratic Party serves Wall Street's interests over the interests of average people. Of course, there just might be a reason they feel that way.

[Maedhros]

46. I'm not so much concerned with what Obama FAILED to do,

but with the horrid things that he SUCCEEDED in doing.

The list is enormous, but the most egregious was his abandonment of habeus corpus and his assertion of the power to execute U.S citizens anywhere in the world without oversight or due process, based solely upon the President's authority. This is the defining feature of a tyrant.

I find it ironic and appalling that the "vast majority" of "liberals" who are "very smart, reasoned, and well aware [sic] of political realities" still have the gall to complain about Republican excesses. If one will accept the President's extra-judicial execution of citizens, what exactly can one justify rejecting?

BTW, the OP covered your response:

A fourth form of apologetic emphasizes the well-known structural obstacles to presidential clout, meaning mainly the power of money, which is impossible to overestimate and which stands in opposition to just about every item on the progressive wish list. There is a variation that emphasizes the insane backwardness of the U.S. Senate, which is not only tilted to favor sparsely populated areas but which confers enormous power on individual members. There are other pundits who focus on the gerrymandered districts that poison the House of Representatives and on the perennial Washington problem of the revolving door, which makes good and effective regulation difficult.

and, especially:

The main thing at stake here isn’t the reputation of the defended president at all, but rather the clear-eyed shrewdness of the pundit making the argument. Unlike the suckers who bought the Obama sales pitch back in ’08, he wasn’t fooled and, like all good courtiers of our new millennial Versailles, he knows never to take politicians seriously.

[Caretha]

62. I could not agree with you more Maedhros

In my opinion......It was just more of the same despicable crap that the Bush admin pulled. But, God forbid it was pointed out.

Are we better off today than we were 8 years ago? I think not.

He perpetuated it. Obama was not helpless...he helped.

[Scuba]

67. +1,000

[kentuck]

10. Hmmmm...

While there may be a lot of truth in these pronouncements, it seems that something is missing?

It is difficult to make decisions without all the information on the table. I'm not sure we have the information yet?

[OnyxCollie]

17. Let's wait until all the facts are in.

And then we can consider thinking about something.

Until then, watch this space.

[kentuck]

25. :-)

Perhaps we have all the information we need? Perhaps it is the willpower to do anything about it is where we are lacking?

[Cryptoad]

23. Thats funny coming from

the self-professed who had rather a Republican win than get out and vote for a less liberal democrat who beat their favorite candidate in the primary.

[pa28]

24. The author nailed it. He must visit DU on a regular basis.

He left out the fact Obama can and does use the "bully pulpit" once in a while to "get things done". Most recently he joined up with Republicans to arm twist Democrats on the crominibus bill.

Like he says toward the end of the piece. Obama is not powerless and those saying so should consider the idea that he's getting the exactly the kind of presidency he wanted.

A moderate Republican presidency.

[RiverLover]

26. +1000gazillion000! nt

[Peregrine Took]

42. I used to think he really made all those wonderful promises about things he would do if elected but

then, listening to his many librul defenders I realized that it was just a dream and he never said them at all.

[jeff47]

28. This is a really stupid article

It's an incredibly simplistic analysis in an attempt to divide the party.

Sometimes, it is Obama's fault. There could have been prosecutions on Wall Street, for example.

Sometimes, it is not Obama's fault. Single-payer could not get 60 votes in the Senate. Not because Obama wasn't "forceful enough" or some other crap. But because Senators like Lieberman hated the idea, and loved their "donations" from the insurance industry. Democrats also didn't have enough votes to change the rules for the same reason.

And sometimes, it gets much more complicated. Prosecutions for torture? Cheney isn't stupid. I'm confident there is nothing written down that ties the top people in the W administration to torture. So if prosecutions were done, I expect the result to be just like Abu Ghraib. The rank-and-file would be jailed, while the people who actually ordered torture go free. Should the rank-and-file have known better? Well, when they hand you a memo from the White House council saying it's legal, and the penalties for disobeying a legal order are quite severe, it's not as easy to reject that order as some claim.

The people saying some things are not Obama's fault are not saying nothing is Obama's fault. They're saying life isn't black-and-white.

[Caretha]

63. For example????????????

What the fuck bro. They broke the god damned law and brought this country to its knees and left the American citizen on the hook to bail out their criminal asses. You think that is sometime small crime that deserves a slap on the wrist??

Here's some reality for you...forget the "ponies & such"...you might as well bend over and kiss yourself on the ass goodbye unless you are part of the criminal cabal that took over this country and was enabled by the DLC - Republicans and the rest of American citizens that just gave up.

Obama not only didn't prosecute them - he appointed them to his cabinet. What part of that is confusing to you?

[Scuba]

68. + Eighty Gazillion

[RiverLover]

71. ^^^Excellent post. Totally nailed it. nt

[jeff47]

72. For example does not mean it's minor.

It means there are others.

[rhett o rick]

65. First of all the Democratic Party is divided. Some have their heads in the sand

and claim otherwise. There is the Sen Warren/ Sen Sanders Wing and there is the Pres Obama/ H. Clinton-Sachs Wing. This is a huge divide. It's the 99% vs. the 1%. It's the common people vs. the Oligarchy.

Obama has a lot of opinions related to condemning Cheney, yet he soft-sells f'n torture.

As far as torture goes, prosecute all, right down to the lowest, slimmy-ist person that held down a prisoner and let someone else pour the water. JUST FOLLOWING ORDERS doesn't cut it. And yet Pres Obama pretends it wasn't a big deal. Pres Obama is apologizing for the torturers. I hope you aren't.

[Scuba]

69. Bingo!

[zeemike]

31. They must be reading DU

I heard every one of those apologies right here and the attacks on the ones that questioned Obama on anything.
The party has been badly harmed by this as the last election shows us, and unless we run candidates that speak to the issues of the average person we will be the ones that become a regional party...when we had the opportunity to make the GOP that...but chose not to.

[Phlem]

36. yep.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

37. But..but...it's not realistic to think that bankers, torturers, war criminals should be prosecuted.

After all, we are only a "nation of laws"...sometimes. When it's politically expedient to be.

[Peregrine Took]

39. Its not "forward thinking" which is what we must be about.

Or ELSE!!!

[ymetca]

44. The sad "truthiness"

seems to be that We The People have always been duped by the wealthy and powerful. Hence the edict "the poor will always be with us". I wonder which fat-cat Roman Cardinal slipped that one into the New Testament?

Somehow We The People need to establish a one-person one-vote Global Democracy that eliminates hierarchical control systems foisting leaders and "saviors" --the perennial hope of generations of subjects conditioned to deprivation and slavery. We need to stop playing the Game of the Golden Bough.

In the short term I am rooting hackers will make all the money on earth just vanish. Poof! I have this idea that when the torches and pitchforks crowd finally arrives at Fort Knox, there won't be anything inside. Just an empty vessel, like Pandora's box --all the evils of economic oppression unleashed long ago. Nothing in there anymore but Hope, of course --the last ditch sales pitch of a dying empire.

Then what will we do?

[LWolf]

45. I haven't read the replies to this thread yet.

I have read the entire article, and I must say that DU certainly has a vocal contingent of the apologists he describes.

I'm going to read the replies now, and, since it's Sunday and I get to stay at home, I'm going to take a drink every time I read an apologist's response.

What are the odds that I'll be sober enough to post again when I'm done?

[G_j]

48. lol

just don't drive afterward!

[LWolf]

49. No driving today, lol.

[Kermitt Gribble]

47. Huge K&R! n/t

[WillyT]

53. K & R !!!

[djean111]

57. So - we unicorn-loving Lefties who criticize the president and are told to STFU by the Obama fans -

we are responsible for this?

[RiverLover]

58. Umm, no, that would be the apologists, the Obama fans. Not us. You'd like the article djean. nt

[djean111]

59. Okay, thanks.......my unicorn starting crapping glitter all over the place when I read the title! n

[alarimer]

70. I agree with this.

Democrats are spineless sell-outs.