Obama's Chicago Boys

[MaraJade]

Recently Obama said that he would seek out and meet with small groups of voters in
in states where working class people did not vote for him in the primaries. The aim of
these proposed meetings is to get a clearer picture of the “kitchen table” issues facing
the working class. However, the odd moves he’s made in choosing economic advisors have
me and many others wondering if these meetings are mere window dressing that hides a murkier agenda.

Barack Obama got the Democratic Nomination based upon his grand promises of change,
especially change in the economic arena. Nevertheless, it does somehow seem that
we can expect more of the very same stuff we are getting now, based upon
the team of economic advisors he’s put together. That team is a cadre of supply-siders,
Wall Street hacks and rabid capitalists who simply love the status quo of runaway free
Markets and deregulation.

I find this very strange. These people actually advocate the same tired ideas that
were rammed down our throats by Ronald Reagan, and that now have the
entire world economy sliding into a grave. Even Obama himself said that the current
economic crisis was the logical conclusion of tired and misguided policies that have
dominated Washington for too long.

How very strange that he’d reach out for help to the very prophets and high priests
of those same misguided policies.

But, don’t take my word for it. See for yourself.


http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080630/klein/print


http://advant.blogspot.com/2008/01/obamas-economic-advisers.html


http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/06/obama-economic.html



But there is a way out of hell—Obama needs to remove these people from his campaign
and completely distance himself from them and their lunatic notions. He must do this
soon. Architects and advocates of the current economic inequalities should not be
top advisors to the new President. All who support Obama should and MUST hold his
feet to the fire on this one. He promised us a clean slate and he must deliver on that.
He must be made to keep all of his promises for change, and that means that these people must go.

[loveable liberal]

1. how about we get him in office first then hold his feet to the fire.

we cant afford another 4 years of bush. Enough of the guilty til proven innocent stuff.

[MaraJade]

7. I never said he was guilty of anything. ..

However, hiring these people really bothers me. I don't think they are in favor of we
working class people, based upon their past behavior. I am really worried, especially since
one of them actually said that they "wouldn't act upon their personal views." Last time I
heard this was from Thomas, Scalia, and Roberts.

Go figure.

I have nothing against holding his feet to the fire after the election. However, if he makes
one false move, I will be leading a petition drive by then. . .

[bluestateguy]

2. How many more people is he going to be expected to throw overboard?

This has a long term price. It makes him look indecisive and vacillating if he is constantly throwing people overboard every time someone says something negative about the people around him.

[MaraJade]

8. My question is

Why did he even take these people on in the first place. Their views are not compatible with
Progressive views. I don't understand this at all.

Not at all.

[sandnsea]

3. Wouldn't it be great if Bush had Krugman as an economic advisor

You know, an opposing view.

[99th_Monkey]

4. One thing to always remember about Obama: his community organizing roots.

I used to do similar work -- community-based development and organizing -- which by the way was
pretty much founded in the 60's by RFK in NY ghettos.

The model re-frames a chronically "polarized" situations (slum landlords v. their pissed off tenants,
bankers v low-income homeowners, etc.) by re-imagining the situation to create and cultivate win/win
scenarios where everyone's interests and needs are respected and addressed.

The early stages of setting up a win/win involves reaching out to the disparate camps on an almost
personal basis, to identify those who can resonate with the win/win vision by appealing to their
better angels. Many are called, but few are chosen; but that's ok because the players (if all goes
well) will bring along their more reluctant peers in the endeavor.

I hope this is what's going on here. But I guess time will tell. For the time being, I'm withholding
judgment because I believe Obama's setting the stage on a national scale for positive change by bringing
along key players from key sectors who are ready for creating positive win/win solutions.

I guess we'll see if this turns out to be the case. But I wanted to caution people to not jump to too
many knee-jerk assumptions about these associations being misguided on Obama's part.

[MaraJade]

9. Not knee jerk at all. . .

I look at the HISTORY of these people, and it is not encouraging at all.

[grasswire]

5. but if he does that, he'll go the way of Dennis Kucinich

The PTB will never allow it.

[fasttense]

6. Doesn't the Obama campaign pay for these "economic advisers"?

Since they pay for those expert opinions, why wouldn't they accept those same costly opinions and use them as a bases for policy?

[MaraJade]

10. This is what worries me. . .

If these people's advice is shaped by their personal view, we are in deep trouble.