It ain't gonna happen.
The latest NYTIMES/CBS poll says 82% of Americans blame Congress for the near shutdown of the government, and 72% blame Republicans. Obama successfully communicated the problem, and the majority of Americans got it. That majority does not I suspect include ideologues on the left and right who predicted the apocalypse from their limited perspective.
They can take the blinders off, but as ideologues we known damn well they won't, even when this is ancient history they'll find the next drama to exploit. If I hadn't seen it so often I'd find it hard to believe they don't learn some lesson along the way--except that isn't how ideologues work. A lot of them are so pig headed don't even know they're ideologues.
I've been reading their blogs on OS for over three years and there's always the last straw that "breaks the camel's back." They can't take it any more. Obama selected the wrong staff, didn't get through the health care reform act that was best, didn't come from the best bargaining position, let them bastards get away with too much, and sold out to the corporations because they gave him money! (Like somebody is going to get elected without corporate contributions.)
They think because they've found their place on the spectrum that gives them an "analytic" point of view. All it does it make them polemicists and usually not very original ones. When the smoke clears, Obama will be back in the running and while some of his initial constituency will undoubtedly abandon him he may do better the second term, especially given the Republicans inability to find another candidate like Bush--both a member of the ruling class and a fundie. That's the Rove ticket and it may well be out of date.
When Obama looks back at his first term, it won't be the bailout that troubles him, or the decision to send in more troups, health care reform, the budget squabbles, Guantanamo, or any of the lefty agenda. Ready for this? The hardest thing he's done so far is his concession to appease the birthers by releasing his full birth certificate. This is the cultural reality that underlies the political consensus. That's personal.
It came after he won the presidency by a solid plurality, following a president who was a fraud and incompetent, who never recognized any interests that weren't corporate, at the hands of a purely racist segment of the population who were still able to gain ground among the ignorant and dispossessed. And not only that, but if any president did reach office illegitimately, it was Bush and that story still remains to be told. And still these bunnie rabbits equate him with Bush. The old power elite doesn't need any better friends.
I'm sure Obama was ready for the political battles, as were more Americans than we knew, but not the racial backlash, not given where he came from and what he already achieved, and not taking into account his own piece of the American dream. His Achilles' heel isn't one any other president has had to face, and the dignity with which he has done it is one of the things I most admire about him. He is among everything else the standardbearer of the Democratic party.
I'm well aware this isn't the "accepted" mainstream conventional ideological interpretation, but a nation capable of re-electing a president who took it to war under false pretenses is capable of anything, including denial of its worst secret.
I wouldn't give most of the Tea Party caucus the time of day but he's been forced to make major concessions that ultimately make no sense for the country. You know damn well he knows better. It must have hurt not being able to wipe out the Bush tax cuts knowing what it meant to the budget and to the cause of equality in general. America may have no greater enemy than the current disparity in income.
I know a lot of wealthy people who think so. I even agee with most of the lefty agenda, but not when it doesn't seriously take into consideration the reality of what he's had to contend with--the folks who never thought he'd be elected because of the color of his skin who were taken by surprise. It's a relief to see the polls demonstrate that moderates aren't oblivious.
I know: the hotheads don't want to hear a word of it. They're transfixed by the headlines. They want Krugman to run the economy, and the wars to end. They want their next shinning star to appear before it's too late since they've been disillusioned once again. The poor fools. Politics after all is a dirty business and they are sick and tired of all the compromise. They're no better than the boys and girls on the other side of the spectrum gnashing their teeth, declaring their own version of the end of time.
At least I'm not the only one saying cool off and grow up. We're lucky to have him and if they aren't careful an even more incompetent fraud will come to power than Bush.


Salon.com
Comments
I with ya 100%.
Sorry we both missed that shindig on 8th Wednesday night, but we should be able to meet up in town with a few folks later this month.
f.
That is scary. The buffoon that dares not speak his name. Palin, Bachman, Perry My lunch was made its second, third and fourth trip up my throat. Rated for fear.
http://www.counterpunch.org/weisbrot08052011.html
I tried that address on two different servers, nothing came back. i rarely respond to such invitations but tried for you.
I know the bay area well. I visit my daughter there a lot and stay at a religious community in Lake County. All politics are local and SF, even if I agree with the positions, is the land of the ideological left. Remember Dear Stellaa? She was my favorite. How I miss her stubborn picket sign in the garden approach, and how I wish I could be so innocent again.
I placed that address into Google and it worked perfectly. I can't imagine what went wrong.
Many choose the polls that support their positions, so I'll do the same.
The latest Rasmussen poll (reported nine hours, ago) finds the number of voter's who STRONGLY disapprove with obama's performance at 39%. He must be doing something right to keep sinking below 40%. I'm sure this weeks employment report and stock market action will keep his rapid decline intact:
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Either way we are giving the corporations complete veto over who runs in both parties the highest officials.
This means that we have a government controlled by the corporations either way and the tea part is at least to some degree controlled by the demagogues.
In addition to election reform we need Instant run off elections so that third parties that don't collect record number of bribes, often called campaign contributions, have a chance.
If you're not kidding, I was hoping somebody would stop by with your view and express it.
I have the impression you've had a charming life. What country was in it? I'm from Detroit myself.
Your friend,
Unfortunately, the reality of this country is that centrists, often conservative centrists like Obama wind up sitting in the Oval Office. Bill Clinton was not only our first black president, but he was a Rockefeller Republican in his policy mix. W is in a universe all by himself where he belongs.
But Obama won the presidency under fall pretenses to me. He promised us Abraham Lincoln and FDR, and instead, we get the first Democratic president in history who proposes "entitlement reforms" when there is absolutely no factual basis for this.
Proposing to cut back on Social Security and Medicare while allowing Leon Panetta and the Defense Department to run wild serves no one except the bankers.
And Obama has demonstrated bad judgement from the very beginning. Where was his call to arms to do something about the economy in his inaugural address? Bupkis. Why did he let Max Baucus and the cons play in the sandbox for six months during the health care bill?
If you see a recent Jon Stewart show, he gives you a clip of the December 7, 2009 presidential press conference where a conservatively based reporter totally lays down the Republican strategy for the debt ceiling crisis. Obama brushes himself off. He didn't listen. And the debt crisis fiasco happened because of the way he structured things.
Why, instead of concentrating on jobs and the economy, did Obama go all in for the Simpson-Bowles deficit commission? I thought that this was a bad idea at the time, and it looks like with the current economy, it will have been a bad idea a thousand times over.
When Obama was the head of Harvard Law, he had the reputation of bringing in every Tom, Dick and Mary for endless "Kumbaya," delaying decisions until the very last moment. Do you see a pattern of administration style here?
And do you wonder why me (as a fervent Obama supporter) gradually over time became so disenchanted? It certainly wasn't because I'm a left wing ideologue.
My friend, you're perfect don't ever change. You don't know the difference between politics and ideology and it's clear you never will. If I didn't know there are so many like you on both sides of the fence I'd point out the simliarities. You're gonna have a tough time in 2012. Thank for stopping by.
It's always impressed me how open minded you are and adaptive--not ideological at all.
The right knows to fight Obama tooth and nail just by looking at him but have gotten sophisticated enough to conceal it. (Though I've seen a few on OS who have so little in the way of actual arguments they don't conceal it very well.)
If Obama can get through this crisis without going under a 50% approval rating nationwide, he's done alright. That's what I think given the forces he has to contend with. 2012 may be one of those "restructurings" that come along once a lifetime. If "liberals" don't get off their high horse for this one the price will be paid for yet another generation.
That's the battle worth fighting.