More emptiness from the master.

Agree with Stellaa. Back off and let this man do what he seems to be brilliant at: listening and working pragmatically. These times call for that!

I defend David's right to be on the wrong side of history.
I concur with most of what Frank and Stellaa say here. I remain one of the "inspired"however and am looking forward to a president I can be proud of and believe in again. Barack is that for me if for nohing more than his transparency--after all, David knows what he knows because Obama is being honest.

I find two things very odd here: (1) Those who disagree with David Sirota's original point refuse to actually address the substance of his argument; and (2) that this conversation was moved over here rather than continuing over at the original blog post where it began. Are people really that selfishly territorial here at OS now?

I did bring it up for discussion "over there"...but you don't get much discussion from David. So I started my own thread.

Is there a problem with that????

He and I both responded to your comment, and then you took your ball and ran. That's what I saw.

(ps--Still waiting for a "substantive" response to the relevant points. I get the feeling I'm waiting in vain.)

Blake, I do not ever “take my ball and run.” I have been discussing politics and religion on the Internet for a very long time…and I try to be out front and never to duck anything.

My experience has been that David does not spend lots of time replying to posts…and I almost immediately decided to post a new blog that brought the issue that concerns me to greater attention.

The issue of concern to me is not windfall profits taxes or any of the other stuff mentioned in David’s several recent posts.

What concerns me is David’s constant swipes at Obama before he even gets started.

Even more specifically, what concerns me is David’s (any many others, by the way) being bothered by Obama making adjustments in his agenda now that the election is out of the way.

See it as a negative if you want, but I see it as something I want Obama to do, because I realize that things have to be said in a campaign simply to get elected. I don’t want any politician to keep all the promises he/she makes while campaigning, because I am not an idiot and I know that some promises are made to swing certain voters and I think the primary objective of any politician who feels he/she can make a difference IS TO GET ELECTED.

Politicians lied! That is a given. We, the people, goddam near DEMAND that they lie to us. So we are not only getting what we deserve, we are getting what we want when they do.

I want Obama to make adjustments…I want him to make the decisions he is making. If you or David or everybody else in this country wants to keep ragging his ass for doing it, so be it. Enjoy yourselves. I have a right to call you on it…and I will.

For you to suggest that I am avoiding saying what I have to say…or that I am avoiding interacting with you is laughable. I am not concerned with your great wisdom in any way.

And if you don’t mind…I will choose what I will deal with in a thread. I do not have to deal with what you deem to be appropriate.

Libertarius just posted a comment over in David's blog that got a response from me. I thought I'd post the same response here.

Libertarius wrote:

“ It looks to me like Sirota is not "ragging" on Obama for making adjustments, but for the quality and implications of the adjustments he seems to be making.”

So apparently you think that because “it looks” that way to you …nobody else can think it looks otherwise to them????

I think otherwise, Libertarius.

I think it is becoming (if it has not already become) petty, repetitious ragging.

“After all Obama might have announced an increase in the proposed wiindfall tax or a supplementary form of taxation on Exxon et al, and I imagine Sirota would have registered no objection. So by all means show Sirota where he is wrong in his particular criticisms (as the ever thoughtful Kent has done) or complain about swipes in general and be guilty of the Dear Leaderism of which Sirota accuses you. “

I will write about what interests or concerns me…and you write about what interests or concerns you. Not sure why you think it appropriate to tell others what to write about, but I, for one, am not interested in what you deem to be the proper way to respond to a post. I addressed the issues that concerned me.

In any case, Obama apparently is not meeting the expectations of some people…and the guy has not even gotten into office yet. He is making some policy decisions and appointments…and he is adjusting the decisions and appointments to conditions AFTER the campaign.

I have no problem with that—in fact, it is what I expect and hope for. I think he has the country and long-term hopes for a successful administration in mind while making these adjustments.

As for the demeaning “Dear Leader” bullshit, this is not China or North Korea…and we do not have a Dear Leader. I would love to have either Libertarius, Blake or David mention the “Dear Leader” mentality accusation to any of the members of the township council of my hometown. They could use the laugh.

Sorry if you are at a loss for anything else to write about, David. Perhaps you’d consider calling Maureen and ask if she’d mind you ragging on the Clintons as a change of pace.

If I am a bit uptight about this, keep in mind that I see this kind of nonsense coming from the right for the next four years…and the thought of it coming from people with whom I am in reasonable political agreement bothers the shit out of me.

It looks to me was a way of speaking. You of course ignored the substance of my comment, which was that Sirota objected to certain kinds of adjustments and deserves to have his arguments addressed. I stated on the other post that I can see where Obama may well be right on this issue. But your carping about reasoned criticisms of what Obama does, without in any way adddressing the specifics of that criticism is cultish. Sirota is right about that.

Libertarius...you simply do not know what you are talking about.

I will post comments on the issues that concern me.

You are fast becoming a cult of one!

At the risk of a shameless plug, I wrote about this on November 6th. Obama is largely an unknown commodity onto which we all projected our hopes and dreams in this rather moribund time in our history.

The extreme flanks always feel emboldened in victory and then bitter when the pragmatists start catching hold, trimming the grandiose campaign utterances into more practical applications. We moderate republicans (honest, we exist. Really, we do. We're not in the wilds anymore, but there's a few of us in captivity.) We moderate republicans endured this crap from the far right for years. We lost because we were not far enough right this time, didn't you hear?

And now the left gets to bellyache about Obama not being true to his word that got him the big landslide in the first place, blah, blah, blah.

This guy has huge issues with which to contend. Virtually every american should be rooting for his success right now. His success is far more important than any partisan bickering at the moment.

At the risk of a shameless plug, I wrote about this on November 6th. Obama is largely an unknown commodity onto which we all projected our hopes and dreams in this rather moribund time in our history.

The extreme flanks always feel emboldened in victory and then bitter when the pragmatists start catching hold, trimming the grandiose campaign utterances into more practical applications. We moderate republicans (honest, we exist. Really, we do. We're not in the wilds anymore, but there's a few of us in captivity.) We moderate republicans endured this crap from the far right for years. We lost because we were not far enough right this time, didn't you hear?

And now the left gets to bellyache about Obama not being true to his word that got him the big landslide in the first place, blah, blah, blah.

This guy has huge issues with which to contend. Virtually every american should be rooting for his success right now. His success is far more important than any partisan bickering at the moment.

Thank you, Geoff. That is sort of what I was saying, but I haven't the skill to say it as nicely as you did.

David Sirota is a decent sort...and I certainly am more in accord with his politics than I am antagonistic to it. But right now, the best thing any of us can do is to give Obama as much breathing room as possible.

Obviously people like David, Blake, and Libertarius are of a different mind.

Fine. That is what makes a horse race.

Glad to know there are Republicans of your stripe around. I work in an especially conservative county...at a country job...and some of the Republicans I contend with are out there near Pluto.

Sirota is turning into the liberal version of Ann Coulter, someone so ideological they are mad at everything.

Frank, it is amazing how far rightward the Republican party has lurched. I worked as a low level advance man in 1979 and 1980 for Bush the Good and then for a congresscritter who shall remain nameless but who is now a Senator, so I am infected with the potomac fever and have outbreaks every four years watching the horse races. (This would be in my Bio, but I have some glitch and tech support hasn't yet gotten around to helping me fix it. *cough*)

As some of you may recall, Bob Dole, in 1976, was deemed too scary and too far right. He was part of a deal struck between Ford and Reagan. Ford offered the Veep slot to Reagan. He declined it. Ford asked what it would take to get Reagan to campaign for him. The response was to pick the Veep. Ford allowed him to submit a list of names from which to pick the Veep. Dole emerged and Reagan campaigned only one or two times for him, such that Ford refused to be in the same room with Reagan for a number of years thereafter.

So that was Dole in 1976. Dole in 1996 was deemed to have been a wishy-washy moderate.

Goldwater, in his final days, was villified by these cretins as having "sold out." What these chuckeleheads failed to realize was that Goldwater had not changed at all. He was adhering to his same staunch belief in states rights that had him against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 but now against federal bans on abortion or any meddling with gay rights. He wanted those issues left to the states.

That happens to be a very consistent constitutional construct. (Whether or not one agrees with it is another story, but it is consistent.)

I distinctly remember a news visual from 1996 that had Dole standing near a fireplace in Goldwater's home and Goldwater seated to his right. Dole said something to the effect that some in the party were criticizing him for being a Goldwater Liberal and if Goldwater beliefs were liberal, then he would wear the mantle proudly.

So yeah. Call me a Goldwater Liberal.

As to Obama? I actually like some of the stuff he is doing. Keeping Gates on shows a lot of class. (Gates was a Scowcroft protege and emerged after W finally realized his strategy was not working. So Gates is essentially cast in the mold of the Elder Bush with respect to foreign policy.)

The Hillary pick is a little curious to me in that they had their biggest disagreements on foreign policy. Perhaps it is a way to placate, again, on the war issue, as he has a republican hold over, a democrat who supported it, and him who had been against it. It essentially covers the entire spectrum.

It will, however, not set well with those who want us out yesterday.

I also like making the UN a cabinet post at this point in time, PROVIDED, it also comes with a little more resolve to have our concerns aired and appreciated better in that august, yet ineffectual, body.

I could go on, but I hope you get the drift.

As an American, you would be a fool to root against this guy. The stakes are too high for partisanship like that.

Frank, to one of your points, i am bemused that all of these judgements and decisions about Obama's governing are being passed BEFORE the man has even been sowrn in. My favorite? "He is governing from the CENTER RIGHT ". REALLY? What governance has he issued? I think it is those media/talking head rightleaning types hoping that if THEY say it often enough it will be so, because of course he will listen to them.
When that turns out not to be so, they will label him as "changing course" and bemoan how he lost his way, again.

Right on, Reb.

The bottom line is...no matter what Obama does right now, there will be plenty of people lined up to tell him why he should be doing something else.

Like I said in another thread...with friends like some of these people...Obama doesn't need any enemies.

Call me strange, but I actually vote based on ideas and beliefs and evaluate my representatives based on how their actions comport with that. Isn't that the crux of a representative republic? Criticizing Obama because he, in many ways, is embracing some of the very same ideas and beliefs of the neocons is why people like David and Matt Taibbi and others criticize them. I don't think it's personal, Frank. It's our job to question our leaders. It's certainly not our job to be sycophantic cheerleaders for them when they do crap that flies in the face of what we believe.