OperaDem's Open Salon Blog

Is Obama a Democrat?

Wed, 3 Aug 2011 22:08:25 -0400

“If I were a Republican this would be a night to party.”

Rep Emanuel Cleaver (D-Mo,) Chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus - 07/31/11 on MSNBC

“We are tying similar handcuff to the next time we raise the debt ceiling.”

Rep Michael Grimm (R-NY) - 07/31/11 on MSNBC

“It is often poor people, the young and the elderly that get the short end of the stick. Somehow I don’t think the Defense Department is going to suffer as much.”

- Mayor Jean Quan, Oakland CA. - New York Times 08/02/11

I would love to say I am Democrat - but I simply don’t know what that means anymore.

To me a Democrat believes in using the power of the government to help people with problems beyond what their own communities can solve. Democrats understand that the hidden hand of capitalism reaches towards greed and self-interest, and that sometimes the power of government is the only way to block its grasp. Democrats stand up to protect a weaker minority be they women, blacks, gays, the uneducated, the sick, the elderly or the poor from a powerful majority determined to rob them of their rights, their homes, or their health.

Our President doesn’t look like a Democrat. The Senate Majority Leader doesn’t look like a Democrat. The 95 House Members who voted for the debt ceiling deal don’t look like Democrats.

They all look like weaker versions of President George W. Bush.

The Party establishment and the President both are trying to put a good face on the deal. (http://swampland.time.com/2011/08/01/five-things-for-liberals-to-like-in-the-debt-ceiling-deal/). (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2011/08/01/not_as_bad_for_democrats_as_you_think.html). Their arguments revolve around the amount of cuts to the Defense Department, the small size of cuts scheduled for 2012, and most cuts are “back-loaded.”

The issue for Democrats is not the size of the cuts, but that they happened at all.

If the cuts to entitlement programs are the smoke and mirrors that the Tea Party dissidents claim they are, then we gave on core principles too soon, and got nothing in return. If they are as deep as Liberals fear, then we truly gave away our moral high ground for nothing.

At this point in history there is little difference between Republicans and Democrats.

We can no longer say Republicans will cut Social Security and Medicare and we won’t, because we just did. We can’t run against the “Ryan Plan” because we just adopted it.

Both Parties will cut the social safety nets that support the poor, the elderly, and the disabled. Neither Party will ask the people who benefited the most from the pirate years of the Bush presidency to sacrifice a cent for the greater good of the country.

Both parties believe in domestic spying. Both parties support torture. Both parties continue the massive rollback of civil liberties that have occurred in the US since 9/11. Both parties are willing to protect big business from any consequence of the fiscal meltdown of 2008 but leave the average mortgage holder in the cold. Neither party is focused on creating jobs or doing anything meaningful to end the recession.

Obama the candidate and Obama the President are two different people. Think of all the differences Obama drew between himself and John McCain during the 2008 campaign - end the Bush Tax cuts, end the war, support single payer health coverage. Look at what he delivered. Did all those people who cheered in Grant Park on election night vote for this?

Presidents Johnson, Kennedy, Truman and Roosevelt would not believe what they would see in the White House today. Not only that an African-American is President but that a Democrat without strength, without principles, whose main policy seems to be to appease political extremists sits in the Oval office. They would turn their surprise to Congress and see Democrats in both chambers who supported the President as he gave ground on every single core principle of the Party.

The Party that I believed in, volunteered for, voted for without exception for my entire life no longer exists.

The Democratic Party as I knew it is gone. I may as well say I am a Whig.

It's all about the Money

Sun, 24 Jul 2011 22:07:35 -0400

"It's unthinkable that this country will not meet its obligations on time. It's just unthinkable we'd ever do that. It's not going to happen.''

- Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner said on CNN's "State of the Union" 07/25/2011

"You know, what I really want right now is to -- to get a debt ceiling deal for my birthday. That's kind of sad, I know."

- President Obama in an NPR interview answering the question of what he wants for his birthday.

Show me the Money!

Jerry McGuire

The American people know that the Republican position in the debt ceiling debate, of all spending cuts and no revenue increases doesn’t make sense. Even Republican voters know it doesn’t makes sense

Congressional Republicans thought that they could bully President Obama into cutting entitlement programs, then blame him for the collapse of any debt ceiling deal when he wouldn’t. They would get the cuts they wanted and not take any heat for their inflexible anti-tax stands.

Much to their surprise Obama called their bluff.

Obama signed on to large cuts in Social Security and Medicare angering his base. But, he also supported a modest increase of revenue that was based almost entirely on closing tax loopholes. This offer turned into a trap for the Republican who now appear they are more interested in protecting their “no tax increase” pledge to Grover Norquist than the world economic system.

When Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) walked away from a deal not once but twice, he missed a huge opportunity to get everything he said Republicans wanted. Now the Senate will step in with a more moderate proposal that will pass the Senate quickly, which the House will be forced to accept.

If Congressional Republicans don’t cooperate, they will suffer a tremendous backlash as average voters pay a high price for their intransigence. Maybe that will jolt the Party back to reality.

Since 2000 Republicans have operated in a political atmosphere where facts mean nothing and spin means everything. The Bush tax cuts didn’t create jobs and under-taxed rich people are not “Job Creators.” The Bush Administration has one of the worst job creation records of any modern Presidency. All the Republican economic policy has done is squander the Clinton Surplus and create an economic catastrophe. Yet the Republicans remain committed to repeatedly driving over the same cliff. Economic reality simply don’t matter as much as keeping their Tea Party base happy.

And they have to.

The Republican establishment looked the other way for years and years as the anti-tax crazies, xenophobic nativists, and the hard core Christian right, took over Republican Party organizations in State after State. Even before these groups formed into the Tea Party movement, the Republican establishment thought they could control them and treated them with the same condescension as the Liberal establishment.

They were wrong.

Those activists have now worked their way up through the ranks to the national stage. Their loyalties are not to the Republican establishment, or even big business. Their loyalties are to each other. They can ignore the establishment and rely on each other for funding and volunteers. Furthermore, Citizens United insulates them from the need for big business or Party money. Outside groups from all over the country can come into any Congressional District and drop lots of money on extremest candidates far to the right of the voters.

As a result Congressional Tea Partiers have no need for, and nothing to fear from the Establishment groups that ran the Party for years.

The Senate is a different matter. Senators need the support of big business to run expensive statewide campaigns. They don’t share the hard core self destructive fanaticism of the House and they need a deal that doesn’t hurt their big business donors.

Unfortunately for them, the Republicans have trapped themselves in an anti-revenue philosophy driven by the hard right of their party. (http://thehill.com/opinion/columnists/mark-mellman/168895-gop-gets-it-wrong-on-tax-increases). Their position is not held by the American voter, and is far outside of the main stream. (http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/07/13/house-republicans-no-tax-stance-far-outside-political-mainstream/).

Skepticism of the “cut only” philosophy runs long and deep. A recent compilation of polls show 19 different polls validate the findings that Americans support revenue increases along with spending cuts as a way balance the budget. (http://www.capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/2292/americans-support-higher-taxes-really).

Republicans need only to look to Florida, Wisconsin and Ohio, to see what can happen to them nationally, if they don’t moderate their position. These three states had freshman Republican Governors who took office in January with high approval ratings only to devastate those ratings with hard core, ideologically driven policies that were immensely popular with their hard core base, but far out of line with voters beliefs.

The budget debate will be devastating for the Republicans in 2012 if they don’t cooperate on some sort of deal. Right now the Democrats look like the only adults in the room and the Republicans look like a spoiled, self-centered child in the middle of a tantrum.

For the future of their Party and for the future of the Country it is time they grew up and learned to share.

Patriotic Acts

Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:07:12 -0400

“Our Country was founded on Dissent!”

The reaction of Ann, a friend of the Operadem, to a yard sign in New York

Ann was reading a homemade yard-sign proclaiming “Dissent is Patriotic,” posted in front of a house in upstate New York. She is right. Our country was built on a solid foundation of dissent.

In a recent survey, 24% of respondents couldn’t identify the country from whom we won our independence. Americans see the founders as bewigged men signing the Declaration of Independence and then going home to idle away the time to the inevitable victory at Yorktown, after which George Washington becomes the first President. Other than Jefferson, best known for his memorial and Sally Hemmings, there were no Presidents until Abraham Lincoln, who saved the Union for Teddy Roosevelt of the Rough Riders.

So it is not surprising the hard, sharp edge of our revolutionary past is hidden under store sales and fireworks.

But, it was the sharp knife of dissent, that carved our nation out of the British Empire. The revolution started because the British Government didn’t listen to dissent. They viewed the dissenting colonialists as a minority, in a colony full of loyalists.

The heavy handed reaction of Britain to the patriots began to unify the colonies into a country. With large English armies roving the country, carrying out a scorched earth policy, Americans began to unify around the revolution and the concept of a new nation.

What began as dissent from the British government ended in the creation of a new nation.

Throughout the years of the Articles of Confederation, the new American government drifted and after 11 years was non-functioning. Again dissenters took over and drafted a new government to overthrow and replace the old.

But, the Constitution’s ratification was not a foregone conclusion. Dissenters, who opposed its ratification - extracted a price for their support. That price was a package of amendments that became the Bill of Rights, which guarantees dissent can continue and not be seen as treason.

Dissent was enshrined in the constitution.

Since its ratification, most of the changes to the constitution have come about as a result of some national trauma and debate. Whether it was giving women and eighteen year olds the right to vote, the great Civil War amendments, or even something as technical as how the Vice President is elected and appointed, the constitution was changed by open honest dissent.

Dissent is not only patriotic it is vital. It is our right and duty to speak up for what we see needs to be changed in our government.

Dissent is why America has been able to grow, adapt and in some cases drive change in the world. Countries that don’t allow dissent, wither and die of their own weight and encrustations.

As we watch fireworks, wave flags - and yes go shopping - we need to remember the greatest patriotic act we can do to keep this country alive and moving forward is an act of dissent.

Patriotic Acts

Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:07:08 -0400

“Our Country was founded on Dissent!”

The reaction of Ann, a friend of the Operadem, to a yard sign in New York

Ann was reading a homemade yard-sign proclaiming “Dissent is Patriotic,” posted in front of a house in upstate New York. She is right. Our country was built on a solid foundation of dissent.

So it is not surprising the hard, sharp edge of our revolutionary past is hidden under store sales and fireworks.

What began as dissent from the British government ended in the creation of a new nation.

Dissent was enshrined in the constitution.

Dissent is not only patriotic it is vital. It is our right and duty to speak up for what we see needs to be changed in our government.

Dissent is why America has been able to grow, adapt and in some cases drive change in the world. Countries that don’t allow dissent, wither and die of their own weight and encrustations.

As we watch fireworks, wave flags - and yes go shopping - we need to remember the greatest patriotic act we can do to keep this country alive and moving forward is an act of dissent.

Republican Cross-roads

Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:06:24 -0400

Obama is the most serious radical threat to traditional America ever to occupy the White House."

-- Newt Gingrich, quoted in a new book, Subversion Inc., as reported by the American Spectator. (http://politicalwire.com/)

The 2012 Republican Presidential campaign is swirling across the national political landscape like a dust-storm.

2012 will be the final battle between the “Establishment” and the “Tea Party” for the soul of the Republican Party. Whichever side wins the nomination only to lose the election will be on the outside looking in on 2016 and beyond.

How will the election playout for the Republicans?

What happened to the Democrats in 1984, 2004 and 1912 highlight three likely scenarios.

In 1984, the Democrats were sure that America hated President Ronald Reagan. The 1982 recession left a lot of pain in its wake, and Reagan’s poll numbers were not much better than Obama’s. (President Obama’s current approval rating is 47%. At the same point in June of 1983 President Reagan’s approval rating was - 47%. (http://www.gallup.com/poll/124922/Presidential-Job-Approval-Center.aspx)).

The Democratic field was crowded with eight serious candidates crossing the political spectrum from the more conservative Sen. Fitz Hollings (D-SC), through former Vice President Walter Mondale. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party_(United_States)_presidential_primaries,_1984#Candidates)

But the Democratic Party’s liberal wing controlled the nominating process. With the centrists out of power, the nomination was won by the more ideologically pure candidate, Vice President Walter Mondale. President Reagan was able to build on the coalition of centrists and conservative Democrats he began in 1980, to win re-election in an historic landslide. In the process, Reagan turned those voters into “Reagan Democrats” which were the basis for Republican victories in 1988, 2000 and 2004.

In 2011 the Republicans find themselves in a similar situation.

Currently eight Republican candidates are running for President, with two or three more waiting in the wings. All of them are to the right of the American electorate. The conservatives are in control of the Party nominating process. By nominating a candidate on the far right of the spectrum the Republicans are leaving centrist Republicans, and moderate Independents open for Obama to consolidated into a Democratic coalition in the same way Reagan consolidated the Reagan Democrats a generation earlier. If that happens, the Republicans may suffer a historic landslide much like the Democrats did in 1984.

In 2004, the main qualification Democrats were looking for in a nominee was someone who could beat President Bush. Their assumption was that Bush was so unpopular and incompetent that the voters would naturally support any candidate that was not like Bush, regardless of their positions or qualifications.

The bumper sticker “Kerry/Edwards - bringing complete sentences to the White House” perfectly summed up their view of the election.

The moment Sen. John Kerry (D - Mass) emerged as a front runner the Democrats nominated him. After the convention Kerry spent more time campaigning as the un-Bush, and never addressed the issues that mattered most to the voters until it was too late. Ironically, it was Sen. Obama’s moving convention speech that underscored Kerry’s weakness both as a candidate and a campaigner.

The Republicans could easily coalesce around a weak candidate like Gov. Mitt Romney or Gov. Tim Pawlenty under the delusion that all Americans hate Obama with the same passion they do. Republicans, spend more time deriding Obama, and looking down their nose at him, then they do articulating a coherent program that Americans can believe in.

They, like the Democrats in 2004, are speaking in an echo chamber to a very narrow band of supporters. Meanwhile, the incumbent is raising close to a billion dollars to support his re-election, while actively reaching out to groups, like Hispanics, moderates, and the middle-class, that the Republicans have left behind.

As a result in 2012, the Republicans may be as stunned the Wednesday after election day as the Democrats were in 2004.

In 1912, President Teddy Roosevelt was deeply disappointed in his hand picked successor President William Howard Taft. In Roosevelt’s view, Taft was unwilling to follow through on the progressive policies the former President had left in his care. Angry and disappointed, Roosevelt bolted the party and ran as a “Bull Moose.” The Republicans split, and as result Woodrow Wilson became only the second Democrat to enter the White House since 1856.

The Tea Party wing of the Republican Party, with its substantial amount of money and volunteers, has already shown that they are reluctant to support a moderate like Romney. If Romney is the nominee, the Tea Party may bolt and run Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Min) or Mike Huckabee. At best they will sit on their hands and not provide any meaningful support to the Presidential nominee and turn their focus in ensuring Tea Party control of the House and Senate.

Without Tea Party support, Romney will lose to Obama.

Republican candidates actively ignore the fact that they are less popular than the President, and their policies have little support outside the right wing of their Party. In only one poll out of dozens released in the last month does a Republican candidate (Mitt Romney) beat Obama. In all other polls, Obama soundly beats all Republican candidates - including Romney (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/president_obama_vs_republican_candidates.html)

A lot will happen between now and election day. But right now the Republicans are standing at a cross-roads, choosing which path they will follow to defeat.