MyDD :: Obama, Again Reinforcing Right-Wing Narratives

Obama, Again Reinforcing Right-Wing Narratives

by Matt Stoller, Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 02:17:02 PM EST

Barack Obama is one of the true progressives in the Senate. His voting record, and his political priorities - Avian Flu and Genocide - suggest that he knows we're all in it together.

So why does he have to reinforce right-wing ideas?

The issue: Barack Obama, one year after the election
Our view: He has defied the liberal stereotype.
More than a year after he electrified the nation with his speech at the Democratic National Convention, Barack Obama remains a reluctant star on the political stage - a circumstance owing to deft political positioning or personal modesty (or perhaps more likely, some of both). While Obama - the only black U.S. senator now serving and only the fifth in the nation's history - has proven himself a champion of progressive causes in the Senate, he also has revealed himself a populist and a pragmatist committed to reflecting the values of the heartland state he represents. Obama, for example, has been a staunch supporter of health-care reform and affirmative action, yet he has been critical of his party for failing to do more to incorporate religious conviction into its core principals and message:
"I do agree that the Democrats have been intellectually lazy in failing to take the core ideals of the Democratic Party and adapting them to circumstances. ... It's not just a matter of sticking in a quote from the Bible into a stock speech."

If the most popular Democrat in the country is saying that Democrats are lazy, impractical, and disrespectful towards religion, why should anyone vote for Democrats?

Couldn't he instead say something like Democrats represent a core set of powerful and common values, and we could do a better job of articulating them?

Come on.

Tags: Senate 2006 (all tags)

Permalink :: 58 Comments :: Post a Comment

Sorry Matt (3.00 / 3)

Ever think he's that most unusual of Politicians doing the most unusual of things: Telling the unvarnished truth?

He isn't reinforcing anything...he's warning the Party to get it together that what they are doing isn't working.

IMHO

Since Practical Politic's is my #1 object of inclusion in whatever I do, whether it's blogging for a campaign or posting a diary (notice the highly practical, fully documented, potential campaign diary yesterday that got zero input or recommedations....).

Practical Politics isn't popular. It's generally not inflammatory enough compared to all the other headlines we can create screaming at the Moon.

My hunch is that Obama means exactly what he says. And others should pay attention.

...just a red meat eatin' Democratic Dawg at PolCampaign

by BigDog on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 02:25:19 PM EST

Re: Sorry Matt (none / 0)

It's about how you say it as much as what you say.

by bruh21 on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 02:28:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

This is disgusting (1.66 / 3)

Barak Obama can switch parties for all I care. He's turning out to be another Joe Lieberman or Zell Miller.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:02:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is disgusting (none / 0)

THE SKY IS FALLING! THE SKY IS FALLING!

by dayspring on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:08:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is disgusting (3.00 / 3)

Gary, statements like this really hurt your credibility.

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:27:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: This is disgusting (1.00 / 1)

Not near as much as Barak Obama's statements hurt his credibility. If he can take the heat, so can I.

My credibility is just fine where it needs to be. I stand by every statement I have ever made at MyDD, including this one.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:00:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You Have Totally Missed The Point Here (none / 0)

What could possibly be more practical than talking to the party about what it needs in a way that speaks to all members of the party, and does nothing to give aid and comfort to the Republicans?

p.s. Tooting your own horn about how practical--and unappreciated!--you are doesn't seem very practical either. You might want to think that one over as well. "Poor little me" comments are kissing cousins to "Good-bye Cruel World" diaries.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:36:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sorry Matt (none / 0)

I read that... thought I recommended it. If not, my bad, because it was very, very good.

Not sure about obama, but I think that '06 os far enough out that these kinds of criticisms do more good than harm, because Democrats are really letting a lot of people down. It IS stupid to just throw some Bible quote onto the same stuff you were spewing in '04.

You can come from the Christian/moral angle on the Democratic platform/agenda, and I'd love to see that. But of you're gonna do that, the neoliberal stuff has to go... all the DLC free-trade-whether-they-like-it-or-not and triangulation has to go.

Stem cell research, Medicare for All, a war on poverty instead of a war on drugs, education reform, and a human-rights-based foreign policy all flow directly from a moral imperative. All of these flow directly from the idea that government should help people to overcome the most serious problems they encounter, that it is right to and proper for it to do so.

I think that's what Obama was getting at (probably not the details), and it true. of course, Dean was saying all this in 2003 and 2004, but of course, everyone called him crazy... and they still do. And he's still right.

by teknofyl on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:39:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Who is Obama addressing? (1.00 / 1)

Is Obama talking to Al From and Joe Lieberman? Is he talking to Harry Reid and Ben Nelson?

It is incompetent and ignorant for Obama to make this kind of broad brushed criticism of the Democratic Party. Anyone who does not question Obama's judgement after he made this kind of statement needs to examine their own judgement and values.

Exactly what the hell is Barak Obama talking about?

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:04:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Who is Obama addressing? (none / 0)

It is too broad, but then again... I AM sick of hearing Democrats give insincere soundbites about 'moral values.'

Really... if you think that's the way to go, which is dubious because i don't think that is what won the election, but even if you think that's the right way to go, damn... you don;t just pay lip service to it.

I think that he wasn't addressing voters as much as he was pointing out that the party needs some a major overhaul, not some makeup to make the pig look better.

That being said... I'm down with Dean, and Obama hasn't been very supportinve of the Chairman, and I doubt that the agenda that he backs is 100% in line with my personal beliefs.

But I felt what he was saying on that 'bite.

by teknofyl on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 08:35:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Not that bad (3.00 / 1)

I don't think this is all that bad. For someone who's done so much for the party in such a short period of time, it feels like this is picking a couple of fuzzies off a 2K suit.

Okay, it's not the best way he could have said it, pehaps. But he's not saying anything that's wrong. He's not saying that Democrats don't have the right values. What he's saying is that those values aren't being adequately put into context so that everyone can understand them. Also, what was in the place where the ellipses are? His position could have been even more nuanced than we're seeing from an excerpted quote.

by blackmahn on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:01:50 PM EST

Re: Not that bad (none / 0)

I like the way you say it, since you don't call us Democrats intellectually lazy.

by Matt Stoller on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:23:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

See The Full Context Here: (none / 0)

[link], as I pointed out in my previous comment, the larger context was:

Obama says his party needs to do a better job of getting its message out to voters.

"I do agree that the Democrats have been intellectually lazy in failing to take the core ideals of the Democratic Party and adapting them to circumstances," he says.

He says the Democrats should "take it big instead of making it small" as they speak about globalization, the need for a tough foreign policy and the importance of faith and family.

"It's not just a matter of sticking in a quote from the Bible into a stock speech," he says.

There is more than nuance here, IMHO. He is saying something that is genuinely progressive. But that only makes Matt's point more relevant. Because he's de facto making a rightwing point while trying to make a progressive one.

I say that O'Bama is being intellectually lazy himself when he stumbles into this sort of thing. And I think it's good for him to hear this sort of criticism, and take heed.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:41:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama is saying the right things (3.00 / 1)

that resonate with most Americans. And he is backing progressive causes without sounding like a hack.

by clawed on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:03:05 PM EST

Re: Obama is saying all the wrong things (1.00 / 1)

And he is backing progressive causes without sounding like a hack.

What are the progressive causes Obama is backing?

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:07:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is saying all the wrong things (1.00 / 1)

Addendum: What are the progressive causes Obama is backing in this article? If Obama has some mystical political purpose for saying this crap, maybe he should have made sure it was included in the article.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:09:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama is saying the right things (3.00 / 1)

And he's right. Nowadays all these Dems are sticking Bible quotes into their speeches, but it just seems contrived.

Dems have to speak from their values - exactly what Obama is talking about.

by dayspring on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:18:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Yes, But He Said It In A Wose-Than-Clumsy Way (none / 0)

See my other comments for the full run-down. But neither Matt nor I is objecting to what we think he's trying to say. We're objecting to how he says it giving aid and comfort to the enemy.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:43:50 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Here's the problem (1.00 / 5)

it's important to remember - as Obama becomes more a part of the Washington establishment . . ..

Barak Obama is turning out to be just another inside the beltway political hack. Fuck Barak Obama.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:06:05 PM EST

Re: Here's the problem (3.00 / 1)

Obama is a progressive, and he's enormously powerful and influential. It's much better to convince someone like him to work as a proud Democrat than to write him off.

by Matt Stoller on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:19:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (1.00 / 1)

Obama is a greenhorn, and he's done nothing. And progessive is a marketing campaign started by the same class of people that brought you the phrase "war on terror" and "death tax"

by turnerbroadcasting on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 12:28:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (none / 0)

He's trying to be a maverick within the party (aka McCain style self-promotion).

Its one thing if you're trying to turn the party in a new direction, but he seems to be taking pot shots as if he's from the outside and voting with the establishment anyway.

Obama is no maverick. Now's the time to really attack the republicans as they are the most corrupt that they've ever been.

by ugottabkidding on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:30:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (none / 0)

thats correct, obama is a greenhorn senator with no legislation or initiatives to his name. he has not championed one cause.

at least, thats my tale of the tape. does anyone know any differently

by turnerbroadcasting on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 12:28:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I Think You're Over-Reacting (none / 0)

And I think that Obama is over-reacting too. His language that Matt is criticizing is an example of a larger pattern of over-reacting to things he thinks are wrong with the party. They are mostly matters of tactics, sometimes strategy. But I think his values and purpose remain sound.

The problem is, IMHO, that he's trying to build a positive record and persona in a time that calls for a certain degree of moral clarity, to steal back a stolen term. This would be much easier if he had been around the Senate for a full term longer. Then we could more readily judge which we he's headed, and why. He would have a longer record of trying to build a positive legacy, and thus sharp criticism would signal a significant sense of departure, while continued "moderation" would be a clear sign of ducking moral responsibility.

As it is, though, I think it's just too early to say. I'd give him a "B" for his performance so far. But I was definitely hoping he would have earned himself an "A".

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:52:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (2.33 / 3)

Fuck Barak [sic] Obama

See the credibility comment above. You're so far off the deep end it's ridiculous.

by barkingmoose on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 05:24:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (3.00 / 2)

When she shouts o lord its sooo deeep, thats turnerbroadcasting.

When she sails away across the deep, thats boat wright.

by turnerbroadcasting on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 12:51:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (2.33 / 3)

Are you real? Who else in the party do you want to "fuck"? Oh, I forgot... you're not even a Democrat but a member of the Green Party. So why exactly should Democrats listen to you or follow your commands? How well did the Green Party do in the last election?

Obama is decidely to the left of the American mainstream, like me. You on the other hand seem to be so far out on the left it's not even on the map.

The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.

by Populism2008 on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 08:14:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here's the problem (1.00 / 1)

Right. I'm the Green Party member who Live Blogged the Western DNC Caucus and the DNC Grassroots Meeting in L.A..

Oh yeah. I also wrote a diary last February about Harry Reid, The Baddest Man In D.C. and

Bad Ass Democrats about Durbin and Waxman.

I'm also a regular at my Orange County DFA Meet Up every month and just recently I walked two precincts for Steve Young in the CA-50 special election and helped with GOTV on election day. What have you done for the Democratic Party lately pal?

by Gary Boatwright on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 12:49:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

How dare you! (3.00 / 3)

I'm outraged!!!

Attacking Barack Obama, the Democrats' pride and joy and sure thing slam dunk 2008 Presidential nominee! You should be ashamed. By now Obama has earned the right not to be questioned by the likes of you bloggers! But you just don't get that do you? Go ahead and turn your circular firing squad on Obama and dash the Democrats hopes of every regaining the majorty.

What's next Matt? Questioning war veterans who served honorably on their lack of ties to the district they want to represent in congress?

You liberals make me sick. God Bless America (as if you heathen liberals believe in God.)

[/GOP outrage simulation]

Witty comment goes here...

by michael in chicago on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:24:04 PM EST

That Was Damn Good! (none / 0)

Reading down from the top without looking to see who wrote it, I really couldn't tell if it was serious or not.

Magnifique!

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:55:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: How dare you! (1.00 / 1)

Excellent simulation michael. For a second there I thought labanman had learned how to express himself without shouting.

by Gary Boatwright on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:06:45 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What's the difference (none / 0)

...between Kos criticizing the Democratic party establishment, and Sen. Obama doing it?

Sen. Obama's just telling it like it is. If you re-read the highlight and dig a little deeper, you'll see he's not criticizing our approach to religion, but rather, our failure to adapt to changing circumstances.

In this case, the changing circumstance happens to be the religious revival that has swept parts of this country, particularly former Democratic strongholds. So a superficial reading of this passage would make it seem like he's criticizing our approach to religion.

Markos criticizes the Democratic party all the time for their repeated failure to act and adapt. Why should Sen. Obama feel the heat for doing the same thing?

TAKE BACK OUR PARTY: Democracy Bonds

by LiberalFromPA on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:29:40 PM EST

Re: What's the difference (3.00 / 1)

Kicking them in the pants

versus

Kicking them in the teeth

by Matt Stoller on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:59:07 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Or In Your Case: (none / 0)

Being a pith viper

versus

Being a pit viper

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:41:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Pot Calling Kettle Black (3.00 / 2)

Obama:

"I do agree that the Democrats have been intellectually lazy in failing to take the core ideals of the Democratic Party and adapting them to circumstances. ... It's not just a matter of sticking in a quote from the Bible into a stock speech."

Matt:

"Couldn't he instead say something like Democrats represent a core set of powerful and common values, and we could do a better job of articulating them?"

Me:

I do agree that Obama has been intellectually lazy in failing to take the core ideals of his own political vision and adapting the to circumstances. ... It's not just a matter of sticking a Democrat-bashing right-wing applause line into whatever else you happen to be saying.

If you look at the AP Story that appears to be the published point-of-origin for this quote, he's actually saying something that I think is rather progressive, but he is--in my estimation--intellectually lazy in adopting (just as Matt has said) right-wing-meme-reinforcing language. Here's the passage:

Obama says his party needs to do a better job of getting its message out to voters.

"I do agree that the Democrats have been intellectually lazy in failing to take the core ideals of the Democratic Party and adapting them to circumstances," he says.

He says the Democrats should "take it big instead of making it small" as they speak about globalization, the need for a tough foreign policy and the importance of faith and family.

"It's not just a matter of sticking in a quote from the Bible into a stock speech," he says.

What this says to me (I hope I'm not in wishful thinking land here) is that a Bible quote here or there is a band-aid. What we need is to really embrace the sort of moral framework that Martin Luther King expressed, for instance. And King, if you remember, rooted his speeches in his sermons, which were rooted in the Bible, but informed by insights from all of humanity.

There are other black politicians in Washington today who operate in such a manner, IMHO. John Lewis--another civil rights pioneer--is a stellar example. Jesse Jackson, Jr. shows strong signs of maturing in the same direction. It's no accident that both are black. Obama may be a less frightening figure to many whites, because he does not come from the bosom of the Civil Rights Movement. But if he is to fulfill his potential, then these are models of what he should aspire to. Because America needs nothing less.

And the best way to teach is to do.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 03:31:58 PM EST

Re: best way to teach is to do (none / 0)

So, don't you think it might be a tad more productive if elected reps like Obama quit mentioning about what the party needs to do and just did it, and then broadcast accomplishments instead of complaints?

by Sam Loomis on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:34:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Agreed! (3.00 / 1)

Walking the walk comes first, second and third.

But I also think that there's a right and a wrong way to talk about needed change, even though it comes in at fourth place.

It's much better, for instance, to talk about needed change in terms of an example where the needed change is demonstated--and then say, "We need to do more of this, beause this is what Democrats really stand for, anyway." (Like they do in Montana, for example.)

I think this is pretty much compatible with what you're saying, if I read you rightly.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:39:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Do you ever get the feeling (none / 0)

that people in power in our party just talk too much?

I mean, it was March of 2004 when I first heard a Dem strategist complain that the Dems had "no unified message". And here we are today, with people on our side saying the same thing.

That's how it is with lots of stuff too, not jsut message. Too much damned talking 'bout what needs to be done. I, for one, am sick of it. I like your coment about how to say which direction we should move in. Every time someone mentions that they should include "...because that's what Democrats stand for!" at the end of the sentence.

I just want my elected reps and their overpaid, complacent consultants to shit or get off the pot, that's all. Just shit or get off the pot.

by Sam Loomis on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 07:31:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Amen! (none / 0)

to all that. But especially this:

Every time someone mentions that they should include "...because that's what Democrats stand for!" at the end of the sentence.

As for people in power talking too much. I totally agree, but want to add some filigree:

But they talk too much, and say too little.

by Paul Rosenberg on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 08:50:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Pot Calling Kettle Black (none / 0)

What he said!

by teknofyl on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 08:37:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What these fucking people forget is (3.00 / 2)

that since they are our elected representatives, these people ARE the Democratic Party!

I hate that shit, where nearly all elected democrats whine about how much the party sucks and it has no ideas. Well, you dumb bastards, let me clue you in to something: people only think that because all the democrats in Washington repeat it all the time.

And by the way, if I could infuse the party with an official agenda and give it some balls, I fucking would. But I can't. Only you guys can!
What, like YOU aren't the main of the problem you are bitching about?

Last time I checked, I don't know a SINGLE fucking democrat voter or activist who lacks balls or a positive platform of ideas about where to take this country.

by Sam Loomis on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:30:39 PM EST

It's kinda like (none / 0)

a group of slugs in a marathon, sitting around complaining about how their team is so slow and slimy. No self-awareness and no sense that they are the problem and only they can get moving faster.

by Sam Loomis on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:32:28 PM EST

The irony of this post confounds me (3.00 / 1)

People on MyDD and DailyKos spent a large part of their time bashing "Washington Democrats" or DLCers and generally setting up straw men to knock over. But when Obama rightly criticizes the party we in turn bash him?

Democrats HAVE been intellectually lazy. John Kerry's message was more a list of programs than any sort of narrative, and too often Democrats lazily toss around words like values or religion without putting any meaning behind them, convincing no one.

I agree with Obama here. When you look at the core values of the Democratic party versus the Republican party it should be a no-brainer, but Democrats have fucked it up. We need to be honest with ourselves and admit shortcomings, which is what Obama did here.

Also, I think you fail to note that in this article Obama is receiving an editorial endorsement from a pretty conservative paper in Illinois. Apparently the guy is doing something right.

by DemocraticBass on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 04:53:20 PM EST

Re: The irony of this post confounds me (3.00 / 1)

Sometimes leaders say things that people and even geniuses like all of you don't want to hear. Thats why Obama is, and will be a leader in the Democratic Party far into the future. I am sure all of you have speaking engagements coming in at the rate of 25 a day from Democratic Party organizations and liberal interest groups because you have something more insightful to say than Barack Obama.

Obama and his wife only received a four page review in last Sunday's Chicago Tribune. The guy has his feet on the ground. And Obama's approval rating in Illinois is at 74%. Illinois loves Obama and we could care less what the rest of the country (even bloggers) thinks of our U.S. Senator.

by riverred on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 08:58:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The irony of this post confounds me (3.00 / 1)

It pains me to say it since I usually agree with what Matt writes. But as someone who has spent 20+ years in the advertising business, I can't help noticing that," Democrats represent a core set of powerful and common values, and we could do a better job of articulating them" has no bite whatever. It sounds like the kind of pablum dished out by oh-so-politically-correct PR flacks who want to make sure that no one is offended.

If you want to convince the American public that Democrats are, indeed, absolutely spineless, there is no better way than to have a hizzy-fit because someone uses plain words that might be picked up and used against us. Think of it this way: Every time someone repeats what Obama says, hoping that it's a putdown, he or she creates an opening for putting serious ideas on the table. When the rest of us are ready and able to do that, then we'll start winning. The way, for example, that Mark Warner and Tim Kaine have done in Virginia.

by jlmccreery on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 09:12:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The irony of this post confounds me (2.00 / 2)

NO! Not Warner and Kaine! They're DLC Moderates! They're not true progressives, like me! (flexes liberal muscle) Anyone to the right of me is a corporate sellout and a slave to the shadowy and mysterious Washington Establishment!

Honestly, folks, when the netroots has turned on Obama, I know we've all gone f---ing crazy.

"There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America"- Bill Clinton

by bluenc on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 02:16:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The irony of this post confounds me (1.00 / 1)

I'm not aware that there has been much if any criticism of either Warner or Kaine in the blogosphere. In Mark Warner: Typical DLC Loser I said I would like more info about Warner:

Personally I would prefer it if Jerome were here to put up a vigorous defense of Mark Warner, but then I was strenuously arguing that Jerome was completely within his ethical rights to blog about any candidate or race as long as he disclosed his paid political consulting positions, so here goes nothing.

What we are complaining about is primarily their messaging technique of pitting themselves against progressive Democrats, instead of attacking conservative Republicans.

by Gary Boatwright on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 09:21:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Totally fucking insane (1.00 / 1)

Criticizing Obama is almost as insane as Democrats criticizing the Chair of the DNC. Nobody would ever dream of doing that.

Wait a minute! Democrats have criticized Howard Dean! And it wasn't just blogosphere criticism, it was public criticism by prominant Democrats on cable and network news shows and in newspapers all over the country.

Would like to try explaining why Obama's shit doesn't stink and it is verbotten to criticize him?

by Gary Boatwright on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 10:50:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Keep in mind that this is a story by an AP writer. (none / 0)

The writer has set the tone and chosen the order to present the quotes from Obama. Here's one that I would remind us here about:

Obama says there's a disconnect between issues people raise at town meetings and those debated in Washington. "There has yet to be a serious conversation about health care on the floor of the United States Senate," he says.
In fact, he says, there hasn't been much conversation at all.
"Now that we're in the C-Span era, we really don't have debates," he says. "What we have are sequential speeches delivered to TV cameras. ... And I think that contributes to the political rancor."

In any case he still says he is from the "progressive wing" of the party, so it is still our job to hound him on that stance.

And to remind him that debates in this society are still carreid on on the blogosphere. He needs to schedule some time to do that here.

Jeff Wegerson - PrairieStateBlue

by wegerje on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 05:03:32 PM EST

Obama is still a greenhorn (none / 0)

And this whole progressive marketing drive is stillborn.

Religion isn't even on the charts today. Its New Years Eve! Its all about kissing a pretty woman right when the new year begins.

Happy New Year, American Flyers!

by turnerbroadcasting on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 09:20:44 PM EST

I don't see this as Dem Bashing (3.00 / 1)

I see it as more of a call to pay attention to core Democratic values; Healthcare, Jobs, Education, a progressive support of the middle class. We (Dems in general) need to articulate them better.

I think that this is what Obama is saying. I think that this could be viewed as an oblique attack on the DLC, start talking principles, stop taking Repub talking points and 'modifying' them.

Lets Review: What really new points (ideas, concepts, themes) have we come up with this year; Social Security, I don't think so. That was a defensive battle. We won (yea!) but the Repubs chose the issue. Bankrupcy Legislation: A Clean Loss. We can find more examples. In each instance the Repubs choose the battlefield (fight).

What issues can we find that seem "new". They don't have to be new, they just have to be new and different from the Republician theme making. For example: on national news TV today (can't remember which, CNN I believe) I saw the results of a survey where the question was something like: Does Congress understand (or addresses) the interests of the Middle Class? (as I remember it)

98% NO, 2%YES

Wow!!! I haven't seen poll numbers like that, ever. I haven't seen any real theme developed around the issue either. THIS is a core Democratic value (and shame on us if it isn't). This is what I think Obama is talking to, not the ability to quote scripture better than the next guy.

Matt: Could we see some original thinking on this issue? Some in depth discussion would be nice? To me, this issue Sounds like a barn burner. Vanishing opportunity of getting ahead in the 'American Way' kind of theme? I think this can be devistating to the Republicians.

PS: May we have a Happy and Successful New Year in our common endevors.

by NvDem on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 09:54:25 PM EST

criticism is good (3.00 / 1)

I think it's perhaps a good idea to take Obama seriously, and not to demand "message discipline" from the members of our party. When Howard Dean sticks his foot in it, we (well, OK, I) generally want to rally round his right to do so and utterly reject calls for his resignation.

Democrats are not Republicans: neither in politics nor in method. We must remain a party of openness, and a party whose members can speak forthrightly about what they think. Again, I'll say I disagree with Obama's remarks but I don't think I'm naieve to say that I'll defend his right to make them.

I realize that more expert and competent people think the way to fight the GOP is to create our own wurlitzers. I'll say the jury is still out on that. I do know that groups that suppress dissent or criticize not the substance, but the perceived effect, of speech fail in the end. The same reason I civil liberties for the country is the same reason I disagree with Matt here.

PS: happy new year Stoller, sorry I'm not in New York (or wherever you are) to celebrate with the gang!

by sdedeo on Sat Dec 31, 2005 at 11:01:55 PM EST

It' Just Constructive Criticism (3.00 / 1)

I don't have a problem with what Obama is saying. Obama didn't say the Democrats stink or don't have values, he is saying they need to do a better job of communicating their values. I would be concerned if he was critical of Democrats on a substantive policy issue like saying the Democrats are morally bankrupt, but that excerpt just sounds like a constructive criticism over a procedural concern. I would equate his criticism about Democrats' need to improve how they communicate their core values to a suggestion about a need to improve getting out the vote.

by robstephens on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 10:32:57 AM EST

Speaking of right wing narratives (1.00 / 1)

On MTP this morning William Safire, Doris Goodwin and some other media hack were referring to Russ Feingold, and by inference Howard Dean, as the hard left. McCain on the other hand was not referred to as "hard right." The current fourth most conservative Senator is mainstream, but wants Rudi Giuliani to get into the Republican Party so he doesn't get hammered by the GOP hard right.

At this rate, in a few more years Joe Lieberman will be on the "hard left" of the Democratic Party.

by Gary Boatwright on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 12:53:27 PM EST

I'll buy that (1.00 / 1)

Well, except for the spanking machine.

We're building up to another little ratings war with these wankers. I'm guessing either later today or Monday.

by Gary Boatwright on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 01:05:25 PM EST

I don't read it that way (3.00 / 1)

Hi Matt

Obama's comment about the insufficiency of "sticking in a quote from the Bible into a stock speech." is right on. Howard Dean was told that he needed to add some religious talk to his stump speech to appeal to the religious folk. Well. I am one of those religious folk and I was turned off when Dean ta;ked about his favorite book in the New Testament and stuff like that. I liked Dean a lot but his advisers were dumb to tell him that. I much prefer honest expression of your religious belief--whatever those beliefs are--than religious fakery. Secular Dems ought not hide who they are, they should tell the truth about what their values are and let the people decide.

Keith

by keith johnson on Sun Jan 01, 2006 at 03:39:17 PM EST

Re: Obama, Again Reinforcing Right-Wing Narratives (none / 0)

The guy is trying to be honest and come up with an explanation of why a weak Republican candidate barely slipped into the White House, twice. Hard-core Democrats act as if they know the Truth so obviously that anybody who doesn't think likewise is an idiot not worth talking to.
Hard-core Republicans are the same, except they will talk to the undecided and bring them on board. They fight for the votes. What Obama calls laziness in the Dems, I call smugness.

To those who say (e.g., Sam Loomis) that Americans think the Dems are clueless because the Dem politicians keep saying it, sorry, but I think you're wrong. I've watched the Democratic party act like deer in the Bush headlights, not knowing where to turn, but acting indignant and unbelieving about it all. The Dem pols are finally seeing that.

Obama is right to say this honestly. It's what everybody thinks except you True Believers. Slap Obama down for this and you can just kiss the Dems goodbye.

by spraky on Fri Aug 11, 2006 at 06:19:35 PM EST

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.