On 2010-10-28, at 3:35 PM, c b wrote: > Jim D: > ...the bail-out could have > been combined with putting the bailed-out institutions under > conservatorship -- or simply insisting on being paid for loans with > corporate equity (stock). (Call it "nationalization," if you will, but > it wouldn't be socialism.) > > ^^^^^ > CB: Not with Congress with the current sum of Republicans + Rightwing > Democrats. > > As a comrade said to me the 2008 elections did not constitute a > compelling mandate for far reaching change nor were the necessary > forces were present to make such a election mandate.
I'm with Jim here. Obama may never, as you claim, have mustered enough congressional votes for a bigger stimulus, tougher bank regulation or restructuring, public healthcare, or mandatory mortgage relief. But it was well within the realm of possibility that, given the political will, he could have forced congress to act - or at least have demonstrated leadership - by using the bully pulpit of the Presidency to sustain and rally the broad coalition which propelled him to power. Instead, he frittered away rather than built on this political capital by ignoring the American people and neutering all of these initiatives in supine backroom dealing with corporate lobbyists, conservative Democrats, and a handful of powerless "moderate" Republicans. It's not only Obama's liberal and left-wing critics who have indicted the administration for its Hoover-like timidity in the wake of the biggest crisis since the Depression. A host of commentators from across the political spectrum writing in both the financial and mainstream media have offered up the same criticisms all year long. They've drawn on the New Deal to underline that such reforms were necessary and possible within the framework of the system. It's wrong for both Obama and yourself to suggest the verdict about to be delivered next week against his administration by US voters is mostly owing to their obtuseness. That may be true of the tea party milieu, but the larger part of the disgruntled population has legitimate cause to believe bolder measures on jobs, housing, healthcare, and financial regulation were within reach, and to hold the Democrats responsible for falling short. _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
