On Oct 13, 2014, at 1:21 PM, raghu <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Sun, Oct 12, 2014 at 9:13 AM, Charles Brown <[email protected]> wrote:
> All of this seems to rest on the belief that if only Obama had put his 
> eloquence behind a radical economic agenda, he could somehow have gotten that 
> agenda past all the political barriers that have con- strained even his much 
> more modest efforts. It's hard to take such claims seriously.
> 
> Read more: 
> http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008#ixzz3FwK4Za2l
> 
> 
> 
> This is such a bullshit straw-man.
> 
> It was not Republican obstructionism that forced Obama to conduct drone 
> warfare on a massive scale, expand the surveillance state and conduct mass 
> deportations of undocumented people. It was not because of the Republicans 
> that he let Wall St off scot free from their crimes in the financial crisis.
> 
> Try defending these instead of constructing silly straw-men.
> 
> Obama did these things ultimately because he wanted to. And that is the 
> actual reason Obama sucks. Not because he failed to bring socialism.

If Charles has any differences with the DLC or the White House, I’ve yet to see 
them. There were no political barriers coming out of the 2008 election, none. 
The Democrats controlled Congress until 2010, and Obama and his advisors could 
have harnessed the powerful desire for a break with the failed domestic and 
foreign policies of the Bush administration in the first two years to pass the 
deeper financial, housing, and social reforms demanded by the crisis had they 
the political will to do so. What would have been the consequences? 
Impeachment? A military coup? The rise of the American right? Losing control of 
the Congress in the midterms and widespread disappointment with the Obama 
presidency?  

FWIW, I commented elsewhere on Krugman’s Rolling Stone piece as follows:

"Good article which outlines the objective constraints on Obama, not least the 
racial divide in the country. However, Krugman does not take into account the 
narrow window of opportunity to pursue deeper reforms within the capitalist 
system following his sweeping election victory of 2008. The Republicans and 
Wall Street were back on their heels, and Obama was making inroads among 
conservative working class voters worried about their homes and jobs who were 
ready to subordinate their racial fears to their class interests. Instead, he 
chose establishment-approved officials and policymakers like Geithner and 
Summers, and allowed the Republicans and Wall Street to lift themselves off of 
the canvas. The result was the rise of the Tea Party, built on those working 
class and petty-bourgeois voters whose support might have been consolidated had 
Obama, following FDR, continued to blame the malefactors of great wealth rather 
than bend over backwards in a futile quest to reach across the aisle to the 
Republicans and the Wall Street interests they represented.”


_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to