General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsIn Defense of Obama by Paul Krugman
I'll go through those achievements shortly. First, however, let's take a moment to talk about the current wave of Obama-bashing. All Obama-bashing can be divided into three types. One, a constant of his time in office, is the onslaught from the right, which has never stopped portraying him as an Islamic atheist Marxist Kenyan. Nothing has changed on that front, and nothing will.
There's a different story on the left, where you now find a significant number of critics decrying Obama as, to quote Cornel West, someone who ''posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit.'' They're outraged that Wall Street hasn't been punished, that income inequality remains so high, that ''neoliberal'' economic policies are still in place. 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.
Finally, there's the constant belittling of Obama from mainstream pundits and talking heads. Turn on cable news (although I wouldn't advise it) and you'll hear endless talk about a rudderless, stalled administration, maybe even about a failed presidency. Such talk is often buttressed by polls showing that Obama does, indeed, have an approval rating that is very low by historical standards.
But this bashing is misguided even in its own terms and in any case, it's focused on the wrong thing.
Read more:
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/in-defense-of-obama-20141008
frazzled
(18,402 posts)So I will. Thanks, Paul Krugman, for a balanced, informative, and reality-based article. I guess that's why nobody wants to comment.
Reality and facts are a hard thing to disagree with, even though some here do try.
Cha
(297,719 posts)Andy823
(11,495 posts)I would think they could come in and counter all the things said in this article, but then again maybe not!
K&R
flamingdem
(39,328 posts)Cenk, Krugman who has a better brain?
(Hint it's not Cenk)
Hekate
(90,829 posts)Don't worry, they'll drop by here when they take a break from gnawing on the bones.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Wouldn't want anyone to miss an opportunity to bash the president.
Cha
(297,719 posts)sheshe2
(83,927 posts)Nailed it hekate!
Late and I am off~
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)"there's the constant belittling of Obama" <<< right here on Democratic Underground.....
Along with...
"There's a different story on the left, where you now find a significant number of critics decrying Obama as, to quote Cornel West, someone who ''posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit.'' They're outraged that Wall Street hasn't been punished, that income inequality remains so high, that ''neoliberal'' economic policies are still in place. 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. "
Now doesn't ^^^ that sound familiar????
Just like I always say....UNLESS you OWN all three branches of govt you are NEVER going to see RADICAL CHANGE......no matter WHO is in office!!
Paul Krugman has GOT Y'all's fucking number!!!
Not Elizabeth Warren....not even Bernie Sanders can perform miracles!
Andy823
(11,495 posts)I call them the "doom and gloomers". All the negative they can find to post ends up here, but not one positive thing do they post. Sad when you think about it.
VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)they are still not swayed from that position....Its an astounding level of lack of introspection!
zappaman
(20,606 posts)you get this...
"Same lame excuses, different day."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025623976#post98
Cha
(297,719 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)that leaves them fried....died....and laid to the side...
"But this bashing is misguided even in its own terms and in any case, it's focused on the wrong thing."
Excellent post Zappaman....nice find!
K&R
Ryano42
(1,577 posts)and they aren't going to vote after reading this either.
All I can say to them is this: "If you are looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror"
I left DU once because them and their apocalyptic views; I won't leave again.
Cha
(297,719 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)further discourage other people from voting at all....
Hekate
(90,829 posts)KnR
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Cha
(297,719 posts)VanillaRhapsody
(21,115 posts)They recently threw Elizabeth Warren under their proverbial bus......On to Bernie Sanders....
"Help us Bernie Won Kenobi....You're our only hope"
zappaman
(20,606 posts)mcar
(42,376 posts)Hard to find anything to disagree with.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)This is a bit odd though:
They're outraged that Wall Street hasn't been punished, that income inequality remains so high, that ''neoliberal'' economic policies are still in place. 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.
Let's be clear: The financial crisis should have been followed by a drastic crackdown on Wall Street abuses, and it wasn't. No important figures have gone to jail; bad banks and other financial institutions, from Citigroup to Goldman, were bailed out with few strings attached; and there has been nothing like the wholesale restructuring and reining in of finance that took place in the 1930s. Obama bears a considerable part of the blame for this disappointing response. It was his Treasury secretary and his attorney general who chose to treat finance with kid gloves.
Eh...OK...
Still, the main thrust of the article is good. It only touches on some of the very real problems with the Obama presidency, but that can be expected given the focus of the piece. There has been some significant successes that have happened, and they don't get talked about a lot, or get trashed when they do. The trashing of the ACA in the media a year ago followed by media silence when it turned out the ACA has been working fairly well is a perfect example.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)I think it's more like
They're outraged that Wall Street hasn't been punished, that income inequality remains so high, that ''neoliberal'' economic policies are still in place. 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.
Chathamization
(1,638 posts)criticism, but also dismisses such criticism on the left because he claims it's based on the wrong assumptions. I may be running with in the wrong circles, but the criticism I see for the failure to go after corporate crooks usually isn't that Obama should have "put his eloquence behind a radical economic agenda." That seems like a dishonest way to brush aside criticism, especially when you go on to make the same critique yourself.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)It was DEREGULATION that led to many legal actions on Wall Street that were formerly illegal. Rampant speculation, overturning of Glass-Stegall, lax oversight over the banks. If there's little illegal activity, then there's nothing to throw folks in jail over.
That's what happened. And I don't understand why that's so difficult for us liberals to understand,
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Cha
(297,719 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,907 posts)And derivatives entered the mortgage market - legally.
CTyankee
(63,912 posts)3I am befuddled and astonished at the stonewalling of the repukes on ANY attempt to jump start the economy after the first stimulus. It is disgraceful and not befitting our democracy.
Let us all heed Paul Krugman. He speaks the TRUTH.
riderinthestorm
(23,272 posts)betsuni
(25,645 posts)zappaman
(20,606 posts)FSogol
(45,529 posts)Number23
(24,544 posts)FOREVER
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Response to zappaman (Original post)
MFrohike This message was self-deleted by its author.
UtahLib
(3,179 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Cha
(297,719 posts)are, Liberal_Stalwart!
Cha
(297,719 posts)Spazito
(50,484 posts)Your OP is being ignored by those who thrive on posting constant criticism of President Obama because, imo, it is hoped it will drop off the first page.
K & R both your OP and Mr. Krugman!
Cha
(297,719 posts)I'm not going to let it "drop off the first page" Ever.
Spazito
(50,484 posts)of President Obama. Maybe the points Krugman makes are irrefutable and those who normally criticize actually agree with his points. One can hope, eh!
Cha
(297,719 posts)must agree! Spazito~
snip//
"There's a different story on the left, where you now find a significant number of critics decrying Obama as, to quote Cornel West, someone who ''posed as a progressive and turned out to be counterfeit.'' They're outraged that Wall Street hasn't been punished, that income inequality remains so high, that ''neoliberal'' economic policies are still in place. 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."
More..
zappaman http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025644404
Electric Monk
(13,869 posts)Cha
(297,719 posts)Vattel
(9,289 posts)and legal issues and immigration issues and criminal justice issues
sheshe2
(83,927 posts)Thank you Paul Krugman.
Great Op zappaman....hmmm crickets, the sounds of silence from you know who!..
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)But, sadly, he's shown no aptitude for politics. Tragically, I can't think of any policies he's altered, even though he knew exactly what needed to be done.
Compare and contrast to, say, Larry Summers. Or even Sara Palin.
I'm not sure that Krugman's the best judge of what could have been done.
Spazito
(50,484 posts)"I'm not sure that Krugman's the best judge of what could have been done."
Who would you suggest would be "the best judge of what could have been done"?
JustAnotherGen
(31,907 posts)Thank you - Krugman did a fine job of laying it out. And I really liked his nod to the fact that not all is lost - in regards to the Senate.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Ignored by the usual POTUS bashers.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Why not?