Obama is Either With us or Against Us

Obama is Either With us or Against Us
http://texshelters.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=490&action=edit&message=6

Howard Fineman thinks Obama is doing the right thing by standing back and not commenting (not much at least) about the Wisconsin labor protests.

Certainly, Howard Fineman makes valid points that Obama is standing back and letting the Republicans attack workers to the President’s political advantage. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-tv/howard-fineman-lawrence-odonnell-unions_b_826927.html

However, it’s not an all or nothing proposition. There are several things Obama can do and keep from being drawn into the fray. How about making a speech about workers rights and fiscal challenges? How about having your press secretary make a statement like, “state budgets are a concern for all governors, and one should not use this crisis to diminish the rights of citizens.” It can be that vague, but it would support the workers in a way that wouldn’t risk the president’s political capital, the little he has left.

Knowing that the President of the United States supports your rights can do a lot to boost the morale of the protesters. Why does Obama constantly avoid such opportunities except when a congresswoman is shot.
The protests in Wisconsin, and other issues, are not all or nothing for Obama. Making a positive statement defending workers rights to collective bargaining would be a great start to rebuilding Obama’s reputation with the left.

Or am I just another liberal the White House has a penchant for insulting?

Peace,
Tex Shelters

I know he's not that dumb, so what gives?

^^^^ Not a facetious question, I want to read a source and be pleasantly surprised, just as I was with the DOMA thing.

***

I would say, as a general proposition, that everybody's gotta make some adjustments to new fiscal realities. And I think if we want to avoid layoffs -- which I want to avoid, I don't want to see layoffs of hard-working federal workers.

We had to impose, for example, a freeze on pay increases for federal workers for the next two years, as part of my overall budget freeze. You know, I think those kinds of adjustments are the right thing to do.

On the other other hand, some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin -- where you're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain, generally -- seems like more of an assault on unions.

And I think it's very important for us to understand that public employees, they're our neighbors, they're our friends. These are folks who are teachers, and they're firefighters, and they're social workers, and they're police officers. You know, they make a lot of sacrifices, and make a big contribution, and I think it's important not to vilify them, or to suggest that somehow all these budget problems are due to public employees.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/02/obama-wisconsin-govs-plan-seems-like-assault-on-unions.php

***

A lot of people give him shit for the relatively mild language, but from a rhetorical perspective, it's actually more effective in swaying people who are uncommitted and uncertain about the situation than a straight up attack would be.

:thumbsup: Commie Pinko Dirtbag likes this.

That's an understatement. Yes, it's true he said "something" so someone saying he didn't speak on the issue yet would be wrong. Admittedly.

But that is definitely one of the most fence riding, thread the needle statements I can imagine being made.

"it seems" like it's an assault on unions? Really? It just "seems" that way?

Just in what you posted, the first portion is all about how public workers have to sacrifice in this economy, but then it's gratuitously added that we shouldn't villify them because not ALL the problems are their fault (implying that they bulk of them are, and also completely ignoring the concessions already made by the unions and ignoring pointing out any of the other sketchy things Walker has blatantly been doing).

I don't expect firebrand rhetoric but I also expect a little more of a stand than he ever seems to be willing to take prior to a clear victor emerging in any struggle.

and they wouldn't be doing that without Obama on board.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0211/DNC_playing_role_in_Wisconsin_protests.html

if it's not enough, say how so, but acknowledge that he did pretty much what you seem to be asking him to do.

.

:thumbsup:

Another speech? Will that really change anything? How many people here know that the president does a weekly radio address? How many people actually listen to said address? So forgive me if I chuckle when I hear people make comments about what the president should or shouldn't say, or how forceful & emphatically he should say it. He's usually two to three steps ahead of his most vicious critics, who don't actually listen what he says anyway, and even if they do, they usually find a way to twist it. :eyes:

This is Obama's organization helping to fight in Wisconsin! I think Obama is doing what he should be doing!

also. I actually don't want Obama on the ground in WI or making an every day thing about it. It would be disingeneous at this point and, quite frankly, he doesn't have the cred in this area for this. Now Biden, maybe....

BUT, and like me it's a BIG but, he could come out STRONGLY for collective bargaining as a BASIC human right. That would put him on the right side of the issue WITHOUT putting himself in the specific uprising going on in the midwest today.

Make it a STRONG point in general terms.

For those who missed it in reply #7, here's his one whole sentence supporting Wisconsin's state workers to date:

"On the other other hand, some of what I've heard coming out of Wisconsin -- where you're just making it harder for public employees to collectively bargain, generally -- seems like more of an assault on unions."

Sounds like he's trying not to offend anyone...