The fierce urgency of defending Obama

From a piece Peter Daou wrote in August:

"I truly respect and admire Obama. I’ve worked in past campaigns with a number of his staffers. I know they are good and decent people trying to improve their country and working tirelessly under extreme stress. There’s no denying that they’ve racked up an impressive list of accomplishments and they deserve credit for it. But that doesn’t mean I should set aside the things I’ve fought for my entire adult life. It doesn’t mean I should stay silent if I think the White House could do a better job promoting a progressive vision. And it doesn’t mean I should stand aside if I think mistakes are being made. Sure, I’m just one individual with an opinion, but why the fierce urgency of defending Obama whenever I express it?"

Bill Maher calls it the "defending your boyfriend" mode. In essence, during the campaign Barack Obama is your boyfriend. After he's elected, he's more like someone who works for you. The former can do no wrong (mostly) and you'd better not criticize him, while the latter had better do his job or there's no point in having paid him that large advance.

Some people get stuck in boyfriend mode. Idolatry overtakes ideology, and as Peter notes, it's not like you give up your ideals when you vote for President. The President is supposed to help further your ideals, not take the place of them. So it's not disloyal to try to hold the President accountable to his promises. In fact, I'd argue that you're being disloyal to yourself, to your own principles, and to the entire reason you got into politics in the first place, when you don't.

http://www.americablog.com/2010/09/fierce-urgency-of-defending-obama.html

for me to fiercely defend him.

My criticism of the President has nothing to do with liking him or his wonderful family. It has everything to do with the way we are tracking to the right when he promised the left.

Bamboozled is a good word for it.

he promised not right.

none of that makes him replaceable.

My mom was one who defended an abusive husband and an abusive boyfriend. A little different than this article suggests, but that's what it made me think of.

Politicians have never been my boyfriend. They've always been job applicants.

Maybe THAT'S my problem.

:applause:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Wow, it's like deja vu all over again. I coulda sworn I read the same thing during the campaign.

What, on the other hand is the fierce urgency of attacking Obama? Most of his attackers do not concede this "There's no denying they've racked up an impressive list of accomplishments and they deserve credit for it."

Usually the argument is quite the opposite. "There is no doubt they've racked up a demoralizing list of betrayals and they deserve to lose the midterms for it."

So what makes it to the greatest page here, what gets said a thousand times a day here is not "Let's give Obama credit for his accomplishments" but rather "Let's castigate Obama for his betrayals."

Either way, we don't want a Republican victory this fall. If Obama has accomplishments then we want more accomplishments in the next two years. If Obama has betrayals, then we can only expect more of them if he faces a Republican congress. A scherezade who tells 1001 stories about Obama's failures and betrayals is first of all not seeing the big picture (at least according to Daou) and second of all is not helping us win in the fall.

Bluebear, if anyone else made that analogy, you'd be bellowing about homophobia, and you damn well know it.

:cry:

:-)

Did I miss something here? More importantly, did Michelle miss something?

Like I said, if someone else used this expression, you'd have your collective knickers in a twist.

Especially this claim- "Idolatry overtakes ideology"