Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Kos Writes About Tuesday Night's Big Lesson

Markos Moulitsos (Kos) wrote last night on his blog, Daily Kos

There will be much number-crunching tomorrow, but preliminary numbers (at least in Virginia) show that GOP turnout remained the same as last year, but Democratic turnout collapsed. This is a base problem, and this is what Democrats better take from tonight:
  1. If you abandon Democratic principles in a bid for unnecessary "bipartisanship", you will lose votes.
  1. If you water down reform in favor of Blue Dogs and their corporate benefactors, you will lose votes.
  1. If you forget why you were elected -- health care, financial services, energy policy and immigration reform -- you will lose votes.
Tonight proved conclusively that we're not going to turn out just because you have a (D) next to your name, or because Obama tells us to. We'll turn out if we feel it's worth our time and effort to vote, and we'll work hard to make sure others turn out if you inspire us with bold and decisive action.
The choice is yours. Give us a reason to vote for you, or we sit home. And you aren't going to make up the margins with conservative voters. They already know exactly who they're voting for, and it ain't you.
I rarely post anything in its entirety, but this was short and concise and makes a good point.

I've spent several hours this morning reading aggregate sites, blogs, newspapers, the MSM pundits from both the right and the left and the analysis is all over the board. I've written some of my own. What I find fascinating, is how many left-wing bloggers are (and have been) saying that we must stop criticising Obama. My own family tells me I must stop and give the man a chance - that it has only been a (month, few months, year). My son, the politics and government major whose thesis was on Clinton and the MSM, reminds me that Obama is the President of the whole country, not just the progressives (to which I remind him that it was the progressives who gave him a majority Congress).

I agree that Obama has accomplished a great deal in one year, relatively speaking, and that he was handed a bigger mess than any president ever has with more restrictions coming in (the stimulus was Bush's, the status of forces agreement was Bush's, TARP was Bush's ...). But, does that mean that we are not to hold him accountable for the promises made in his campaign?

  • Don't ask, don't tell
  • Guantanamo
  • Torture investigations
  • Transparency
  • Regulations on Wall Street
  • Iraq & Afghanistan
  • Health care

In every case, Obama has either changed his mind, begun discussions so close to the bottom that any legislation would be close to worthless (health care), or put people in charge that were part of the problem and allowed them to craft the solutions. Instead of taking a strong stand, he holds back. Yes, we did vote for a President who would take a measured, informed approach to problem solving. But we did not vote for a President who is going to straddle the center line at the expense of the ideals of his party.

Obama has said over and over and over again that he is committed to bipartisanship, that we want bipartisanship. No we don't. Sure, we would like Congress to get things done, but I don't think at the end of the day that anyone cares who votes for what. The American people gave him an overwhelming majority in the House and the Senate because we want change and we told him that we wanted the change that he said he would bring. I understand that it will take time. He said it would. But change doesn't happen if he doesn't at least begin. I don't understand why he allowed Congress to begin negotiating healthcare at the bottom, why it had to be a 50/50 committee that crafted the Senate plan, why he is going back on his word on the wars, on torture, on transparency, and so many other issues.

This election yesterday was not a referendum on Obama, but if he doesn't get it together quickly, the historic election of 2008 will be wasted and he'll lose Congress. He said that he would be happy to be a one term president if he could accomplish what he set out to do. I'm beginning to wonder if that's true.

Thanks for stopping by. Come back soon.

1 comment:

  1. Your comments were stated better than this interview I listened to a few weeks ago. You may enjoy it. I've linked to the podcast. I totally agree. He needs to put the pedal to the metal alongside with some prodding from constituents.

    An interview with 89-year-old White House correspondent, Helen Thomas [Dean of The White House Press Corps] on the Obama administration and the media...podcast, thursday november 5, 2009, CBC's Jian Ghomesi on Q. I've transcribed some statements [not verbatim, but close]

    'has conscience, his heart's in the right place, but doesn't have the courage to follow through to make true what his ideals are. There's no reason why he doesn't weigh in when he has a democratic congress. No reason why we don't have universal healthcare, government health insurance plan and get the hell out of Afghanistan and Iraq.'
    'Having lived through the Vietnam era, I have deja vu all over again.'

    'he's too cautious and is not willing to fight for a government insurance plan, 47M people with no health insurance. He may have his own reasons, but surely they aren't justified.'

    10:40 -rolls eyes to question posed, however, the answer...
    'Do the right thing, reach the top of the mark, 'aint no other place to go, so the only thing to do is the right thing, and there is such a thing as a moral decision, he should stop the killing, stop the dying and explain why.'