(and my other friends on the left unhappy because you didn't get the little blue wagon you all wanted for Christmas)
I just read the Daily Howler page you linked to in this post, and it seems that first item on the list is the story about Obama's "Assault" on Social Security, which had you pulling your hair out and breathing fire just a few days ago.
Here's what the article in question had to say:
- President-elect Barack Obama said Wednesday that overhauling Social Security and Medicare would be ''a central part'' of his administration's efforts to contain federal spending, signaling for the first time that he would wade into the thorny politics of entitlement programs.
As the Congressional Budget Office projected a record $1.2 trillion budget deficit for this year even before the costs of the nearly $800 billion economic stimulus package being taken up by the House and the Senate, Mr. Obama stepped up his effort to reassure lawmakers and the financial markets that he plans a vigorous effort to keep the government’s finances from deteriorating further.
Speaking at a news conference in Washington, he provided no details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare, which are projected to consume a growing share of government spending as the baby boom generation ages into retirement over the next two decades. But he said he would have more to say about the issue when he unveiled a budget next month.
Should he follow through with a serious effort to cut back the rates of growth of the two programs, he would be opening up a potentially risky battle that neither party has shown much stomach for. The programs have proved almost sacrosanct in political terms, even as they threaten to grow so large as to be unsustainable in the long run. President Bush failed in his effort to overhaul Social Security, and Medicare only grew larger during his administration with the addition of prescription drug coverage for retirees.
Here's Somerby's response:
- ...the word "promise" doesn’t appear in that text. Nor had Obama provided "details of his approach to rein in Social Security and Medicare" during his news conference. But he’s headed for "a risky battle," Zeleny warned—if he actually "follows through with a serious effort," of course.
At the Times, this was the day’s biggest story; the report appeared at the top of page one, all the way on the right. And we were surprised when we saw the report, because we’d already read the Washington Post—and we didn’t recall reading a word about Obama’s promise there. At the Times, Obama’s "promise" was the day’s biggest news. At the Post, had it even occurred?
So how about it:
Did Obama make a promise to overhaul Social Security? After reading Zeleny’s full report, we still weren’t entirely sure. You see, we read all the way to the end of his piece, and we didn’t find a single quotation of anything Obama had actually said about this matter! Three lonely words ("a central part") were quoted in that opening paragraph. But that turned out to be the only quotation about this promise provided in the report!
For those of you who want to read further into it, the transcript of the press conference can be found
here, Obama's remarks came as an answer to a (loaded, in my opinion) question from the Wall Street Journal's Laura Meklynn:
- LAURA MEKLYNN, REPORTER, WALL STREET JOURNAL: Mr. President-elect, budget experts agree that the real key to controlling spending lies with the entitlement program.
How early do you plan on addressing Medicare and Social Security, and what will your approach be?
OBAMA: Well, first of all, as I noted in my remarks, we're going to be inheriting a trillion-plus dollar deficit. And if we do nothing, then we will continue to see red ink as far as the eye can see.
And at the same time, we have an economic situation that is dire. And we're going to have to jump start this economy with my economic recovery plan, creating three million jobs. That's going to cost some money.
And in the short-term, we will actually see potentially additions to the deficit. As you point out, the key is going to be medium-term and long-term, how do we bend the curve so that we start getting these deficits down to a manageable level? And entitlements are going to be a part of that. We will -- we are working currently on our budget plans. We are beginning consultations with members of Congress around how we expect to approach the deficit. We expect that discussion around entitlements will be a part, a central part, of those plans.
And I would expect that by February, in line with the announcement of at least a rough budget outline, that we will have more to say about how we're going to approach entitlement spending, how we're going to approach eliminating waste in government, one of Nancy's tasks. So we will have some very specific outlines in terms of how it's going to be done.
So as you can see, there was no clear statement on Social Security or Medicare, just a very vague comment about "entitlements" when asked by an employee of a newspaper whose owners and editors probably wonder how to turn the poor into some form of Soylent green. And yet you characterize this as "His assault on Social Security", and said he was
implying that liberalism is stupid and the neocons are right. That's a pretty harsh retort for such a vague comment.
Now, I've been getting a lot of heat from you and some of your commenters because I'm (rightfully) upset that Obama's being accused of being a neocon, and while my retorts have been very snarky they have at least been based on what people here have actually said and not wild speculation. Somerby rightfully went to the source of the problem: how badly Zeleny wrote that article (Just out of curiosity, how much does Zeleny make a year? Far less than he wants, but far more than he deserves, I imagine), I wonder if you even bothered to read the article in question and compare it with the transcript of the press conference. It didn't take me very long to research it, after all. And this not the first, it follows a pattern of statements you've made along these lines, on your page and in your comments section.
I certainly don't want to think you're hoping President Obama will fail just so that we could have a chance to get a real liberal in the White House, if not DFK, then perhaps some other current liberal icon or someone who has yet to come around. But with everything that's being said here, I'm beginning to believe just that, and frankly I'm starting to wonder about your sanity. What you hope to accomplish by tearing this man down before he even has a chance to do anything, I have no idea, but you're depressing me and driving me away from a site I have enjoyed and have been very loyal to for many years.
Now, maybe you think that, from a strategic point of view, my voice doesn't matter very much: after all, I've been blogging for six years, and have done a regular radio show, live and pre-recorded, for a decent portion of that time, and not many people seem to give a shit about what I have to say or how I have said it. So I doubt that my lack of participation will do very much in terms of your readership or popularity. But you don't seem to take into consideration the personal stake I have in the success of this Presidency. I have been unemployed now for over eight months, and the jobs I had before then weren't exactly gems, in terms of pay or working conditions. Not counting unemployment, I earned a little over three thousand dollars in 2008, even with unemployment and food stamps I haven't exactly been raking it in.
And I'm one of the fortunate ones. I still have a roof over my head, I don't (usually) go hungry, and I even manage to enjoy myself from time to time. I see a lot of homeless people and beggars and places going out of business because nobody earns enough money to buy anything more than the bare necessities, and in some cases not even that. So you'll forgive me if I feel like I can't afford to wait for the perfect politician to come along, even if I thought such a person existed in the first place. All of us need a change, and it may well be that President Obama is the last, best hope for this generation of Americans. Because if he truly is as bad as you say he is, if he really is a neocon in liberal clothing, then this country is doomed beyond repair for the remainder of my lifetime at the very least, and all the DFK's of the world aren't going to make a damn bit of difference. And that's not even taking into consideration what's going on in the rest of the world. I wish you would think about that, or at least do a little research, before you start jumping to conclusions or saying things like he's signaling heavily that he has every intention of betraying all the things you care about. Because if you're wrong about him (and I think you are, or I wouldn't be writing this post), and if enough of you manage to torpedo him, then, well, I don't want to think about a President Palin in 2012.
I happen to support Mr. Obama, and I have many good reasons to do so. I'm not a "minion", I don't think he's God, I just think he's a competent, caring man who honestly wants to do the best he can for his country, and who is willingly taking what is arguably the most difficult job in the world under circumstances that would make most people run screaming from the room. For that alone, he deserves better from you.