Dear everyone,
It seems that now is "one of those times" where everyone gets very angry and starts yelling at each other and accusing treason and ignorance and stupidity. It has happened before on dKos, and it will happen again. I come here to share my viewpoint on some of these volatile issues, and to ask for a bit of participation from my fellow Kossacks. Specifically, I want to talk a little bit about populism, a little about outrage, a little about Obama and a little about the echo chamber. More below the fold . . .
Let me start by saying that I am one of those who continue to strongly support President Obama, and the way he is conducting his business. This brings me to my first point: the "Obamabot," or "idol worship" memes that have been propagating on this site.
1.) Obama is not a plutocrat. He is not "in bed with corporatists" inasmuch as he sympathizes with them and actively wants to enrich them further. This is a ridiculous notion. He does, of course, have to talk to these people, bank CEOs and financial sector types on a daily basis, so perhaps he has a more personal relationship with the fat cats of America than some of us on ahem this site would like. But let me repeat, that does NOT MEAN that Obama has suddenly "sold out" to corporate interests and is now "bought and paid for". No American politician gets to where Obama is now and honestly believes they can and should overthrow the entire finanical system 3 months after taking office. Honestly, I would be completely shocked, not in a good way, if Obama declared the system to be dead and had an entire plan for nationalization or whatever else drawn up already.
Here's the important part: simply because I trust Obama to handle the current financial crisis and expect him to regulate the system after the crash is over does NOT make me an "Obamabot." I have faith in the president I helped elect 4 short months ago, and I have seen him make all the right moves on a number of issues so far. There are good signs and bad coming out of Obama's current management of the crisis, but labeling me or others as an Obamabot for actually having some confidence in an elected leader is silly, and a bit offensive.
This house, America, is on fire. A bunch of guys at the AIG frat house passed out and knocked over the hookah (as thereisnospoon's totally excellent diary explains in much finer terms than I just have). Geithner's plan is basically a trillion dollar fire hose to put out the blaze currently sweeping through our economy. I, for one, hope it succeeds, so that Obama can then try his hand at the re-regulation of the economic sector. In my view, we should really be thinking about how to set the rules up AFTER the current crisis ends (knock on wood), and how best to keep these financial institutions from running amok once again.
Please, everyone, remember what Obama, the most thoughful and articulate and intelligent man to grace out national political stage in some time, has on his plate AFTER the recession, a mere 60 days into his presidency:
-A national budget. A big one.
-Global warming
-Iran
-Israel/Palestine
-Afghanistan/Iraq
-Sustainable infrastructure redevelopment
-Alternative fuel/green energy
That's a lot, and its a painfully incomplete list, cherrypicking only the hot button issues. We have to trust this guy for the long haul, not write him off for trying to put out the fire.
2.) Outrage
I understand a lot of the outrage coming out of places like Michigan. The situation with the car companies is tragic, and Michigan has indeed been in recession much longer than the rest of the country. My sympathies go out to the families everywhere effected by the crisis, and Michigan has been especially hard hit.
But, with respect, I question a lot of the 'outrage' I see on this site. There is genuine disgust over corporate greed to be sure, but when I see diaries and comments linking Obama to Bush and Reagan, I just have to stop. This isn't constructive-- it's attention-grabbing, straw man dangling nonsense. Saying "Obama's just appeasing his bankster masters!!!11' provides nothing in the way of contribution to the economic discussion, merely an excuse to be mad at the man in power and blame him for all our troubles.
Which brings me to "populism." Populism is a term that's tossed around with reckless abandon these days. Anyone who yells "Plutocracy!" or "They're robbing us blind!1' is suddenly a folk hero, speaking up for the little man. Right. Right now, populism is a term worn with pride by Glenn Beck and Lou Dobbs. So what does populism mean exactly? Well, Wikipedia will provide you with a quick overview of the historical implications of the word. To me, populism is thrown around by people who want to say they have the answer, who know exactly what the right tonic is for everyone.
Obama, to me, personifies another kind of populism, one that doesn't get tainted by the likes of CNBC and Beck. He is someone who listens to everyone at the table after inviting all sides to the table in the first place. He takes criticism in stride, and he tries things out to see what works. He seems untainted by ideological leanings or by the notion that his first assumption is the correct one (the central troubling trait, to me, about our current national brand of populism). Honestly, I couldn't ask for anything more. He seems to work from a core of integrity, and while I haven't agreed with everything he's done (I'd say about 80% so far), I'm damn proud to call him my President.
So conclude my thoughts. Sorry for making this so long, but what I would dearly love to see here is people talking about these issues with a longer view than 60 days. So if you decide to comment on this diary, I would like to hear what you think about Obama so far, for better or worse, and why. If you are outraged, I'd love to hear why. If the reason is simply "he gave trillions to bankers!", so be it, but I want to get a sense of how dKos feels about where we're headed under the new administration. I've shared my thoughts, and you are now welcome to share yours.
Good night,
B o o