So, based on the title, this might sound like it’s about to be the most apologetic, wishy-washy and ass-kissing defense of President Obama you’ve ever heard. And, besides press releases from the Obama campaign, it just might be. But these are the conclusions that I have come to, and I base them on years of information gotten here, as well as TPM, Huffington Post, and even, shock, sometimes Red State or NRO. And the conclusion I’ve come to is this: Barack Obama is, a) governing exactly the way he said he would on the campaign trail and b) the best hope for progressive politics in quite some time.
First a quick intro, since this is my first diary here. I love the idea of blogs, especially for uniting progressive action, and Daily Kos is obviously like none other. But I’ve never been much for Internet commenting, and I use places like this primarily for information gathering, and not really as a place to connect. I would also like to add that I am probably not what you would call a true progressive. Socially, I would definitely call myself more of a libertarian: pro choice, very pro gay rights, but also against some stricter forms of gun control, as well as some of the more “PC” causes. But when it comes to the government, and the government’s role in people’s lives, I look to my personal political hero, Paul Wellstone of my home state. “Government is about improving people’s lives.” Along with all of my political beliefs, I also believe in one other thing: Realism. As in, realistically, what can we get done?
And here is where I will make my first point about Obama: He has been exactly the president he promised he would be, and exactly the president I elected him to be. This is a huge, very politically diverse nation. The man who leads it, in order to get things done, must be at least somewhat popular. In order to stay safely popular, unfortunately, there is going to be some bullshit. It’s the way it has always been, and if you think about it realistically, the way it will always be. Obama ran as a “change” candidate, basically, the candidate that was going to get rid of the bullshit in Washington. And, at first glance, that has not exactly come to pass. It would be unrealistic to think that an Obama presidency could be truly bullshit-free. But, in my mind, Obama has been, for lack of a better phrase, the least “bullshitty” president… Perhaps ever.
Let me explain: Politics, of course, has always been a dirty game. You look back on every presidency in history, Republicans and progressive Democrats like LBJ and FDR alike, you are going to find examples of flip flops, pandering to certain voters, capitulating, and, unfortunately, out and out lying. That is just the way politics has always been played. Obama, of course, is not innocent of playing politics, and his government has, unfortunately not been as transparent as promised. But consider this… Almost everyone on this site agrees: Obama handled the health care debate wrong. He used his proposal as the base, then gave the Republicans concession after concession. He should have started with a more liberal proposal, then, after giving into concessions, it is still a strong, progressive plan. This was my thinking for some time as well. But in my mind, it is far too simple a view. Obama did not bullshit: He proposed his plan, and it was too liberal to get the number of votes needed. He could have done what we all would have loved, proposed a single payer plan, given an eloquent speech defending its virtues… And then Republicans would point out that, well, a single payer bill is introduced every year (and one is, by Rep Weiner). And it always fails. The Republicans would say that Obama is proposing an unreasonable plan that has already failed in congress numerous times, and that he is just pandering to his base… And they would be right. Again, with the Bush tax cuts, there was no bullshit from Obama. He stated clearly time and time again his position on the Bush tax cuts. He was for them continuing, but only for the low and middle class. His positions on this were very clear. No bullshit. But then, when congress couldn’t get a deal made that included everything Obama wanted, he had a choice: To sign or not sign the bill. Either one would break a campaign promise. In my opinion, he made the right choice. The tax cuts will be debated soon enough. Important unemployment benefits, and important tax breaks for the middle class, were kept intact. The loss in revenue from the continuation of the tax cuts is an unfortunate price to pay, but, in my mind acceptable. This is EXACTLY how Obama explained his decision. No bullshit. I think most of you should be able to agree with me: The main argument against him seems to be that he is far TOO reasonable, that, in combating the extremes of the Republican party, he should be more aggressive, take it to them, and so on. This, in my opinion, runs pretty much contrary to what Obama ran as. This tact results in more bullshit: Arguing back and forth. Everyone who wishes that Obama would have “more fight” in him ignores the fact that it is almost exactly what he said he would not do. It would have made it yet another left vs. right issue, when Obama specifically called for an end to the left v right games. As much as we would love Obama to give passionate speeches about fighting for progressive values, that would, unless he gave the greatest speech of all time, most likely result in the media labeling him as too partisan, and, would unfortunately, distract from the issues. We can all agree that his most recent speech was also his most aggressive against Republicans: and this makes sense. Their “serious” policy would do extremely unpopular and dangerous things. He was blunt and direct on this. And he was able to do so safely because he knows the public is on his side. This is what Obama was all about. Not choosing the most progressive option available, but the most REASONABLE progressive option available. And this is where many on this site, including certainly myself at times, find fault. Sometimes the most reasonable progressive outcome isn’t nearly progressive enough. But sometimes it is, and the movement, however small, counts.
All of this leads me to the second point: Obama as being the clear choice for progressive change going into the future. First of all, the Obama-as-bad-negotiator crap should really stop NOW. If you really believe that, then you hold him to a far higher standard than any president should reasonably be held. In that last paragraph I explained, why, in my mind, the health care deal and tax cut deal were not nearly as terrible as many make them out to be. And I will add something to that: I challenge anyone to show a two year stretch in history that saw as much progressive movement as 09-10. Since LBJ, you will not be able to find one. It is no coincidence that what I would say the two presidential terms that included the most progressive movement, LBJ's and FDR's second, also came with 65+ Dem senators and big majorities in the house. And note that I say progressive MOVEMENT. We forget, sometimes, the realities of what eight years of Bush really did to this country. Since Obama has been in office, basically EVERY change in policy, through both executive decisions and, much more often, through legislative action, has been in the progressive direction. Here is the problem: Sometimes, this means taking what was an extremely conservative policy, and simply making it a centrist, or even center right policy. This can come off looking bad when you focus on the specifics. But really, with the talk that as often heard on this site, it is if Obama is championing conservative causes on a daily basis. This is completely untrue. I challenge someone to find a significant policy change that moves rightward. Note that I am not saying he doesn’t have any right leaning policies. As I said above, and as everyone on this site knows, Bush did terrible things to the country. And since it would have been tough to go through congress for many of them, he did them in deceitful ways. We all know this. Obama is not only reversing these policies, he is doing so in an honest and open way. And, this means, sometimes, he will lose. He lost on tax cuts for the rich. He lost on the public option. He lost on Guantanomo. But do not forget that he still made these fights in the first place, maybe not fighting as “hard” as you would like, but he supported all of the right policies, and, unfortunately, he lost on some of them. WE lost on some of them. But do not mistake this for a betrayal of an overall progressive vision. Look, for example, at the latest budget battle. It should be clear that Obama and the Dems got the better of the deal. We forget sometimes that republicans won big in the house and senate, and they won on a mantle of severly limiting the size of the government. All that has happened so far are a few small cuts, some of which weren't even true cuts, some of which were to things we don't even really like (clean coal technologies, a War on Drugs-type center). Let's be clear about this: Republicans, extreme conservative Republicans, won big in 2010... And, so far, they have basically nothing to show for it. Overall, we should all be happy with the direction Obama has taken the country. We should remember that, if he had gotten all he wanted, it would be even better, and keep that in mind for the 2012 and 2014 elections. If we give him more time, and more importantly, more and better Democrats, he will do even better.
Alright, this has been far too long, but I’d like to conclude with two thoughts. The first is, basically, all that I have said to defend Obama is not really arguing with his detractors about any of the facts, just in how we look at them. Of course, Obama has not been has liberal as we would like, and of course, we should continue to push him in that direction. But to claim that he is “selling us out” is, in my mind, ridiculous, to consider primarying him, even more so. It fundamentally ignores political realities. And that is what I’d like to make my last point about: political realities. We all have are issues and causes that we hold to and cherish, and that is a great thing. Personally, my “big issue” is, simply drugs. In my mind, legalizing drugs in a sane and reasonable way would do wonders for the problems that plague many inner cities… But that is for another diary. My point in bringing this up is this: I do not think this will ever happen. I simply don’t see a scenario where this could ever be politically realistic at any point in the next say 30 years, and probably beyond that. But that doesn’t stop me from trying to change things. I think we can, at least for marijuana, come to a reasonable solution that keeps drug profits out of gang’s hands and keep more people out of prison. I think we can have more tolerant laws for non-violent drug offenders. I will fight for these things. But I do not blame Obama for not tackling these issues: In times of financial crisis, it would not be realistic, and it would, unfortunately, end in bullshit.