This Man Speaks For Me

Creative Tension, Obama & the Left

Perhaps no three sentences better define the big lie ethos of predatory conservatism than George Orwell’s,

“War is peace. Freedom is slavery. Ignorance is strength.”

All these years we liberal bloggers/activists struggled against an alternate reality that claimed global warming wasn’t real, health care in America was just fine, Iraq was the central front in the war on terror, we do not torture, we can maintain an empire on the cheap forever, all free trade agreements are good, tax cuts for the rich trickle down to everyone, privatization is always wonderful, Social Security belongs in the stock market, the free market makes regulation unnecessary, government belongs in our bedrooms, religious doctrine supersedes the Constitution, conservative politicians are morally superior to Terry Schiavo’s husband, Brownie did a great job, homosexuality is a deviant lifestyle choice, sex education should be entirely abstinence centric, evolution never happened, Sarah Palin is brilliant and reality can be ignored.

For too much of this struggle the Democratic Party was a self-gelding machine of ineptitude. Indeed, too many Democrats were collaborators and have blood on their hands. Hence, Howard Dean spoke for so many of us in March 2003 with his famous “What I Want To Know” speech in Sacramento.

Understandably, the scars remain for many of us on the left even after last week’s joyous celebration. Heinous crimes were committed in our name as an unpatriotic elitist plutocracy went on a grand larceny rampage under the guise of “national security,” “God,” “country” and “values.” Now the chickens have come home to roost.

Many of us warned that America was on a collision course with calamity and were either ignored or ridiculed. We therefore toiled to change the political landscape and since 2006 helped deliver Congress, the White House, as well as many statehouses and state legislatures to the Democrats.

Now we’re impatient for change. And we want accountability for the past. Whereas America’s old guard nomenklatura lectured about the “moral hazards” of bailing out homeowners and saving the jobs of auto workers, we rail against the moral hazards of allowing the highest officials in the Bush Administration to evade criminal prosecution. President Obama understandably does not want to get bogged down in prosecuting the past. We however believe that ignoring yesterday’s crimes risks them being repeated by future presidents of either party.

Many on the left, like myself, respect and admire President Obama. If nothing else it’s a relief to have a president that is well intentioned and intellectually curious. Nonetheless, our higher allegiance must remain with promoting peace, prosperity, human rights and social justice. In that spirit, many have cited Franklin Roosevelt who legend has it once told a group of reformers,

"I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it."

President Obama needs a strong, assertive political left to help him push the barriers of change. Indeed, our passion is even more important under a Democratic President than it was in opposition to predatory conservatism because now we have leverage to influence policy. Yes, we really do.

We don’t have to be shrill or disrespectful about it. Under President Bush our default posture was to question his motives. I don’t question President Obama’s motives. I believe him to be honorable but results are the bottom line.

Too often Democrats have been willing to be “reasonable” at the onset of negotiations with predatory conservatives. The best negotiators start out by drawing lines in the sand, especially when they hold the high cards. Last week, President Obama admirably stood his ground against the Republican leadership that complained about his “Make Work Pay” proposal as he politely reminded them who won the election and I praised him for it.

Regrettably though, Illinois Senator Dick Durbin confirmed today that President Obama caved with respect to including bankruptcy “cram down” mortgage relief in the stimulus package. This is important.

As recently as Friday, President Obama was standing shoulder-to-shoulder with congressional Democrats and supported including legislation that allowed judges the authority to alter loan terms for primary residences. The banking industry who helped create the mess we're in are naturally opposed.

The very same industry that has wasted billions of tax payer bailout dollars now has the chutzpah to pressure congress to not include bankruptcy relief for out of work wage earners struggling to keep their homes. Even worse, they’re spending $83 million in lobbying Washington to not provide any bankruptcy relief to homowners. I wonder how much of that TARP bailout money was allocated for these lobbying efforts against struggling out of work home owners?

President Obama has indicated he will push for mortgage terms/bankrupt relief in separate legislation. However, passing separate legislation to provide this sort of relief for homeowners will be far tougher. President Obama has maximum leverage in a comprehensive economic recovery bill because Republicans don’t want to appear obstructionist with the country on the brink of an economic depression. Hence, the most effective negotiating posture is to dare Republicans to obstruct economic recovery just so the banks that refuse to extend credit can avoid any pain.

Republicans are taking Obama’s measure and for him to cave this early in his administration as well as the negotiating process is troubling. If Obama is rolled this easily with his political capital at its apex, what else will he cave on once the going really gets tough? Does President Obama really believe Republicans could obstruct comprehensive economic recovery without the entire country turning on them? What is he afraid of?

I realize that when President Obama reaches out to Republicans it's really about giving 80 conservative House Democrats political cover. Furthermore, I appreciate that maintaining the viability of a working majority requires some flexibility. Governing requires a broader coalition than Dennis Kucinich. I appreciate those realities and am prepared to enthusiastically praise the Obama administration when they deserve it. Indeed, I am already proud of the leadership President Obama has shown in his opening week.

Nonetheless, we must loudly oppose this surrender to the banking and lending industry. My sympathies are with laid off autoworkers and small business owners, struggling to make their mortgage payments. Not the money-lenders who irresponsibly created the housing bubble and refuse to absorb any pain while millions of Americans are confronting destitution and homelessness.

Call your representatives in the House of Representatives and the Senate and insist that mortgage terms/bankruptcy relief be included in the stimulus package. Moments like this require creative tension from the left. That’s not being disloyal to President Obama. Rather it’s saving him from himself.

Obama's First Weekly Presidential Address

I've said it before, President Obama is utilizing the web as a means for twenty-first century fireside chats as with this address about his proposed economic recovery plan.

Click here to review a four page bullet summary provided by the White House about the plan. It's reminiscent of the PDF summaries from his campaign website. Once the economic recovery plan is passed, the Obama Administration promises to illustrate how the money is being spent at this website.

As we can see, the rubber is starting to hit the road with respect to the policy debate about the economy. I appreciate President Obama's efforts at transparency. Nonetheless, we liberals must remain vigilant in defense of middle/lower income wage earners and small business entrepreneurs as more details are revealed.

Making Work Pay

I'm currently writing an essay about creative tension between the Obama Administration and the left in our quest to promote peace, prosperity and social justice. In the meantime, I just wanted to do a quick post about President Obama's proposal for a "Making Work Pay" tax credit to benefit workers who earn too little to pay taxes yet do pay Social Security and Medicare taxes.

In a bipartisan meeting of congressional leadership yesterday, Eric Cantor, the Republican number two House leader objected to the proposal. Predatory conservatives such as Cantor typically prefer that tax benefits go to the wealthy and champion the failed policy of trickle down economics. Liberals prefer a progressive tax system that helps low wage earners spend money on necessities such as food, utilities and shelter. It is our belief that money in the hands of people who need it most is the best tonic for the economy.

Well, the New York Times reports that according to White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel, President Obama told Cantor,

"We just have a difference here and I'm President."

The Times described the moment as lighthearted and respectful. Nonetheless, while civil, President Obama clearly stood his ground.

Congressman Cantor recalled President Obama as saying,

"You're correct, there's a philosophical difference, but I won, so we're going to prevail on that." Cantor further added that, "There was no disrespect, but it was very matter-of-fact."

That's real change and I like it.

The Bruno Indictment

The other major development in New York politics yesterday was the indictment of former Republican state senate majority leader Joe Bruno for eight counts of public corruption. Specifically, Bruno is accused of defrauding New Yorkers as a consulting firm he was associated with received hundreds of thousands of dollars through contracts with state agencies. The indictment released by the Department of Justice is a thirty-five page PDF document and culmination of a two year FBI investigation. It's an interesting read.

Candidly, what Bruno is accused of is far worse than anything former governor Eliot Spitzer ever did. Ultimately, Spitzer's transgressions were private while Bruno exploited his powerful position to defraud New Yorkers and undermine state government's performance to enrich himself.

Susan Lerner of Common Cause NY writes at the Albany Project that Bruno's indictment reveals how pitifully corrupt New York State truly is:

"This is an indictment of not only Joe Bruno, but also of New York State's ethics laws. The man who held the highest position of power in the state legislature for years is formally accused of betraying the public interest on behalf of his self interest. Joe Bruno's indictment emphatically highlights the shameful state of New York's ethics laws, graphically demonstrating why the Legislature should not be expected to police the ethics of its own members. Even more disquieting is that the indictment is further proof that, for years, the only meaningful ethics and corruption oversight in New York State is being carried out by federal agents and United States Attorneys. This is a sad day for Joe Bruno, and sadder still for the New York Legislature."

For what it's worth, Bruno is known for being close to Kirsten Gillibrand's family and is friendly with Governor David Paterson as well. For all the negative publicity Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich and Chicago politics has received in recent weeks, the Empire State remains the gold standard of pay to play corruption.

New York, New York

Unless hermetically sealed in a dungeon you know that Governor David Paterson finally named Representative Kirsten Gillibrand to succeed Hillary Clinton. First let me address the fallout with respect to the disastrous public relations courtship between Caroline Kennedy, Governor David Paterson and his staff. Both Paterson and Kennedy are diminished from the entire process.

I never believed Kennedy was appropriate for the position or capable of withstanding the rough and tumble of New York politics. To her credit, Kennedy has been a citizen advocate for progressive causes and survived the public relations goldfish bowl far better than several other Kennedys who became entangled in scandals. Yet it was quite apparent during her “listening tour” that Kennedy did not have the right stuff.

Furthermore, Kennedy appeared to project a sense of entitlement about the position that was off putting. Other New York dynastic political figures such as Robert Kennedy, Hillary Clinton and Andrew Cuomo repeatedly demonstrated toughness, the willingness to work for their support and the resilience to bounce back from self-inflicted wounds. Without those skills a politician has no shot in the unique New York media cauldron. Sadly, Kennedy’s image took a beating and this Camelot icon will never be looked upon the same way again. She asked for it but it’s regrettable nonetheless.

Putting Kennedy’s flaws aside however, Governor Paterson’s administration was graceless in publicly throwing her underneath the bus after she asked to no longer be considered. It was bad enough that Paterson appeared disorganized, narcissistic and inept during his own selection process. Even worse was his staff’s eagerness to kick Kennedy while she was down in order to salvage Paterson’s reputation. Yes, the New York Times reported that Kennedy had personal issues with respect to taxes and a household employee. It's also true that her public performances these past few weeks were uneven at best.

However, the New York media was already piling on and pouring more salt in Kennedy’s wounds only served to make Paterson appear small. It seems inevitable now that Paterson will be challenged in the 2010 Democratic primary. If Eliot Spitzer was a vindictive bull in a china shop then the previous 24 hours has exposed Paterson as a feckless barking dog with no teeth that cowardly refused to let Kennedy depart the stage with any semblance of dignity. It was Paterson’s fault the process with Kennedy went as far as it did in the first place. A putrid demonstration of leadership at a time when accountability and competence are needed most.

With respect to Representative Gillibrand, I am neither enthusiastic nor gnashing my teeth. I would have preferred a genuine liberal advocate such as state Senator Liz Krueger or Congressman Jerrold Nadler who unflinchingly opposed the Bush Administration’s worst civil liberties abuses. Gillibrand is a respectable choice but she’s no liberal and won’t be a counterweight to Chuck Schumer who is in bed with the banking industry, and also paved the way for Michael Mukasey to serve as George W. Bush’s Attorney General in spite of being pro-torture.

In 2006, I phonebanked for Gillibrand when she challenged four term Republican incumbent John Sweeney in New York’s conservative upstate 20th congressional district. Naturally, Gillibrand reflects the cultural mores of her upstate conservative constituents with respect to guns and is a member in good standing of the Blue Dog Coalition in the House of Representatives. Electing centrists such as Gillibrand was the price for securing a majority in the House and Gillibrand does have her good points too.

Gillibrand is a strong advocate of legislation to reinforce the National Instant Criminal Background Check System Improvement Act to keep guns away from criminals. She also courageously supports same-sex marriage and that is not an easy position for any upstate legislator to assume. Gillibrand has been a reliable supporter of abortion rights, stem cell research, and the Children's Health and Medicare Protection Act. On fiscal matters she opposed the TARP bailout, supports extending the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts and has a record of opposing Social Security privatization. In other words, Gillibrand has a centrist record. Pretty good on most social and civil libertarian issues but fiscally too conservative for my taste.

Gillibrand’s challenge now is persuade downstate urban voters like myself that she can represent the entire state’s diverse interests and views. Pro gun control congresswoman Carolyn McCarthy has indicated she will challenge Gillibrand in the Democratic 2010 primary. McCarthy as New Yorkers may recall first entered congress following the tragic shooting of her husband in 1993.

I’m pro gun control but will make my decision on whom to support over a wide spectrum of issues while evaluating Gillibrand’s performance. Robert Harding over at the Albany Project provides a useful guide about gun control with respect to upstate/downstate perspectives and Gillibrand in a post today that is worth reading.

Hopefully, there will be several Democratic primary challengers vigorously competing to provide options for both governor as well as senator. Party establishment figures often prefer the banality of “unity” but I’ve always believed that intra-party competition is healthy. Two years is a lifetime in politics and that is doubly true given our current economy. In the meantime, New York desperately needs both Paterson to quickly get his act together and Gillibrand to grow into her new job with dispatch. Otherwise New Yorkers will need viable options to consider as replacements.

ILJ Sourced In Wikinews

To my utter amazement, the Intrepid Liberal Journal was sourced at the bottom of an entry in Wikinews today. Longtime readers of this blog may recall my October 23, 2006 post entitled, Reminiscing About the Future: Barack Obama's Inauguration Speech. It was my attempt to draft a hypothetical inauguration speech in Obama's voice at the time. Unbeknownst to me, it was speculated that the same Obama photo I uploaded from a Google Images search was later used to create the iconic Barack Obama HOPE poster by artist Shepard Fairey. The mystery was ultimately solved by the resourceful sleuthing of Tom Gralish. Gralish identified Mannie Garcia as being the photographer of the picture used by Fairey

I've only recently learned how much controversy existed over this topic. During the campaign I was entirely focused on issues, the horserace narrative and my activism. These sorts of side topics did not interest me and it also never occurred to me that my post would generate interest because of the photo I used.

It's also amusing to read some of the comments from that post two years ago. Keep in mind when reading it that the Democrats hadn't even retaken congress yet. I also received numerous emails at the time accusing me of being crazy for even suggesting that a black man named Barack Hussein Obama could be elected president.

Ironic that the very day President Obama was inaugurated my hypothetical inauguration speech has received such high volume traffic. I was receiving emails from people with photography blogs and journalists hoping I might know who took the original photograph until Gralish figured it out. Such is life in the online world. Kudos to Tom Gralish for figuring it out.

A New Day

My advice to liberal activists is simple: enjoy today. Our recent past under President George W. Bush was tragic, criminal and shameful. The years ahead will be challenging and tough. At times pragmatic political expediency inside the Obama administration will clash with our convictions. Creative tension is inevitable and necessary to advance the cause of peace, prosperity and social justice. Americans are embarking on long-term project of rebuilding our house after putting out an eight-year fire. How we rebuild that house can and will be debated intensely.

For me however, today simply means drawing strength from a refreshing sense of hope and renewal. An intelligent, capable and decent human being becomes president today. That is no small thing after eight long years of George W. Bush’s insipid reign of indecency and incompetence. I busted my ass to help make it happen. So did many of you. I intend to fully enjoy the moment and hope you will too.