How do all the people on DU who describe Obama as Centrist or Center-Right

[Every Man A King]

explain the budget?

[WI_DEM]

1. The fact is that Obama has so far been the most liberal president domestically that we've had since

LBJ.

[MADem]

3. LBJ was center right, too. So was JFK.

[ClarkUSA]

23. Says who? You? Source, link?

[blueclown]

27. LBJ... center right?

You're fucking joking, right?

One look at the Great Society and that myth would be batted down in a second.

[Jennicut]

38. LBJ may have been center right on foreign policy but he was like FDR on domestic issues.

The fact is LBJ was one of the most progressive Presidents domestically that we ever had.

[blueclown]

59. You are 100% correct.

Domestically, LBJ was even more liberal than FDR was.

[WI_DEM]

28. Center right? just because they weren't Dennis Kucinich maybe.

I guess FDR was center right too. Look at the legislative victories of the Great Society.

[rug]

2. "Obama plans to spend as much on defense as Bush did."

http://www.slate.com/id/2212323/

[ananda]

4. Look at his policies and appointees..

.. regarding the military-industrial complex,
his continuation of two wars or occupations
that are nothing but money sinkholes, and
his refusal to hold war criminals and Reep
fraudsters accountable, AND his refusal to
end domestic spying and renditions.

Look at his appointees in the financial sector
of the admin.. all bastions of wrongheaded
free marketism and criminal cronyism. They
are part of the problem and helped cause it.

We might love Obama's social positions, and
his budget might well reflect some of our
New Deal sensibilities.. but his is STILL an
imperial presidency and he is most definitely
abusing that power in some ways... just not
as much as Bush did.

No way I'm not happy for some of Obama's
reversals of Bush's orders and policies, and
no way I'm not happy that his budget will
address some of this country's problems and
help some people.. but you have to realize
that throwing money from the broken corrupt
economic at that system in order to fix it
is not going to mean much in the long run.

The whole thinking around the presidency,
the balance of powers, the purpose of
government, and what a workable and sustainable
economic system means will have to change.

And I mean a complete metanoia .. not just
bandaid thinking.

[Captain Hilts]

5. He's Center-right, just as JFK, LBJ and Bubba were.

Bubba had a Republican congress to deal with, so he gets an asterix and Dems - Jim Cooper and Sam Nunn - blocked his most progressive policies - gay rights and healthcare.

[ClarkUSA]

6. He's a down-the-line liberal who doesn't pander to either the DLC or the right.

[firedupdem]

9. You summed it up perfectly. Nothing he has done is even close

to being right wing.

[Captain Hilts]

11. No one said he's 'right wing'. nt

[Captain Hilts]

10. No, he rides the center whenever possible. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

His healthcare plan was centrist in not requiring universal coverage or membership, for example.

It's politically more practicable, but not more liberal.

[ClarkUSA]

13. No way. He is a liberal's dream with none of the corporate DLC pandering of some fmr. presidents.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

56. Are you gay? I am. A "down-the-line liberal" would believe in marriage equality.

Don't say he's down the line if he isn't.

Unless you don't care about gay rights.

[YOY]

7. The reality of global politics puts most of what we call "left" in the center or right.

n.t.

[Captain Hilts]

18. Correct. Ted Kennedy would be a centrist in Europe. nt

[YOY]

20. This is what makes FReepers all the more rediculous.

They have no idea just how far to the right they truly are.

[Captain Hilts]

22. Very true. nt

[Jennicut]

43. Exactly. Obama is a liberal here in the United States.

All countries are different.

[Spider Jerusalem]

8. America has become an extremely right-wing country over the past 30 years or so.

And has always been significantly more right-wing than any major European country (socialism didn't get very far here, after all). By global standards, Obama is centre-right. The fact that he may be significantly left of any US president since Lyndon Johnson doesn't change that.

[Captain Hilts]

12. Success among the middle and upper classes will do that to a country. Thank FDR. nt

[ClarkUSA]

15. Interesting. You blame FDR and not Newt Gingrich, the Moral Majority, and Reagan?

That explains alot.

[Captain Hilts]

16. Economic security has made people more conservative. Gingrich came along...

20+ years after the lower income brackets started to fall behind.

And Gingrich didn't make poor kids fight Vietnam.

[ClarkUSA]

21. Source, link? Or is this your pet theory?

[Captain Hilts]

24. Nope, just decades of studying economic policy and having a phd in it.

Not to mention having read a wall of books on the New Deal and FDR.

[ClarkUSA]

26. Uh huh. Then you can provide an incredible amount of credible sources and links, I'm sure.

:eyes:

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. As I remember it, the Grinch came along in Clinton's first term,

almost 15 years after REAGAN fucked things up, causing the lower income brackets to fall behind. And he was directly responsible for accelerating the trend that Reagan started. It was about greed and deregulation, not prosperity engendered by the New Deal.

You can't seriously blame FDR for the conservative trend. Better to blame the conservatives themselves who ignored FDR and proclaimed "All we have to fear is COMMIES COMMIES COMMIES!"

[Kurt_and_Hunter]

14. Within the range of polite, acceptable public opinion he's liberal

But the political space in which our discourse takes place is pretty far to the right.

Obama is a redistributionist by American standards, but mainstream centrist by first-world standards.

I've got no beef that he's not liberal enough on budgetary matters.

[Captain Hilts]

17. BINGO! Our discourse and negotiations have a starting point that is not liberal or centrist. nt

[Armstead]

19. We're in a big pickle, and it's an emergency budget

I give props to Obama for what he has done. But it's what he hasn't done -- amnd his tone -- that makes him a center-right president.

Under the current situation, there's basically two choices.

1)Either a Republican-style right-wing slash-and-burn budget that strips the government down, throws everyone but the rich to the wolves and continues to follow the unbridled free-market idiocy of the last 30 years.

Or

2)Something to the left of that, which addresses the human costs of the current mess, reinstates regulation of markets and corporations and attempts to pull us back from the abyss of unbridled pirate capitalism.

Obviously, Obama has chosen the second course, recognizing that bold steps are necessary just to break even.

However, the real question is of degree. IMO, Obama is doing what is necessry and steering somewhat to the left -- but he is not really proposing the fundamental changes and reform that are needed.

He is still attempting to placate the moneymen, being kind of apologetic for looking like a (God forbid) progressive liberal, and promising a return to the Same Old Shit once we get past this crisis.

For example, health care "reform" is meaningless if it still relies on the kindness of the insurance industry. Reform of the financial system is meaningless if the goal is to preserve the consolidation in the hands of a few mega-banks -- rather than steering back towards a more decentralized system of smaller and mid-sized banks.

[Captain Hilts]

25. I agree. He's doing well. Congress is more conservative than the US people right now. nt

[liberalsince1968]

29. How do all the people on DU who describe Obama as a "liberal"

explain his agreeing with the Bush administration on secrecy re torture?

[wyldwolf]

32. or...

... leaving 50,000 (is that figure accurate) troops in Iraq or any number of issues where he takes a decidedly right of left position.

[liberalsince1968]

34. We'll be waiting a long time for answers to those questions.

[ClarkUSA]

41. The troop number is yet to be determined; they are for stabilization purposes until 2011.

The combat mission will be over by August 2010, however. This is not a left, center, or right issue; it's a matter of doing what's
responsible and necessary. Let's not politicize it.

[ClarkUSA]

39. I disagree with your premise. Any decision is pending review, I believe.

[wyldwolf]

30. duplicate - self delete

[wyldwolf]

31. who on DU has EVER described Obama as "center-right?"

As for the gist of your question, you're approaching it from a misunderstanding of what a centrist is. A centrist takes some liberal positions and some conservative positions (for example, I believe in a woman's right to choose and I believe in gun rights. I am therefore a centrist.)

[Uzybone]

40. Look at #5 in this very thread

just one example.

[Lilith Velkor]

49. I have

and I am also pro-choice and pro-RKBA. The reason I am a leftist and not a centrist is that I believe we should have a cradle-to-grave welfare state.

Left, right, and center are economic positions. A centrist advocates a blend of capitalism and socialism. If one leans more toward capitalism, like Obama does, that would make one "center-right."

edit : HTML oopsie

[wyldwolf]

50. ok, based on your definition of the political spectrum (being economic position)

I can see how you arrive at your conclusion. Food for thought. Don't totally buy it, but thanks.

[Forkboy]

35. On the full political spectrum he IS a centrist.

The political spectrum goes further to the Right than Republicans and further to the Left than Democrats, putting Obama pretty much in the center. Don't mean that as an insult, it's just the way it is.

Too many people on DU think the "far left" is Kucinich supporters. These people need to get out more. ;)

[Jennicut]

44. On the United States political spectrum he is a liberal to moderate though.

I don't get why anyone here wants to use the spectrum for other countries on our country when we are a much more conservative country in general. We are a capitalistic society, not a socialist one, though some here don't like that, it is the way it is. We are swinging to the left now but we are still not a leftist country by any means. Obama is considered a liberal from the conservatives point of view. To me he is a moderate to liberal Dem on many of his positions.

[Forkboy]

46. I was actually talking about here in the U.S.

Obama is considered a liberal from the conservatives point of view.

Sure, but they think anyone left of Caeser is liberal. ;)

To me he is a moderate to liberal Dem on many of his positions.

I don't disagree, but my point is that it's all relative to where one stands, and there are many people right here in the U.S. that are very far left compared to Obama. We can't snip them off the end of the spectrum and say they don't count because there's no party that represents them, or no system in place that they prefer. :shrug:

I've known quite a few people personally that are pretty far left, even by my standards. They may not be huge in numbers, but they're still U.S. citizens with a political view, and it should be included.

[paulk]

60. and the Kucinich supporters conveniently forget

that Kucinich was a rabid anti-abortionist his first 6 years in the House.

In the long run all these labels don't do us much good...

[Milo_Bloom]

36. How much of that budget is wasted on ....

war, previous tax cuts that should end IMMEDIATELY and corporate welfare?

[Orsino]

37. He's a conservative, albeit a relatively honest one...

...who is conservative because he's trying to build the largest possible coalition of Americans. He looks left wing to those who have accepted or even cheered Big Money's right to rule us, or who are simply used to Bush/Cheney's tyranny.

When the corporate media call him a socialist, or any sort of lefty, that's just their whining that Obama isn't a fascist like them. Obama's a conservative who's smart and pragmatic enough, it seems, to allow us a taste of progressivism as a way out of a state of emergency.

I don't yet see him reviving Welfare, demanding equal rights, or ending our endless wars, so I'm not going to call him a lefty. Center-right it is--for now. I'll predict, though, that he's going to surprise us by quietly introducing further small progressive measures, and will do it so intelligently that'll he'll slip some of it past the wingnut screamers on TV.

[Jennicut]

42. Its all relative. He is a socialist to conservative Repubs like my own parents

but center right to those on the far left. For the United States he would be considered moderate to liberal left imo. I really think it is all where YOU personally fall on the scale and its kind of nonsense anyways. Someone can be very left on almost everything and be for the death penalty or for stricter regualtions on immigration for example. Labeling people in strict little categories is what Repubs do anyways. For me there is no purity test on a President except to do what is for the best of the country. He is light years from Bush and much more to the left then Clinton. Of course, some people will never be satisfied.

[tpi10d]

45. in the context of US politics he's center-left

I agree with the assessment to this point he's been the most liberal since LBJ for domestic policy.

[RIFF RAFF]

47. I find this neverending discussion interesting...

People keep questioning Barack Obama's liberalism, and then some of these same people go on and on about how the Kennedys are the greatest progressives on the planet! Every time Barack Obama does something, some people call him a 'DLCer', or conservative, whatever. The Kennedys were worse! But with them, all is forgiven. Most people around here are aware of the Kennedys' right-wing past, but some die-hard progressives, like myself, don't believe they have ever truly changed, for various reasons. People around here like to swoon at JFK's comment about him being proud to be a liberal. But in a June, 1953 edition of the Saturday Evening Post, he said this: “I’d be very happy to tell them I’m not a liberal at all. I never joined the Americans for Democratic Action or the American Veterans Committee. I’m not comfortable with those people.” Eleanor Roosevelt also refused to endorse him when he was running for president. She waited until near the end. JFK needed her endorsement, badly. Because she was the Queen Bee of progressivism. The Kennedys were not the liberal icons within the party, when JFK ran for president. One of the reasons she didn't endorse him, was because she didn't believe he was a liberal.

JFK's liberalism was in question during the primaries. Hubert Humphrey, kept trying to point out that JFK was not a liberal. He suddenly got "election year religion". People here laugh about republicans saying JFK should have been a republican. Hubert Humphrey said the same thing, during the primaries! I also read an old news archive from 1960, where LBJ said that JFK was "conservative without being reactionary." Whatever that means. Hubert Humphrey got screwed. Hubert Humphrey did a lot for the progressive movement, and seems kind of ignored. The Kennedys get all the credit, now. The Peace Corps was not even really JFK's idea. The Peace Corps was Hubert Humphrey's idea. Hubert Humphrey was even one of the founders of Americans for Democratic Action. He did A LOT of great progressive things. In 1948, it was Hubert Humphrey who got the democratic party to adopt the civil rights plank. He screwed up on the Vietnam war, but in 1960, he was a flaming liberal/progressive, who got killed by the powerful Kennedy machine. Another thing. A lot of people here know that Robert Kennedy used to work for Joseph McCarthy. Everyone always says that he "saw the light" and he resigned in August? of 1953. Except, Robert Kennedy returned to his post on Joseph McCarthy's committee in February of 1954! This is before Joseph McCarthy's fall. I don't read history books, or biographies to learn about these things. Those sources (purposely, I think) tend to leave out details. Old news archives are one of the best ways to get interesting information. Also, getting information directly from sources like Eleanor Roosevelt. Elanor Roosevelt was a writer, and she used to write a lot about politics. She used to write a daily, or weekly column called, 'My Day'. Brilliant woman, really.

[FrenchieCat]

48. Call him what you will, but all indications are that he is a pragmatic progressive with heart.

I opt to sit back, watch and enjoy the tremendous difference between President Obama and the nightmare of the last 8 years.

In 4 years, Perhaps I'll put a different label on him, once I have actually witnessed the course of events.

What I am tired of, however, are people who think they "know" without practicing patience.

[Numba6]

51. He's more conservative than me

he's also smarter -- I don't think those 2 are connected, BTW

& completely irrelevant -- any Prez would be more conservative than me.

[depakid]

52. The budget hasn't passed yet

and unless Reid has the courage and political fortitude to use the appropriate parliamentary procedures- it WON'T PASS in anything close to its current form.

Here's how it can be done (and how the adminstration is its serious can ensure that the Senate gets it done):

After we get through this season of passing necessary emergency legislation (in order to yank the American economy back from the cliff Bush led us to), Congress is going to have to turn its attention to the federal budget. They didn't pass one last year, and this year's budget is right around the corner as well. But a little-known rule in the Senate may dramatically change the balance of power between the parties during this process. It's called "reconciliation," and it's a magic bullet to slay Republican opposition to passing a budget with President Obama's priorities and agenda intact.

Because (are you sitting down?) budgetary bills that go through the reconciliation process cannot be filibustered in the Senate.

Which means both Obama and the Democrats in Congress may be able to totally ignore the congressional Republicans of both houses -- since these Republicans will be utterly powerless and utterly irrelevant to the discussion. The ramifications are enormous.

The process itself is part of the arcane set of rules the Senate runs by. From Wikipedia, here's a quick overview:

To trigger the reconciliation process, Congress passes a concurrent resolution on the budget instructing one or more committees to report changes in law affecting the budget by a certain date. If the budget instructs more than one committee, then those committees send their recommendations to the Budget Committee of their House, and the Budget Committee packages the recommendations into a single omnibus bill. In the Senate, the reconciliation bill then gets only 20 hours of debate, and amendments are limited. Because reconciliation limits debate and amendment, the process empowers the majority party.

Until 1996, reconciliation was limited to deficit reduction, but in 1996 the Senate adopted a precedent to apply reconciliation to any legislation affecting the budget, even legislation that would worsen the deficit. Under the administration of President George W. Bush, Congress has used reconciliation to enact three major tax cuts. Senate Republicans have repeatedly, though unsuccessfully, tried to use reconciliation to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling.

It's a bit tricky, and there are a lot of i's to be dotted and t's to be crossed to qualify (including something known as the Byrd Rule), but this looks like a good way to get a budget passed without having to worry about getting 60 votes for it in the Senate.

Republicans, of course, would howl.

More: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-weigant/democrats-should-just-say_b_168073.html

[leftofthedial]

53. Other than his Afghanistan/Iraq policy, his continuation of monetarist economic policies

(on the Geithner-banking side of things), and his inclusion of far too much tax-break nonsense in the jobs bill,

he has been less right of center than I expected.

[dcindian]

54. Seems right of me and I would guess I would be center or center left in the world view.

gay marraige
killing innocents in Pakistan
Afghanistan and Iraq
faith based initiatives
Israel
Death Penalty
border fence
feels that faith is central to family life
No child left behind


Just a few I can think of where he is right of me.

[DevonRex]

55. They don't. They just make up some other stupid shit to complain about.

[ZombieHorde]

57. How do people who describe Bush as RW explain the African Aid?

[dcindian]

58. You nailed the false dichotomy.

And made it easy to understand.


Well done.