Back at You, Robert Gibbs! "Gibbs should be grateful that progressives aren't even more critical"

[Better Believe It]

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)



Back at You, Robert Gibbs!
By Matthew Rothschild
Editor, Progressive Magazine
August 10, 2010


Boy, are they thin-skinned over at the White House!

And rather than aim their ire at the Republicans, who want Obama to fail, they’re going after their progressive critics, who want him to succeed.

This perverse defensiveness first surfaced in February when Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel called some progressives “fucking retarded” for considering running attack ads against conservative Democrats who were dragging their feet on health care reform.

Now, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has let loose, too. In an interview with the Hill, Gibbs went after what he called “the professional left.”

On the three biggest issues of his Administration—the economy, health care, and the war in Afghanistan—Obama has either settled short or made disastrous choices.

On the economy, he lowballed the stimulus, even after being advised by Nobel Prize-winning economists Joseph Stiglitz and Paul Krugman (and the great progressive economist Dean Baker) that unemployment would remain between 9 and 10 percent for more than a year unless he put more federal spending into the economy. Obama also failed to extract meaningful concessions (such as a foreclosure moratorium) from the banks when he had them at his mercy.

(snip)

Please read the full article at:

http://www.progressive.org/wx081010.html

[FirstLight]

1. right on!

:thumbsup:

[moksha]

2. Gibbs opened the door for the left to stand up and get in the President's face.

Thanks for the invite Gibbs!

[Better Believe It]

3. For those who won't read the article and think it's a one-sided attack on President Obama read this:

Rothschild also pointed out in the article:

"Yes, he’s done some good things:

--Signing the Lilly Ledbetter Law, making it easier for women to sue for sex discrimination on the job

--Renouncing torture

--Lifting the global gag rule on family planning overseas

--Endorsing the U.N. declaration on gay rights

--Lifting the ban on immigrants with HIV

--Moving toward jettisoning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

--Allowing women in the military to have the morning after pill

--Giving transgender persons in the federal workplace protection against discrimination

--Giving partnership benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees

--Endorsing stem-cell research

--Downplaying the war on drugs

--Not prosecuting medical marijuana

--Allowing states to have higher carbon standards than the federal government

--Having the EPA classify carbon dioxide as a health hazard

--Promoting alternative energy and mass transit

--Supporting workers’ right to organize

--Canceling the F-22

--Canceling missiles in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic

--Getting private lenders out of the student loan industry

--Giving immigrants the right to counsel in hearings

--Shutting down a prison in Texas housing immigrant children

--Negotiating he new START treaty with Russia

--Expanding children’s health care

--Expanding Medicaid for single men

--Prohibiting discrimination against people with preexisting conditions.

These aren’t nothing.

[zipplewrath]

7. Doesn't balance.

Rothschild also pointed out in the article:

"Yes, he’s done some good things:

--Signing the Lilly Ledbetter Law, making it easier for women to sue for sex discrimination on the job

Yes. ALL he did was sign it, this was a law that was written well before he showed up. But he did sign it. I mean, he also signed a law allowing conceal weapons to be carried inside national parks too.

--Renouncing torture

No, he did not. He with held authority to do so from the various services. The next president can undo it just as quickly. He's done nothing to ensure it won't happen again. And he can't seem to find anyone to prosecute so that people might actually be dissuaded from trying.

--Moving toward jettisoning “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”

This isn't anything he's accomplished. He's shuffled alot of paper, and distributed one of the most distorted and homophobic surveys imaginable. He's been very sensitive to the bigots in the services, trying to make sure they don't get their feelings hurt. What he HASN'T done is to exercise his authority under DADT to suspend investigations and expulsions until this study is done.

--Downplaying the war on drugs

--Not prosecuting medical marijuana

These two are a mixed bag. There's be a lack of consistency on these issues, with pronouncements being made from the White House, and arrests being made in the field.

--Supporting workers’ right to organize

Card Check is still hanging out there. He supported Lincoln, who didn't support this.


--Negotiating he new START treaty with Russia

One of his better accomplishments

--Expanding children’s health care

If you mean S-CHIP, yes he signed it. A bit like the Ledbetter, that's about all he did, it existed before he came.

And you forgot one other:

-- The GM rescue. There were folks on both sides of the aisle that wanted to be much harsher to the unions.

These aren’t nothing.


And they don't begin to match alot of the negatives

[Jackpine Radical]

9. In looking at both the + and - lists, it strikes me

that most of the things on the + list are items that are either no great inconvenience to the Corporate Establishment (they want stem cell research, don't care about gay issues, etc.) or are balanced by gifts to the involved industry (pre-existing condition ban being balanced by mandates). There are some exceptions to this, e.g. cancelling the F-22 & some lender legislation. Nevertheless, it is largely a fiscally conservative, corporate-friendly list with some socially liberal additions. In other words most of what he did gave some appearance of being liberal while not seriously inconveniencing the capitalists.

[ibegurpard]

20. yup

[qb]

4. K&R Obama could get away with doing the right thing... if he'd just do it

and then get on TV to explain it to the American people.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. After the Gibbs comments, progressives are likely to get more critical.

[Better Believe It]

8. When progressives are attacked what else can they do but respond with the hard facts and the truth?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

11. Well, some of the progressives who bought into the sloganeering are having their eyes opened.

And, realizing that with the statements of Rahm and Gibbs they've been had.

[mmonk]

34. Yes. It forces a defense that the left's concerns are legitimate.

[scheming daemons]

6. How could they possibly be MORE critical? (without joining the tea party, that is)

[Political Tiger]

10. +1! n/t

[TBF]

16. LOL - as if any criticism is a push to vote republican.

Give me a fucking break. The democratic party has been lucky in that the communists were imprisoned in the 50's. In doing so they tore down an active leftist presence in this country that has lasted for decades. But now we have a whole bunch of folks who realize they really aren't welcome or fit in either party. If I were Obama I wouldn't be alienating that crowd (especially since they actively campaigned for him), but it's his election to lose not mine...

[sabrina 1]

21. They could be asking this WH if they are trying to

lose the Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress in November. But they have refrained, even though House Dems have brought those concerns to the WH on two occasions, until now.

Now I think the time has come to ask that question. If the gloves are off at the WH I see no reason why anyone else should be holding back either.

Nancy Pelosi and other House Dems have at least twice over the past several months taken the WH to task for bashing their own Party. They stopped short of asking that question.

I think we can assume that the WH thinks it can win in 2012 without the people who helped get them elected in 2008. Especially since they've more or less said so. But House Dems are facing an election in November and are fearful that the backlash from the ongoing attacks on Democrats from the WH may reflect on them.

I think the only response from House Dems now is to distance themselves from this WH or WE THE PEOPLE will pay the price in November with a Republican majority and if that happens, there will be no doubt who is to blame ~ because as Pelosi and other Democrats have stated, this WH is NOT helping their own party in the upcoming elections. And the question is 'why'? Why are they doing this?

[glitch]

22. Very well said. Pelosi needs to come out swinging on this one, her leadership is being put at risk.

It seems quite deliberately.

[sabrina 1]

23. Pelosi has come out swinging but not exactly publicly.

although it was covered in the press. In this article from a couple of months ago, it is obvious that the House Dems are very concerned about the WH's seeming willingness to attack Democrats in public. It is worth reading even though it is long:

Democrat in Chief?

And then there was the president — their president — who for 17 months had cajoled them into taking tough votes on stimulus spending, on the trading of carbon emissions, on health care. Barack Obama, the postpartisan president. He continued to go out and shake his head disbelievingly at “the culture of Washington,” which to the Democrats in the House sounded as if he were saying that his own party was the problem, as if somehow the Democratic majorities in Congress hadn’t managed to navigate the bulk of his ambitious agenda past a blockade of Republican vessels, their ship shredded by cannon fire. And all this while the president’s own approval ratings fell below 50 percent — an ominous sign, historically speaking, for a majority party.

This frustration among Democrats was bound to find an outlet, and that’s what happened at a meeting in Nancy Pelosi’s conference room at the end of April to discuss the party’s election-year message. Around three sides of the table were close to a dozen Democratic leaders in the House. On the remaining side sat David Axelrod, the president’s senior adviser and message-molder, along with two other White House operatives: Jim Messina, the deputy chief of staff, and Stephanie Cutter, a senior aide to the president.

Chris Van Hollen, the Maryland congressman in charge of House campaigns this fall, and James Clyburn, the Democratic whip and an Obama ally, complained to Axelrod about the president’s unrelenting assault on Washington rather than on Republicans specifically, according to three people who were in the room. “A ‘Washington is broken’ message doesn’t help incumbents running for Congress,” Van Hollen pleaded with the aides

The article is revealing in that it is clear that the leadership knew they were taking political risks by voting for the controversial HC bill eg. But in return, making it even worse, they are wondering what they are getting in return.

The article also illustrates how the WH feels about 'going to bat' for candidates as Dem Presidents have always done in the past. And how they, the WH intends to spend millions rounding up NEW voters so that in 2012 they do NOT have to depend on, well, US, the people who worked to elect them in 2008 many of whom are now disillusioned.

I think this latest debacle with Gibbs should be a message to the leadership that they WILL lose if they do not come out strongly against the message against the base of the party coming from the WH. And I would not be surprised if we begin to see it pretty soon. Pelosi is not dumb, and she knows when she is not getting the support she needs. Now it's HER job on the line, and the cause of her worries is NOT the 'Professional Left', it is the WH itself, which she appears to be aware of.

[glitch]

24. Oh I know. But I think she needs to go public. Quite a few progressives feel unrepresented.

As the leader of the House she needs to show them they're represented somewhere.

The DLC is very public about their disdain, and they are doing damage. It's pretty clear our side needs to take the gloves off and fight back very publicly, so that the base can see it. We know it here because we take the time to inform ourselves but there are a lot of people who don't have that time.

This is probably a beautiful dream but I'd like to see her team up with Dr. Dean.

[sabrina 1]

25. Oh, I agree. She needs to come out now, very strongly and in

public and slam Gibbs for his comments. Especially his comment about Health Care. If that wasn't a rightwing talking point, I have never heard one. But she and House Dems do need to publicly separate themselves from this WH now so that the base does not associate them with the hateful anti-base rhetoric from this WH.

Much as they wanted to take the wrong message from the loss of Ted Kennedy's seat, that was the first sign that the base was not about to work for a party that despises them. But I now see Congress as separate from the WH and it is vitally important to win back the base before November. Only Pelosi can do that. Obama could, but he'd have to fire Gibbs and Rahm and he's not about to do that as apparently they do speak for him.

I do not want a Republican majority and am livid at this WH for making it a definite possibility. The other issue she needs to get on right away, rather than 'cooperating' once again as they did on the Health Insurance bail-out, is Social Security and the Deficit Commission. She needs to state clearly that Democrats will fight anyone, including this WH if they continue to support the Republican lies that SS has anything to do with the deficit.

Congress never should have caved just to be loyal to this WH, but that's in the past. They don't have much time left so I hope we'll start seeing some push-back from them now. What more do they need to see? I have seen all I need to see from this WH. Our only hope is Congress to stop a Republican resurgence.

[glitch]

26. Could not possibly agree more. And the good thing about this latest offense

it has made it very clear: there is NO benefit in caving. Got this link from mopinko's thread:

http://www.democracyforamerica.com/activities/357-dean-corps-organizer-application

[sabrina 1]

29. Yes, this was like a bubble bursting imo.

It's really time to organize, and if the WH doesn't want to get on board, then that is their choice. We've been looking for leadership in the wrong place.

Dean was the one who made the majority possible even though Rahm still tries to take credit for that. If Obama really wants to be a great president, he'll get rid of those who've been advising to do things like lift the ban on Offshore drilling, not fight for a PO etc. And if he had any sense at this point, he would hire Dean as his spokesperson. That would motivate the base and unite the party leaving the DLCers out of the process where they belong. They've had their chance, and they've blown it reducing a huge mandate to a possible defeat in November.

Thanks for the link. I'm really glad Dean is still working on elections.

[whathehell]

31. You are correct, Madam. +100 n/t

[KoKo]

41. Thanks for the posting. I remembered reading it at the time and wondering what was up...

Now re-reading from the snip...it makes sense in the context of what has come down later.

Thanks!

[midnight]

28. Good question.

[gkhouston]

27. Stay tuned. n/t

[LostInAnomie]

37. Indeed

+1

[katandmoon]

12. Bingo. K&R

[bvar22]

13. I am beyond mere criticism today.

THIS is how I feel about Gibbs and the "New Democrat" Party's treatment of FDR/LBJ Democrats.



Fuck Me???
NO!...Fuck YOU and your Republican Appeasing Bullshit!!!

[bvar22]

14. I am beyond mere criticism today.

THIS is how I feel about Gibbs and the "New Democrat" Party's treatment of FDR/LBJ Democrats.



Fuck Me???
NO!...Fuck YOU and your Republican Appeasing Bullshit!!!

[mnhtnbb]

19. I agree.

[nightrain]

15. I guess Obama wants to be a one-termer, cuz he sure is pissing off potential voters!

If he loses in 2012, and if seats are lost in November, they will have earned it.

Where is that spine, Obama?

[crim son]

17. Gibbs wouldn't be grateful; Gibbs doesn't give a shit.

He's got a job, health insurance and a regular vacation & he always will. Wait - doesn't that make him a Professional Democrat? I know it makes him a hypocrite.

[me b zola]

18. K&R

[pengillian101]

30. K&R

:thumbsup:

[whathehell]

32. I believe, as did Eugen Robinson on Hardball last night, that they thought

would act like The Right and simply "all fall in line" behind Obama.

One wonders how long Gibbs and company have been in politics, at least Democratic politics.:eyes:

[Better Believe It]

35. Gibbs is a "pro" in Democratic Party politics. That's why Obama is using him.

[whathehell]

36. Then why is he insulting the base?

Howard Dean is also a "pro" and I understand Gibbs helped do a hit job on him in 2004.

Somehow I lack confidence in this guy.:wtf:

[Better Believe It]

38. Because they take the "left" for granted and believe that

more conservatives and moderates will support their agenda if they attack the "left".

That's my take on it if you think the Obama administration does not have a liberal "main street" agenda and more of a Wall Street and corporate agenda on the big economic issues.

[whathehell]

40. Gibbs went beyond "taking us for granted"...He showed outright hostility.

They better "walk it back" a lot farther than "inartfull comments" if they want to close that 20 point enthusiasm gap.

In the meantime, Let's see how many "conservatives and moderates" will be up for GOTV work this November...The "Left", we who got their asses in power in the first place, are getting VERY sick of this shit.

[EFerrari]

39. Yep. Oops. n/t

[Vinca]

33. Exactly. Last night I was thinking about what it is that really has me pissed off

at the administration (other than the fact they apparently think I'm a drug-addled psycho). It's their refusal to fight. Especially for health care which is a life or death issue for many of us. Without repeating my usual health care complaints, it occurred to me I might have accepted the outcome (welfare to big insurance) if Obama had fought like hell (think LBJ and Medicare) and lost. But he prefers to hold hands and sing kumbayah and give the other side whatever the hell they want. That's what has me pissed off.