Gibbs wants progessives to hold Obama accountable while simultaneously smearing everyone who's tried

[Better Believe It]

Accountabilitiness
By: Eli
August 13, 2010

Used to be that only Republicans could say things contradictory and incoherent enough to make my head explode. Not any more:

Gibbs: Obama Still Wants To Feel Pressure From The Left
By Sam Stein
August 13, 2010

Addressing the issue four days after he initially chastised liberal (cable news) critics for having demands of the White House that he deemed “crazy,” Gibbs once again stood by those remarks.

“There are a small number of people on cable and elsewhere who will never be happy, who will never give the President credit for anything, and who will always look for some cardinal sin to be upset about,” the press secretary said in an email to the Huffington Post.

But, from there, he offered a far more conciliatory if not diplomatic reflection on the riff that briefly dominated macro-political debate within the Democratic Party.

“I also stand by my statement… that the vast majority of progressives and those on the left, whether that’s bloggers or groups or what have you, do not hold those beliefs and are pushing in good faith for a better country as they see it,” Gibbs added. “The President has urged those who want change to push for it and hold him accountable, and that’s how he feels.”

So let me see if I have this straight: The White House’s official spokesman criticizes “the professional left” for pointing out that Obama has broken his promises on the public option, Medicare drug reimportation and price negotiation, EFCA, DADT, closing Gitmo, restoring government transparency and respect for the Constitution, cleaning up Wall Street, challenging “the broken system in Washington” and, arguably, immigration and climate reform… and then tells us that Obama wants us to push for change and “hold him accountable”?

But what does pushing for change mean if not demanding more than incrementalist status quo-preserving weak tea? And what does holding Obama accountable mean if not calling him out for all his broken promises?

Obama can’t have it both ways, trotting Gibbs out to brag about how much his boss wants progressives to hold him accountable… while simultaneously smearing everyone who’s tried to do so as irrational commie whiners. Either he wants to hear what we have to say, or he doesn’t.

http://firedoglake.com/2010/08/13/accountabilitiness/

[EFerrari]

1. I know. I wish he would just be quiet for a few days. n/t

[nightrain]

2. and maybe do some serious self-reflection,,,

[JVS]

8. I wish he'd take a vow of silence.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Their internals must be down right horrific

to repeat myself from this morning.

[Jackpine Radical]

6. I think they're suffering from the typical DC Delusional Syndrome

in which they mistake poll results for reality, and they think they have the unwavering support of 90% of liberals or something.

If they can't see through the thicket, they're in real trouble, operating on false perceptions. We can't fix that for them, other than by trying to communicate our sentiments through whatever channels are open to people like us. It's up to them to tune in to those channels. They had damn well best not just be listening to the polls, because there is nothing like a poll to obfuscate actual information on how people really feel. I have never yet seen a poll with response choices that allowed me to really communicate my positions or attitudes in an undistorted fashion.

If you were going to construct a poll honestly, you would first go out & sample the population of interest with open-ended interviews. E.g. "Tell me what you think about {Obama; the state of the nation; health care reform; whatever}, and then from that database I would construct multiple-choice questions that adequately sampled 95% or so of the opinions collected in the open-ended phase, and would then administer those items to the larger sample. This is almost never done outside academic settings. They essentially make up questions based on what they think people might think, and then keep asking the same questions year after year so they can "measure changes in public opinion." What they actually get is mostly bullshit, useful only for the talking points somebody mentioned.

[nadinbrzezinski]

7. Re-read what they said

it strikes me as the polls are horrific. And they are starting to realize this.

The only thing that is keeping them in the run, not me saying it, but pollsters in general, is the brand of crazee the GOP is running.

[Jackpine Radical]

12. I still think they're being delusional.

I don't think they realize just how deep and how wide the disappointment and frustration run on the left side of the electorate. People keep citing those polls that show lots of supposed liberal support, but fail to realize how tenuous that support really is.

I just don't see a grasp of reality there, Nadin. I don't know what you're picking up on. All I hear is more of the same crap they always peddle in their attempts to mollify the (in their view) simple-minded, childish left. This wouldn't be the first time I've missed something obvious, but missing it I am.

[flyarm]

11. + 10,000 I agree 100% ..the internals are most likely in the toilet, and they should be! eom

[Jackpine Radical]

4. You wanna know why?

Easy.

He wants a visible but ineffectual left that he and his minions can posture against with taunts and slams so that the valued independent voters can see that he is not one of those scary liberals.

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. I AM an independent voter

and trust me, it ain't working too well.

So is my hubby.

But given the special brand of crazee the GOP is running, let me see, spineless mollusks we know, or real down right dominionist crazee we don't.

Lesser of two evilism has taken an interesting turn...

[Jackpine Radical]

13. You're not the kind of independent I had in mind.

I meant the low-information types who think "liberal" is a cussword.

[havocmom]

9. I've decided they want us to help them in the theater of diversion

while the corporate bosses continue to rape an pillage.

Frankly, I am weighing the merits of letting the administration go on about aiding and abetting without my participation in the farce theater of the absurd.

[flyarm]

10. he needs to STFU and be fired! eom

[dgibby]

14. He won't be fired.

He has the full backing of the WH; otherwise, he'd have been on his knees begging for forgiveness by now.

This was no slip of the lip. It was a poor attempt at triangulation: pit the "professional left" against the "amateur left" and the centrists, while at the same time setting up the "professional left" as the scapegoat to take the fall if things go south in the Nov. elections.

Stupid move, but definitely deliberate.

[Better Believe It]

16. Why would President Obama fire him? He's clearly speaking with Obama's approval.

[SidDithers]

15. He won't be fired...nt

Sid