Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama and the Long View

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 01:57 PM
Original message
Obama and the Long View
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20100208/abramsky3

Obama and the Long View
By Sasha Abramsky

January 21, 2010

snip//


Read Obama's writings and you are clearly reading the words of a man who loves grappling with social theories but who also realizes the fragility both of ideas and of the social systems that rest upon them. Like most keen students of history, he understands the need for leaders to exhibit flexibility to meet changed circumstances. In his 2006 book The Audacity of Hope, he wrote that "It may be the vision of the Founders that inspires us, but it was their realism, their practicality and flexibility and curiosity, that ensured the Union's survival." Great men make history, but they are also made by it. They dream, but they also know how to get down to brass tacks.

America, for Obama, is a wondrous experiment, something to be marveled at rather than taken for granted. "At the core of the American experience are a set of ideals that continue to stir our collective conscience; a common set of values that bind us together despite our differences; a running thread of hope that makes our improbable experiment in democracy work," he wrote in The Audacity of Hope. And yet at the same time, Obama is all too aware of the times when the country has strayed from its ideals. "Self-reliance; and independence can transform into selfishness and license, ambition into greed and a frantic desire to succeed at any cost. More than once in our history, we've seen patriotism slide into jingoism, xenophobia, the stifling of dissent; we've seen faith calcify into self-righteousness, closed-mindedness, and cruelty toward others."

Few politicians would dare to put such a critical analysis in print for public consumption. Yet the criticism is always tempered by a sense of possibility. Writing to his daughters in an open letter published in PARADE magazine, Obama said of his grandmother Toot, "She helped me understand that America is great not because it is perfect but because it can always be made better--and that the unfinished work of perfecting our union falls to each of us."

On the night of his election victory, Obama addressed a vast crowd of enthused supporters in Chicago's Grant Park. The nation, he declared, needed to be remade; and the task would be carried out not just by a new administration but by a motivated populace, "the only way it's been done in America for 221 years--block by block, brick by brick, calloused hand by calloused hand."

On inauguration day, Obama again took up the themes of sacrifice and duty. "Let us mark this day with remembrance," he told a worldwide audience, "of who we are and how far we have traveled." And then he segued into an homage to American laborers. "For us," he declared, past generations "toiled in sweatshops and settled the West, endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth."

It was a carefully choreographed reminder to the global audience that historically America has been a country made great by underdogs. Its story can only be told and understood by digging beneath the surface, by searching for the lost stories of countless millions of "ordinary" people. If the Bush years had been characterized by a certain historical amnesia, the inauguration's timbre made clear, the Obama years were to be framed by a powerful and inclusive sense of history.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 02:05 PM
Response to Original message
1. Wait, work? You're kidding!
we didn't elect Obama because we wanted to work on stuff, we elected him so he would wave his schnitzelgruben and cure every ill in our country just like that!

...I considered putting in a sarcasm tag here, but apparently a lot of people really did vote for him with that in mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 02:35 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. I voted for bailouts of billionaires and corrupt health insurance mandates.
Edited on Sat Jan-23-10 02:35 PM by Warren Stupidity
I recall that clearly now.

:sarcasm:

I did vote knowing that I was going to get more PermaWar, so I am actually not pissed about that crap. Sad that we are a force for such evil in the world, but I voted knowing where Obama stood on this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. I voted for the opposite
and there is progress being made.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
treestar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 07:26 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. You know you are straining to interpret everything so as to get the most
negative and pessimistic result you can out of it?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 07:17 AM
Response to Reply #11
16. 'straining'?
Please elaborate how protecting million dollar bonus programs on wall street and eliminating the risk for a too big to fail institution that happened to have employed the secretary of the treasury is 'strained' to be labelled a bailout for billionaires.

And don't hesitate to explain the vote in Mass. last week.

How exactly is it 'strained' to depict that awful Senate bill as a corrupt mandated establishment of big health insurance companies as a permanent franchise chartered to extract rent from the docile neo-feudal peasants of 21st century America?

I assume you will also be wearing these rose colored glasses this november when we get our asses handed to us at the polls for all this change we have delivered.

It is what it is pal, and pretending otherwise is not helping.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HopeOverFear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 05:56 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. +1
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. Yeah, and I didn't know that until
posters at DU made it obvious.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bkozumplik Donating Member (391 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. oh please
I didnt vote for him to get a super pro-bank Fed.
I didnt vote for him to have a more robust defense dept, or expanded wars.
I didnt vote for him to have him colaborate with the repubs or the health care execs.

So dont give me this "You want everything on a silver platter" crap.

My working or not working for him wont make those things right, now will it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Chulanowa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:24 AM
Response to Reply #9
12. So you were an uninformed voter, ignorant of the issues
Edited on Sun Jan-24-10 12:25 AM by Chulanowa
Don't feel bad, it seems most of the people thumping their chests about how awful Obama is, are terribly ignorant about... Well, everything, to put it shortly

The fed has always been super pro-bank. Obama did not change that, through he is demanding accountability.. .Which in the annals of US presidency, is landmark.

Our wars have not expanded. We're drawing down Iraq, and are putting Afghanistan up to the proper level of US commitment. It's a long complicated subject, but the basic thing there is, it was a big job that was severely understaffed. Putting more people there means it can be finished more quickly and more effectively. I know you and many others desperately want Obama to look like Johnson on this, but that's not going to happen. Bush left Afghanistan unattended, it was falling apart, and the only way to fix it is to start attending to it - which yes, means more troops there.

You didn't elect him to collaborate... Okay. Now I know your grip on reality is tenuous at best. The big problem with Bush is that he and his party went everything alone. I'm, personally not a big fan of bipartisanship - Ronnie's old "we do not negotiate with terrorists" comes to mind, ironically - but i recognize the need to at least make the offer. Obama's bending too hard for my tastes on this as well. But when you remember that our Legislative majority rests on the positioning of a bunch of Democrats who are actually just republicans with a D next to their name...

You guys are, in all honestly, absolutely the same as the dumbfucks on the right. You're pissed that you're not getting every iota of your agenda passed in the first year. For you, everything is an absolute, black and white issue. There are no complexities in your world, no detailed considerations. if you don't get what you want, and NOW, by god, well, you're going to throw a screaming fucking tantrum. Just like your dumbfuck counterparts on the right did when Bush didn't criminalize Abortion, nuke Syria, or designate Christianity as the national religion.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #12
14. .
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warren Stupidity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 02:32 PM
Response to Original message
2. Um, fine but one year in this administration is as amateurish as
the Clinton administration on the practicality front. We can hope that they have learned something along the way, but from the noises emanating from Rahm's office, any lessons learned are being kept close to the vest. Advisors rarely if ever admit to their advisee that they fucked up.

"They dream, but they also know how to get down to brass tacks." In this case they sat on those tacks.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 02:39 PM
Response to Original message
4. Wonderful article. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 06:03 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
DeepModem Mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-23-10 07:21 PM
Response to Original message
10. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ildem09 Donating Member (472 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:37 AM
Response to Original message
13. The issue is that in modern politics POTUS only has 1 year
to really effect change. and implement an agenda. after the first year. congress gets to jittery to implement anything that groundshaking. then after that you have to run for reelection if you survive that your second term you have a year before you become a lame duck
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
johnaries Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 12:53 AM
Response to Original message
15. That's what so many people don't understand. They want a "quick
fix". Quick fixes are broken just as quickly. Obama is looking at the long term. I've seen so many people say "he could just pass an Executive Order". First of all, many of the things they talk about cannot be done with an ExO, unless they want him to grab even more power than Bush* did. Secondly, an ExO can easily be repealed by the next POTUS. Obama wants things done legally, correctly, and he wants them to work for the long term. That's a fine balancing act.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
azmouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jan-24-10 10:42 AM
Response to Original message
17. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 07:24 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion: Presidency Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC