Dear Mr. Obama

I read this with sad recognition:

In other words: it makes no difference to us how much we stomp on liberals' beliefs or how much they squawk, because we'll just wave around enough pictures of Michele Bachmann and scare them into unconditional submission. That's the Democratic Party's core calculation: from "hope" in 2008 to a rank fear-mongering campaign in 2012.  Will it work?  The ones who will determine if it will are the intended victims of that tactic: angry, impotent liberals whom the White House expects will snap dutifully into line no matter what else happens (even, as seems likely, massive Social Security and Medicare cuts) between now and next November.

The Liberal Party of Canada used "Scare the lefties" for years, and it worked very well-- until it didn't. I think you are where the Liberals were about eight years ago. I will not give away the ending, but let's just say it didn't end well for them. I have always called you the"Paul Martin" of American politics. Every day you get closer to sharing his fate.

Recommend this Post

Signs The American MSM Is Crazy

Number 1: Frank Rich suggests that the reason Obama is acting like the a conservative Democrat is due to the Stockholm Syndrome. If this is so, Mr. Obama has been suffering from it for a long time. At least since his days at the Harvard Law Review. Obama is what he has always been. "Progressives" got suckered before his election -- as usual. And it is driving them nuts.

Recommend this Post

Dare To Compare

To understand why we on the left may have some difficulty with Iggy's idea of "coalition", you need to take a look at a case study of Iggy style "coalition" in action. The key concepts to remember if you are a leftist in such a "coalition" are, sit down, shut up, don't criticize us even if we our policies are right wing.

Recommend this Post

Meanwhile Other Issues Go On (Or Don't)

President Obama is now without any kind of carbon strategy at all. Harper must be delighted.

Recommend this Post

The Agony Of The American Left: A Lesson

It is instructive following Ian Welsh's documentation of the disillusionment of the American left, about Obama(even though people like Ian did warn them). Obama is just acting like any Canadian Liberal would if placed in the same situation. Indeed, Obama's campaign was a proto-typical Liberal campaign -- he used meaningless platitudes like "hope" to sucker the "progressives" into projecting their lefty hearts' desires onto him. Then once the election is over, Obama thanked them very much and then ruled according to the wishes of the corporations that own the country.

Leftists in Canada should take this as a warning. Never get into bed with Liberals (and that includes third way New Democrats). They will use you for their own gain and then dump your sorry ass to the curb when it suits them.

Update: "Progressives" should tuck this away for future reference. Whenever Iggy and the boys begin singing Kumbaya in the next election (and you just know they will), remember who is conducting the show from the wings. Hint, it aint the progressive wing of the Liberal party.

Recommend this Post

Don't Call Obama "Mr. Dithers"

Call him "The Waffler".

Recommend this Post

Bob Herbert Is Mad

Not mad enough to call Obama a "corporate whore", like someone I know, but mad none the less.

Recommend this Post

Robert Reich On Obama's Secret Dealings WIth Big Pharma

I want universal health insurance. And having had a front-row seat in 1994 when Big Pharma and the rest of the health-industry complex went to battle against it, I can tell you firsthand how big and effective the onslaught can be. So I appreciate Big Pharma's support this time around, and I like it that the industry is doing the reverse of what it did last time, and airing ads to persuade the public of the rightness of the White House's effort.

But I also care about democracy, and the deal between Big Pharma and the White House frankly worries me. It's bad enough when industry lobbyists extract concessions from members of Congress, which happens all the time. But when an industry gets secret concessions out of the White House in return for a promise to lend the industry's support to a key piece of legislation, we're in big trouble. That's called extortion: An industry is using its capacity to threaten or prevent legislation as a means of altering that legislation for its own benefit. And it's doing so at the highest reaches of our government, in the office of the president.

Go read the rest. It is important.

Recommend this Post

Summer Blah's And American Healthcare Follies

I haven't been posting much lately. The crappy weather, combined with a certain amount of outrage fatigue, have taken a toll. But, I have been reading other people's stuff. Yes I have. And if you read nothing else today, read Ian Welsh's piece on the debacle that is the Obama healthcare plan. I am so glad Tommy Douglas got us healthcare before big pharma and big insurance were as organized as they are today. Now, I am going back to look outside for any sign of the sun.

Recommend this Post

No Wonder People Are Against Bailouts

When the government involved privatizes profit and socializes risk, the taxpayers are always the loser. So it should come as no surprise that popular opinion is against bailouts of any kind. The problem isn't in the bailout, but in the government's attitude toward the private sector. Joseph Stiglitz explains how the bank bailout in the U.S. is set up:

In theory, the administration’s plan is based on letting the market determine the prices of the banks’ “toxic assets” — including outstanding house loans and securities based on those loans. The reality, though, is that the market will not be pricing the toxic assets themselves, but options on those assets.

The two have little to do with each other. The government plan in effect involves insuring almost all losses. Since the private investors are spared most losses, then they primarily “value” their potential gains. This is exactly the same as being given an option.

Consider an asset that has a 50-50 chance of being worth either zero or $200 in a year’s time. The average “value” of the asset is $100. Ignoring interest, this is what the asset would sell for in a competitive market. It is what the asset is “worth.” Under the plan by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, the government would provide about 92 percent of the money to buy the asset but would stand to receive only 50 percent of any gains, and would absorb almost all of the losses. Some partnership!

Assume that one of the public-private partnerships the Treasury has promised to create is willing to pay $150 for the asset. That’s 50 percent more than its true value, and the bank is more than happy to sell. So the private partner puts up $12, and the government supplies the rest — $12 in “equity” plus $126 in the form of a guaranteed loan.

If, in a year’s time, it turns out that the true value of the asset is zero, the private partner loses the $12, and the government loses $138. If the true value is $200, the government and the private partner split the $74 that’s left over after paying back the $126 loan. In that rosy scenario, the private partner more than triples his $12 investment. But the taxpayer, having risked $138, gains a mere $37.

In effect the Obama administration is forcing the American taxpayer to take on the majority of the risk, on behalf of the crooks who put the world's economy into the dumper. To me, it is completely rational for the American people to be sickened by this "remedy". This is change we can believe in? Don't make me laugh. It is the same old crony capitalism peddled by a much better sideshow barker.

Recommend this Post

Hey Paul Krugman

It must be hard for the Paul Martin wing of the Democratic Party to hear coherent criticism coming from a Nobel Prize winner. Then again, toadying to Wall Street during a populist uprising can't be easy either.



H/t to West End Bob.

Recommend this Post

Words Of Warning

From Paul Krugman, on the Paul Martinesque, establishment-approved, neo-liberal, Obama administration. As someone once said, "The problem with being 'middle of the road' is that's where the traffic is". As Martin found out, trying to be all things to all people leads to disaster. Obama has time to turn it around, but I don't think it is in his nature to be anything but a conciliator.

Recommend this Post

And People Wonder Why I Am Cynical

News Item: Hoyer: Obama Unlikely to Investigate Torture. Obama talks right pretty, but he is, in the end, an empty-suit liberal.

Added Bonus Snark: America won't torture... unless it is necessary.

Friday Update:Glenn Greenwald calls Bullshit.

Recommend this Post

I Am With Krugman

Obama is going to have to stop feeding Republican delusions with public money and spend tax dollars where they will do the most good. He needs to set an example for Canadian Republicans, who are just itching to gut the treasury here, in the name of "stimulus".

Recommend this Post

A New Record

"Progressive" disillusion with Obama begins before he is even sworn in.

Recommend this Post