Obama-bashers, read and learn?

[bos1]

I don't mean to provoke by using the "Obama-bashers" term; I just hope that someone might read this and learn from my experience. I will try to be as brief and clear as possible.

Back in the day, I was excited when Bill Clinton was elected, relieved to see the Reagan/Bush era end, to have GHW Bush lose after one term, after living through the Iran-Contra and S&L scandals, the US waging illegal wars and supporting death squads in the Americas... generally, the incredible rise in militarism during that time.

When Clinton sent missiles into Iraq in his very first year in office, ostensibly over an assassination plot against GHW Bush that sounded as laughably bogus as it turned out to be, I pretty much threw in the towel on supporting Clinton. I felt that he was just another pro-military puppet.

Later, I came to understand that I had been naive. I learned more about what is possible in politics, and came to appreciate what Clinton achieved -- such as an economic miracle in balancing the budget and reversing the first Bush deficits, some reductions in military spending, a general PR victory against the right wing lunacy that has so much power in the US. I saw that my "everything or nothing" view had been impulsive and immature. The installation into the White House by judicial fiat of GW Bush, and his vivid example of true warmongering and maliciousness, helped cement this view.

Nowadays, I appreciate the radical voices that want change right away, that want justice immediately, that can't stand compromise in the face of the evils concocted by US military corporate control of the system, by throwing soft drug users into prisons, by the appalling lack of national healthcare, by an administration that legitimized torture and waged a war that was one big war crime going unpunished -- another long list I don't need to go into.

But I also understand that Obama has already done incredibly good things after only a couple months in office. I understand he is up against a right wing PR onslaught that is more extreme than anything seen in four decades, at least. I really see him as very promising so far (stopping Gitmo trials, opening relations with Cuba, taking strong stands against torture, reversing the US image abroad in one fell swoop -- that list is long, too), and is in some ways a positive force just by being in office at this time, I will support him even through the decisions I don't appreciate, for the time being.

Don't be so quick to reject Obama if he fails our idealistic expectations on one or two issues or instances. Appreciate what we have, while fighting for what's right. That's all.

[damonm]

1. Well said - proudly recommended.

[sui generis]

2. well at least you own up to "Obama Bashers" being

inciteful as opposed to insightful

Unlike another similarly monikered thread title . . .

Seriously, when someone says "everyone who doesn't agree with me beats their wife, but they need not post here" it begs a smackdown.

[Cha]

3. Thanks for telling your

experience.

[RaleighNCDUer]

4. ...more extreme than anything seen in four decades...

Yep - my memory is not so far gone that I don't remember Clinton, and the RW attacks on Obama after less than 3 months are as virulent as anything I saw against Clinton after 7 years.

[GeorgeGist]

5. Fanatics only learn what they read.

"We have been through a dark and painful chapter in our history. But at a time of great challenges and disturbing disunity, nothing will be gained by spending our time and energy laying blame for the past."

[americanstranger]

6. I tried to make a simliar point in another thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8361285

- AS

[Luminous Animal]

7. I reject substantive criticism of some of Obama's policies...

as bashing.

I do assert that characterizing such criticism as "bashing" or "hating" is a tactic developed by the right wing to quash discussion.

[bos1]

9. yes, I didn't intend that, just wanted to reach those who some might call bashers. nt

[Egnever]

8. Great post

Deserves a kick.

[Seldona]

10. Disagreeing with a policy proposal does not make one a basher.

Do some take it over the top? I am sure. That doesn't change the fact that not only is it a fundamental American right to address grievances, it is our duty as citizens to do so.

Keeps them honest. Seems perfectly healthy to me.

[bigjohn16]

11. For me this was not an issue I could just respectfully disagree on.

I'm very glad that President Obama decided to sharpen his administrations stance on this issue. I hope that the calls and letters sent by people here on DU and other made this easier for him. I'm cautiously optimistic for now and hope that at the very least we get and open and fair investigation.

[mkultra]

12. Dont waste your breath

The only think the thickheaded critics will consider in this post is your choice of words. K&R

[bos1]

15. well people did read, but don't know if anyone benefited. eom

[BlooInBloo]

28. Yup.

[Skwmom]

13. Oh yeah, you just got to love that Clinton economic miracle.

NAFTA, China getting favorite trade status, the repeal of regulation that served this country well for decades, etc.

Wow, I just don't know how many more economic miracles this country can take.

Of course, your post doesn't even compare to one about Clinton blaming Sanders for not pushing him to do the right thing for the American People (I forget the exact issue). Oh no, it wasn't Clinton's fault that he didn't do the right thing, it was the supremely powerful Bernie Sanders who just didn't push Clinton hard enough. :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:


There is a big difference between compromising and selling out. All I can say is the mind sure does have the infinite capacity to rationalize.

[mkultra]

14. sooo you dont like clinton and you bash Obama?

Who the hell do you like?

[bos1]

16. in 80s, balancing budget was considered impossible. Clinton did it. End of story. sorry bout that

[Orsino]

21. Propping up a system of ever-increasing inequities of wealth?

Balancing the budget was a considerable achievement, but hardly the end of the story. It was merely another battle in the ongoing class war.

[mkultra]

31. Its either that or full redistribution

Guess which one has never worked.

[Romulox]

17. Clinton and the entire "Third Way" group shifted the dialogue HARD to the right for a generation

[autorank]

18. Did you appreciate this?

Table 13: Calculations of Excess (Attributable) Mortality among Under Five-Year-Olds (Most Likely Model)
During the 1990's.


227,000 "under five-year-olds' dead due to the total embargo of the 1990's.


See Table 13

[chknltl]

26. Interesting Link Thanks, bookmarked

Off topic:
I recall Rep. Jim McDermott quoting from this study after he returned from Iraq just prior to bush's Shock and Awe attacks. Now I need to find a comparative study for the period covering bush's fiasco over there. I believe that the embargo was quite devastating to the children of Iraq but I suspect as bad as it was, it pales in comparison to what the children have gone through over the past 8 years.

[autorank]

27. Good to keep an open mind

Here's a summary on casualty estimates for 1990-2000 in Wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Casualty_Estimates

The link I gave above is based on meticulous research, 227,000 under five children. So anyone who comes in at below that number for total deaths is just wrong.

"The sanctions, the toughest in history, are killing up to 6,000 Iraqis a month, according to Denis Halliday, a former UN coordinator of humanitarian aid to Iraq."

That's a lot of months in 10 years.

2003 INVASION

Current civilian death tolls from the U.S. invasion have a better measure although they're not
publicized very well. Johns Hopkins School of Public Health estimated 650,000 deaths thorugh 2005/early 2006. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6040054.stm

ORB, a British polling firm, estimated over 1,000,000 dead Iraqi civilians due to the disruptions
and civil strife caused by the Bush-Cheney invasion. http://www.opinion.co.uk/Newsroom_details.aspx?NewsId=78

They did the survey again and came up with a higher figure a year later, closer to 1.2 million dead
civilians.

Here's a summary from "Project Censored" on invasion deaths and displacement.
http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-over-one-million-iraqi-deaths-caused-by-us-occupation/

What a mess.

[firedupdem]

19. rec'd n/t

[Raineyb]

20. Thank you for using every meme about people who have had criticism of Obama

That is really quite helpful. Now I'm sure that people who have more than likely thought about what their positions are can feel good at yet more dismissal of their thought processes. That's always good for having discussions I find.

:sarcasm:

[bos1]

23. I don't do memes. I don't do sarcasm. Best of luck to you.

[Orsino]

22. You meant to provoke by using the term "Obama-bashers."

I appreciate your commercial for the long view; that ought to be a source of comfort for us all. Every citizen should keep a careful accounting, however, of the good and bad deeds that are done along the way. When a nuanced, stealthy approach to torture prosecution begins to look too much like stonewalling, for example, it's our duty to nudge the president in the right direction--if only to be sure that caution doesn't give way to cowardice. Whatever Obama's intentions, he can't do it all. We simply expect him to lead intelligently and compassionately.

[demmiblue]

24. Of course you do.

[demmiblue]

25. Added: obama supporter with many issues

[Name removed]

29. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dorkulon]

30. I support him when he's right, dissent when he's wrong.

What more can anyone expect? Of course he was the right choice, given the options. But it's not "bashing" to be disappointed if nothing happens on torture, or to be wary of all the trillions being handed over to Wall Street. Obviously, we will all have to wait and see how it all turns out, but in the meantime, we argue about it. That's what we do here, right?