It’s not just Fox News: How liberal apologists torpedoed change, helped make the Democrats safe

[newthinking]

It’s not just Fox News: How liberal apologists torpedoed change, helped make the Democrats safe for Wall Street

Center-left pundits have carried water for the president for six years. Their predictable excuses all ring hollow
Thomas Frank
SALON

http://www.salon.com/2015/01/11/its_not_just_fox_news_how_liberal_apologists_torpedoed_change_helped_make_the_democrats_safe_for_wall_street/

As the Obama administration enters its seventh year, let us examine one of the era’s greatest peculiarities: That one of the most cherished rallying points of the president’s supporters is the idea of the president’s powerlessness.

Today, of course, the Democrats have completely lost control of Congress and it’s easy to make the case for the weakness of the White House. For example, when Frank Bruni sighed last Wednesday that presidents are merely “buoys on the tides of history,” not “mighty frigates parting the waters,” he scarcely made a ripple.

But the pundit fixation on Obama’s powerlessness goes back many years. Where it has always found its strongest expression is among a satisfied stratum of centrist commentators—people who are well pleased with the president’s record and who are determined to slap down liberals who find fault in Obama’s leadership. The purveyors of this fascinating species of political disgust always depict the dispute in the same way, with hard-headed men of science (i.e., themselves) facing off against dizzy idealists who cluelessly rallied to Obama’s talk of hope and change back in 2008.

It is, in other words, a classic apologetic. The pundit, a clear-thinking, reality-based fellow (and yes, they are almost always fellows), knows that if you paid attention back in 2008 you understood that Obama wasn’t promising anything great. Plus, the president has delivered all kinds of subtle but awesome stuff that his soft-headed fans overlook. Besides, there are those awful racist Republicans. Good Christ! Would we rather have one of them in the Oval Office?

Continued:
http://www.salon.com/2015/01/11/its_not_just_fox_news_how_liberal_apologists_torpedoed_change_helped_make_the_democrats_safe_for_wall_street/

[hifiguy]

1. Thomas Frank is always the smartest person

in any room he is in.

[Enthusiast]

2. Kicked and recommended!

Spot on. If you do not recognize this by now you simply are not looking. I acknowledge it is an unpleasant reality. But it is reality nonetheless.

[Scuba]

3. Center-left? Nah.

[Rex]

4. The wording is just sad, liberal apologists? On what planet?

Why is the word 'moderate' or 'centrist' so hard for people use when it is the right word? Always those darn liberals.

[sulphurdunn]

5. There are only two viable political parties

in the US: A rightwing party and a far rightwing party.

[pscot]

6. If he's right, there's no point

to voting for Democrats.

[bbgrunt]

7. big K and R.

[SadWingsOfDestiny]

8. There is a growing group

that call them selves liberal when they really are not.


Let us make something clear.

Not Tea Party does not mean liberal. Being anti GOP is not liberal (it is common sense)

President Obama is not liberal.
Hillary is not liberal.

Chained CPI is not liberal
TPP is not liberal
Robotic assassination is not liberal
Affordable Care Act is not liberal.
Invading Iraq using false evidence is not liberal.
Coordinated Federal help for Mayors to "Crack down" on Occupy is not liberal.


Many folks here claim they are liberal. They are not.

I cannot be accused of carrying water for President Obama and not for the same talking points you get out of the crazy Fox crowd.

[Skeeter Barnes]

9. Everything you described is exactly what liberals are for.

Chained CPI is liberal
TPP is liberal
Robotic assassination is liberal
Affordable Care Act is liberal.
Invading Iraq using false evidence is liberal.
Coordinated Federal help for Mayors to "Crack down" on Occupy is liberal.

Hillary and Obama are most definitely liberals. Liberals are not leftists, despite what Fox News tells you. They do not support the working class.

Chomsky explains it at 2:25

[SadWingsOfDestiny]

10. The link does nothing for me.

Orwell: 2 + 2 =5

[Doctor_J]

11. to be precise, the du apologists no longer call themselves liberals.

But it's true that people like Krugman, who still considers himself a liberal, has abandoned liberalism for Obama and now Clinton. Good read

[hobbit709]

13. So we're liberals this week? Last week we were leftists.

Next week the the corporatist wing of the Democratic Party will call us dangerous radicals.