Is Obama lying or naïve?

[lwcon]

Poll question: Is Obama lying or naïve?

If you're on DU right now (and I think you are), I reckon that odds are good that you believe the following:

America's major political/governmental problems over the last 7 years (and more, if you want to start counting with Nixon or any of his partymates in-between) stem from the ruthlessness, corruption, incompetence, and valuelessness of http://correntewire.com/why_you_cant_reason_with_a_republican">today's Republican Party.

However, I'd peg the odds as poor that you believe this:

America's problems are substantially caused by a comparably out-of-control leftwing/progressive Democratic force.

So when Barack Obama rails against "partisanship" and says "we can't afford four more years of the same divisive food fight in Washington" -- as opposed to saying, say, "we can't afford four more years of Republican malfeasance" -- is he lying (glossing over the truth to get more votes) or is he naïve (he doesn't understand what he's going up against)?

[cali]

1. um, I make it a point not to vote in push polls

they're vaguely insulting.

[sniffa]

2. i voted

:popcorn:

[Dawgs]

3. He rails against Bush and the Republicans all the time.

How about a poll asking if you are ignorant, wrong, or lying?

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. bad choice. How about foolish, inane, shallow?

[ecstatic]

5. I hate RWers as much as anyone here, but common sense dictates that we can't continue

to go on like this... completely divided. I don't know how Obama intends to address the problem, because the RW machine is hate-filled, very nasty and hard to reason with... I guess we'll just have to see. The only way, IMO, is to shut right wing radio/TV down.

[Cameron27]

8. I don't even think shutting down right wing radio/TV

will do it. How do you find common ground with people who will continue to fight against abortion, gay rights, stem cell research, global climate change, scientific advancement, teaching evolution in the classroom, federal assistance to the poor, maintaining the line between church and state, capital punishment, and don't get me started on foreign policy.

Our new Democratic Congress started out with an aim to reach out, they called for bipartisanship from the day one, and look how well that turned out.

[lwcon]

10. Bingo. n/t

[Terry_M]

6. It's not just "the republican party"

I don't believe the first statement.. There are enough corporate democrats to make the statement inaccurate.

[lwcon]

7. Corporate Democrats would be on the same side...

... of that food fight as the Repubs, no?

So they're not part of the phantom "other side" (which of course is the dirty fucking hippies) in the food fight.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[Vickers]

9. You need one more option: "Push polls suck."

:thumbsup:

[chieftain]

11. When do we get a chance to vote on whether he is still beating

his wife?

[lwcon]

20. I'm not sure, but he's still beating...

Edwards and Hillary at the moment, and I'm seriously worried about how so-called centrist he's going to be, given his repudiation of the reality of modern day anti-GOP politics.

Oh, I'm sorry I said "anti." That harshes the mellow. I'll say three Hail Oprahs and do a couple of rounds of Kumbaya.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[chieftain]

25. Amusing response. Bitter but amusing. (eom)

[journalist3072]

12. I say he's both..a lying sack of crap, and he's naive.

[Infinite Hope]

13. No "lie" in his quote. nt

[parasim]

14. Since this poll appears to be a cross-post from Daily Kos...

(http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/5/94124/11339/215/430995)

...I'll take the opportunity to relay an excellent rebuttal (imho) from dkoz poster Joe B:

Read his own words on this topic: (20+ / 0-)

Let me be clear: I am not arguing that the Democrats should trim their sails and be more "centrist." In fact, I think the whole "centrist" versus "liberal" labels that continue to characterize the debate within the Democratic Party misses the mark. Too often, the "centrist" label seems to mean compromise for compromise sake, whereas on issues like health care, energy, education and tackling poverty, I don't think Democrats have been bold enough.

Our goal should be to stick to our guns on those core values that make this country great, show a spirit of flexibility and sustained attention that can achieve those goals, and try to create the sort of serious, adult, consensus around our problems that can admit Democrats, Republicans and Independents of good will. This is more than just a matter of "framing," although clarity of language, thought, and heart are required. It's a matter of actually having faith in the American people's ability to hear a real and authentic debate about the issues that matter.

Finally, I am not arguing that we "unilaterally disarm" in the face of Republican attacks, or bite our tongue when this Administration screws up. Whenever they are wrong, inept, or dishonest, we should say so clearly and repeatedly; and whenever they gear up their attack machine, we should respond quickly and forcefully. I am suggesting that the tone we take matters, and that truth, as best we know it, be the hallmark of our response.

My dear friend Paul Simon used to consistently win the votes of much more conservative voters in Southern Illinois because he had mastered the art of "disagreeing without being disagreeable," and they trusted him to tell the truth. Similarly, one of Paul Wellstone's greatest strengths was his ability to deliver a scathing rebuke of the Republicans without ever losing his sense of humor and affability. In fact, I would argue that the most powerful voices of change in the country, from Lincoln to King, have been those who can speak with the utmost conviction about the great issues of the day without ever belittling those who opposed them, and without denying the limits of their own perspectives.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/9/30/102745/165/500/153069

by Joe B on Sat Jan 05, 2008 at 06:56:27 AM PST

[rucky]

15. He's taking away the labels, and taking steps towards reconciliation.

The effect could go two ways:

It could either push progressive politics out of the picture completely, or the most widely-appealing planks of the progressive platform could be folded into a new form of mainstream politics that i think he's trying to create.

If we really do want peace in American culture, we're going to have to put our pride in our pocket (not our principles) and give up the labels that both set off the opposition and marginalize ourselves out of the mainstream.

I'm not saying I buy into that whole-hog, but this is how I interpret what Obama's trying to do.

[lwcon]

18. Which behavior from the GOP since...

... the Contract on America suggests a willingness to do anything to a hand reached across the aisle other than bite it off?

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[Skidmore]

23. If you pay attention, he is not challenging the political establishment

to reconciliation, he is challenging the people to take up common cause in revitalizing the nation and reclaiming our Constitution. He knows the political machineries are too firmly entrenched in their scripts to change. It is up to us to change and to own our government. Politicians may wish to join, and if they can't participate they should be sent packing.

[rucky]

34. He's not talking to Washington. n/t

[lwcon]

35. I misunderstood

I thought "we can't afford four more years of the same divisive food fight in Washington" referred to the District of Columbia.

My bad.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[Enrique]

16. or maybe you misunderstand him?

or maybe he just disagrees with you?

[SOS]

17. Do you have a link for this?

"America's problems are substantially caused by a comparably out-of-control leftwing/progressive Democratic force"

A Google of this sentence brings only one hit: this thread.

[lwcon]

19. A good example is cited in the OP

He equivalates the left's behavior with the right's: "the same divisive food fight in Washington"

See, by way of commentary, here:

http://words-of-power.blogspot.com/2008/01/campaign-08-update-open-letter-to-sen.html

And here:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/1/133841/9311/412/428780


And still-more progressive-bashing from Obama:

“I think it’s important particularly for those of us in the Democratic party to not cede values and faith to any one party.”

“For progressives, I think we should recognize the role that values and culture play in addressing some of our most urgent social problems… I think progressives would do well to take this to heart….”

“…the discomfort of some progressives with any hint of religion has often prevented us from effectively addressing issues in moral terms.”

In other words religon = values = Republicans, unless Dems get properly more religiose. Progressives and secularists' concerns about the religiosity as a litmus test for the presidency is, in Obama's position misguided. He's publicly ratifying the GOP straw man that says that defending the separation of church and state is some form of religious intolerance on the part of progressives. I proudly voted for Evangelical Christian Jimmy Carter... who has since written an excellent book on the perniciousness of this creeping theocracy. In November, I may have to check an X next to Obama's name. But, as things stand, much less proudly.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[SOS]

21. So the sentence in question -

"America's problems are substantially caused by a comparably out-of-control leftwing/progressive Democratic force" was not spoken by Obama?

How can a person make a distinction of "naive" or "lying" when the examples set forth are not quotes, but rather made up out of thin air?

[lwcon]

27. What part of "divisive food fight" don't you understand?

Have you heard the man talk? It's all about "no more bickering, you kids."

A typical "pox on both of you partisan groups" moment here:
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/09/20/372106.aspx

First he condemned the MoveOn Petraeus ad, disagreed with the Senate vote against it, and abstained from voting either way on it.

The framing always dings lefties as much as righties.

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[THUNDER HANDS]

22. what is naive is believing

that you can yell at republicans and expect them to give you what you want. Or pretend like they don't exist and promise supporters the moon and stars and say that if you just "fight them for it" we'll be able to take it.

The issue is not about who fights harder, but who fights smarter.

[lwcon]

29. Nancy and Harry have tried capitulating to Republicans

That doesn't seem to have accomplished much, has it?

___

The Vast Left-Wing Conspiracy, now at my new home: Correntewire.com

[krabigirl]

24. He's lying. A snake in a nice suit with a happy smile.

[intaglio]

26. You missed one option

Obama is - like Edwards and Clinton - a politician. He and they are not wonderful fairies who can speak nothing but the truth and neither are they dispicable imps who speak nothing but lies; they are human, political creatures who probably believe that they can do good things for their country and the world. All will speak in ways which allow their supporters, and those who might support them, to see good things; whilst those who oppose them will see nothing but deception.

The actions of politicians will speak louder but our understanding of those actions must be tempered by the knowledge that what they are engaged in is "The art of the possible" (Bismark). True politicians want to bring as many people together in change as possible, because an imposed change will be reversed. This, in turn, means they may need to indulge in gradualism, accepting less than desire to ensure the acceptance of the basic concept of what they wish to achieve. It also means that they must be able to accept when they are wrong or out of step with the their society or times.

Contrast this with the demagogues that have been thrown up by the Goopers ...

[Sulawesi]

28. And for the next poll...when did he stop beating his wife...

[featherman]

30. Is this poll garbage or trash?

[Jai4WKC08]

31. I think he's reasonably sincere

There may be some pandering to the folks who want to believe one side is as bad as the other. But on the whole, I think he believes it too.

If Obama gets the nomination, he'll find out when the GOP machine hands him his ass on a platter. Just like Kerry did when he saw Repub "friends" like McCain and Dole turned on him, and Clark did when his Repub "brothers-in-arms" went partisan.

[lwcon]

33. I guess the naive option worries me more

I suppose one can swallow the pill that "all politicians are liars," but if he really thinks today's GOP will do anything but fuel the corporatist machine at the expense of the little guy, it's going to be a painful comeuppance.

Seems to me at best, he'll be a (Bill) Clintonesque equivocator, and that's not so bad relatively speaking, but not as good as we truly need.

[H2O Man]

32. No.

He isn't the one who is.