Well, here's MY meta-comment about the Rick Warren controversy

[lwcon]

In one word, I think the Warren controversy at DU is: healthy.

For people who felt that, shockingly, Obama was less-than-perfect, DU became a surreal and hostile place during the campaign. My mother, who doesn't frequent DU, recently admitted she thought Obama was "perfect," so she's been majorly bummed out to find out he's a mere mortal.

Finally, it seems, one can criticize the now-PE or push him to be more progressive.

"Hope, but verify" is my watchword. Obama will be at his best if progressives are loud and clear about how he can and must do better.

Collectively this simply didn't happen during the primaries or the campaign. He knew he could cave on FISA, promise to let faith-based groups "help set our national agenda," etc. with impunity.

It doesn't mean you hate or are undermining Obama if you think he's not above criticism. It means you're sane and honest and care about our country.

Glad to see that debate is back at DU.

[Shiver]

1. Agree, especially with this statement:

'Obama will be at his best if progressives are loud and clear about how he can and must do better.'

I would like to add that in addition to letting him know when we are angry (which we are damn good at doing), we also need to let him know when we're happy with what he's done. Standing up and speaking out need not be entirely negative - we had dozens of threads about Gates, Clinton, and Holder, but less than half a dozen about Chu, Polis, Shinseki and many of the progressives appointed as White House staff and personal advisers.

Getting vocal when we are upset is good, and is to be encouraged. But I think giving him kudos when we approve should be just as important. How else is the administration going to know what we like, if all we talk about is what we don't?

[BeFree]

4. Heh

"...if progressives are loud and clear..."

Loud, yes. Clear, not so much.

Our problem is that we run around like chickens with our heads cut off. Iraq war? Imprison Cheney?

That was so yesterday. Today we are eating ourselves...munch, munch, munch. Fried chicken, anyone?

[Shiver]

5. Yeah, that's the problem

We are loud, but hardly clear on many things. All that gets conveyed is the anger, not the reason for the anger.

Damn... now I'm hungry... pass me some...

[BeFree]

6. Fried Obama wings, anyone?

And we have plenty to be angry about, but we've turned our angry actions back on ourselves, much to our detriment.

Imagine a newcomer reading all this stuff here the last few days. F'n scary. Is it any wonder why new recruits to politics would rather play in the republican party?

[BlancheSplanchnik]

2. Good post!

In addition to Shiver's fav remark, I also like your slogan, "Hope, but verify". Good rule of thumb for life in general.

I like good rational thinking.

[glowing]

3. He said he will make mistakes: well this was def. one mistake.

[BeFree]

7. Maybe, maybe not

Hope they enjoyed eating a piece of him for that one little mistake, and let's hope they get their fill real soon. There are only so many Obama wings, and then it's all gone!

[glowing]

19. The President is on the wrong side of history honoring at this inauguration

a person who would work to keep equality and civil rights from a minority group.

[BeFree]

24. That's an elite position

This telling us how history is gonna judge Obama over this political gamble.

And casting Obama as someone who supports oppression of minorities. Oh, you may not have put it those words, but that is how I take your meaning.

Get over your bad self, would be my advice.

[glowing]

30. I don't think Obama thought. I think he was and is so into uniting that

he didn't think about issues that are black and white. Civil rights and equality are NOT for gamble. Our children and our grandkids will look at us like idiots for not allowing and striving always for equality.. Religion is not state sponsored for a reason.

[lwcon]

31. That's why this "uniting" has never sounded so great

"Unity" is inevitably defined as caving into authoritarian conservatives. There's never an gesture of "unity" with dedicated progressives. They're expected to follow wherever Obama leads them.

Look at the 1,000 threads on DU that call people who think Warren is a bad representative for this historic occasion "single-issue whiners" and the like, and act like the sky is falling because some Democrats dare to disagree with the PE.

[alwysdrunk]

13. In the end it will be a net win for Obama

He will lose some support, gain some support, but the main thing is he will blunt the edge of some of the most damaging weapons against him.

[lwcon]

17. Maybe Obama should do something harsher to

gays, women, and atheists? Since it will help blunt the opposition and all.

Any suggestions?

[AntiFascist]

28. He may win politically...

but that does not make him any less of a bigot when it comes to marriage equality, which erodes his character as far as I'm concerned. It seems to me that the current president did quite a bit to win politically as well, which eventually eroded his character, now look at how he has turned out?

[alwysdrunk]

8. Agree, but labeling him a bigot, vowing to work against his re-election

....is a little bit more than just healthy criticism. The fair critics can barely get a word in edgewise against the outright Obama bashers dominating the board.

[Jennicut]

10. I agree. Healthy debate allows room for all to debate

and I don't see that here right now. All I see here lately are people telling each other to F*ck off and F*ckin shut up if they do not agree with their particular view on this whole Warren thing. That goes for all points of view. I see nothing constructive being done. I tried:http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8008547&mesg_id=8008547
I now give up.

[LynneSin]

9. I don't know how it's healthy when I have people no longer talking to me

I don't support Warren but I'm also in recognition that this is an invocation and that Obama also has someone who strongly supports gay rights doing the benediction.

It was not a smart choice that Obama made but I suspect there is more to it then what meets the eyes. But it seems no matter what Obama does with ANYTHING there is someone here at DU pissed. For 8 years I knew who the enemy was and it was the republicans. Today I have no clue - for all I know it's me.

I support equal rights for the GLBT community 100% but I also know this is not OUR inauguration - it's the country's inauguration. Why Warren was picked will always baffle me but that doesn't change my support for PE Obama or for my GLBT friends in any way.

[Liberal Veteran]

25. I sorta know how you feel. I'm waiting for my toaster to be repossessed

:hug:

[Marrah_G]

32. Perhaps some private communication with them would be better

I suggest a phone call if possible.

[WillyT]

11. Also... A Reminder From FDR... And Digby...

FDR was, of course, a consummate political leader. In one situation, a group came to him urging specific actions in support of a cause in which they deeply believed. He replied: "I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it."

He understood that a President does not rule by fiat and unilateral commands to a nation. He must build the political support that makes his decisions acceptable to our countrymen. He read the public opinion polls not to define who he was but to determine where the country was – and then to strategize how he could move the country to the objectives he thought had to be carried out.

If Obama wants to govern as liberally as the political circumstances allow, then we need to work to make sure that the political circumstances include a strong liberal base. Mindlessly cheerleading out of a misplaced sense of loyalty will not help him. As Roosevelt understood, politics are interlocking interests and constituencies that have to be brought to bear to achieve certain goals.

In the current political world, I believe that Obama and the Democrats need a strong left wing that is out there agitating in order that we can continue to build popular support and also give them a political excuse to do things that the political establishment finds too liberal. Being cheerleaders all the time, however enjoyable that is, is not going to help them. Leaving them out there with no left wing cripples them.

One of the problems for Democrats has been that there has not been an effective progressive voice pushing the edge of the envelope. Therefore, when they inevitably "go to the middle" as politicians often feel they must do, the middle become further and further right. It is my belief that one of the roles of the progressive movement is to keep pulling the politicians back to the left, which often means that we are not being publicly "supportive," in order that we really do end up in the middle instead of farther to the right than the country actually is.

More: http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2008/11/making-him-do-it-by-digby-i-was-reading.html

:shrug:

[Zenlitened]

15. An excellent response to an excellent OP.

K&R for both. :thumbsup:

[lwcon]

16. thx n/t

[hardeeboy]

12. message

I don't know why people take things so personal myself, I have no probelm with the man myself. To each their own. This is starting to be the united states of the offended. Life is good, enjoy yourself and don't be so wound up about things.

[lwcon]

14. Status quo we can believe in! n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

26. More like

The United Straights of America if you ask me.

[AtomicKitten]

18. If it were only discussion, I would agree.

Unfortunately too many people at DU express their displeasure by attacking other DU'ers, and that isn't healthy behavior in any group.

[lwcon]

20. Compared to the STFU culture during the primaries

Honest disagreement is a breath of fresh air.

If some posts are crappy and rude, it doesn't change the overall sense that we're getting our groove back, able to hash out ideas again.

[kath]

21. There was an interesting article in The American Prospect a few months back that pertains to this

issue of "pushing him to be more progressive":
Where Do We Move When America MovesOn?:
Victory could pose an existential challenge for the grass-roots groups that arose in opposition to Bush. A MoveOn.org veteran examines the challenge and its opportunities. http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=where_do_we_move_when_america_moveson

This transformation is what so many of us have been fighting for over the last 10 years of Gingrich-Bush-Rove-dominated politics. But, ironically, a brand-new context could pose an existential challenge for the independent grass-roots forces that helped to get us here. Groups like MoveOn.org that were born and bred in an era of opposition will have to act fast to avoid a weakening of outsider progressive pressure just when we need it the most.
{snip}

Fortunately, we're not the first country where progressives have gone from opposition to power in the Internet era.

For the last 11 years, Australians suffered under the Bush-like administration of Prime Minister John Howard. As in the U.S., a new generation of high-tech, action-based opposition emerged, including GetUp.org.au, which was based on the MoveOn model and now has even more members per capita.

In the 2007 election, GetUp members played a big role in toppling Howard and replacing him with the relatively progressive Kevin Rudd. Now our friends Down Under have had nine months to grapple with the challenge of pushing the popular new government to "go big."

After the election, GetUp members gathered in hundreds of local meetings to dream up their top priorities for a "People's Agenda," much of which found its way into the high-profile of several Parliament members' "maiden speeches." When GetUp hired an economist to cost out the major priorities, some of the findings were used in Rudd's first budget. It's a great example of how to form the harder, slower consensus about what we're for and of how to shape the agenda from the outside. The MoveOn "Positive Agenda" developed in 2006 sets a precedent for what can be done in the U.S. GetUp played an even more imaginative role in the campaign for reconciliation between white and indigenous Australians. Before the election, GetUp campaigned for the new Parliament to issue a long overdue apology to the members of the "stolen generation"--indigenous children taken by the Australian government as recently as 1971 to be raised in white society. And in February, that's exactly what happened. But after winning the capacity to do more, the group's members believed it was only the first step toward the greater reconciliation Australia needed. So GetUp members took the challenge into their own hands. First, they placed outside the Parliament building thousands of candles that spelled out: "Sorry: The first step." {much more}

[JohnnyLib2]

22. Pushing him (or her) " to be more progressive" is where I usually am.

That makes it especially nice to read about being "sane and honest and care about our country."

Nicely put, thanks. K & R

[lwcon]

23. You can't imagine what a relief it is

To hear talk like that around here.

[democrattotheend]

27. I agree that we ought to hold him accountable

I just believe we ought to pick our battles, and save our fire for policy fights rather than fights over symbolism, no matter how much we may abhor a symbolic move.

[lwcon]

29. Why are Democrats so inclined

To "keep their powder dry."

Republican indignation is a renewable resource, but we're always tiptoeing around. Odd that.