Obama Told Us To Speak Out, But Is He Listening? By William Greider

[Better Believe It]

Obama Told Us To Speak Out, But Is He Listening?
By William Greider
Washington Post
March 22, 2009

The president is getting what he asked for, but perhaps not what he had in mind. During the campaign, Barack Obama beckoned Americans to put aside their cynicism about politics and re-engage as active citizens. They are now doing so with red-hot anger. They are outraged by events and forcing their way into congressional affairs and behind closed doors where policy wonks discuss issues with cerebral civility. The president is now trapped between these two realms -- the governing elites who decide things and the people who are governed. Which side is he on? If he does not choose wisely, the anger could devour his presidency.

Something fundamental has been altered in American politics. Encouraged by Obama's message of hope, agitated by darkening economic prospects, many people have thrown off sullen passivity and are trying to reclaim their role as citizens. This disturbs the routines of Washington but has great potential for restoring a functioning democracy. Timely intervention by the people could save the country from some truly bad ideas now circulating in Washington and on Wall Street. Ideas that could lead to the creation of a corporate state, legitimized by government and financed by everyone else. Once people understand the concept, expect a lot more outrage.

What's changed the president's situation? During the past nine months, gigantic financial bailouts amid collapsing economic life made visible the crippling divide between governing elites and citizens at large. People everywhere learned a blunt lesson about power, who has it and who doesn't. They watched Washington rush to rescue the very financial interests that caused the catastrophe. They learned that government has plenty of money to spend when the right people want it. "Where's my bailout," became the rueful punch line at lunch counters and construction sites nationwide. Then to deepen the insult, people watched as establishment forces re-launched their campaign for "entitlement reform" -- a euphemism for whacking Social Security benefits, Medicare and Medicaid.

Obama's approach so far is devoted to restoring Wall Street's famous names, and his economic advisers tell him this is the "responsible" imperative, no matter that it might offend the unwashed public. Obama evidently agrees. He does not seem to grasp that the tone-deaf technocrats are leading him into a dead-end.

The president needs to hear a second opinion -- millions of them.

People are angry, but they want this president to succeed. Mobilized citizens can help him to prevail. If he goes with the other side, they will bring him down.

Please read the complete article at:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR2009031902511_pf.html

[BeFree]

1. Problem is

Of those million voices there are probably half a million different ideas. How in the hell can anyone listen to all that?

So what we million need to do is focus: keep focusing on the republicans and what they did. Focus on gas prices, the war, the MIC, and health care. We can't be swayed from the big things. Obama will hear and can listen to 10 groups of 100,000 people.

[pscot]

4. There may be a lot of different voices

but they are coalescing pretty clearly around a single message: no more money for the Wall Street mafia who got us into this mess. People want the bailout reined in, and they want to know that the President is calling the shots, not the Wall Street wise guys. Unfortunately he seems to have surrounded himself with Wall Street wise guys. And they seem to be running things to benefit the bankers rather than the public. If the President goes along with this, it will be seen by the public as a fundamental betrayal of everything he campaigned on.

[Better Believe It]

5. The people want Obama to control Wall Street and end Wall Streets control over the government!

Is that really so hard to understand?

Obama and the Democratic Party needs to do that or the Republicans will parade around pretending to be anti-Wall Street populists!

[chimpymustgo]

6. Exactly. And stop throwing OUR money at the banksters.

[BeFree]

7. Heh

All this "I want it all and I want it now" sounds like a bunch of five year olds who need a nap!

Some of you won't be happy unless he changes everything going back to raygun, and he hasn't done it yet! Guess what, grow up.

[Zenlitened]

8. You seem to be confusing Direction with Distance Covered.

:shrug:

[BeFree]

9. His direction is fine

You just don't know it. Besides, he is doing what he promised.

[ProSense]

2. From the OP article: "The immediate impetus is the latest outrage from the financial sector."

...AIG, the failed insurance giant on government life support, proceeded to hand out $165 million in employee bonuses. Because Washington has pumped $170 billion into this zombie corporation, people quickly grasped that AIG was redistributing their tax money. On March 13, the White House sent out Larry Summers, the president's economic adviser, to explain things. Government has no choice, Summers said, because this is a government of laws and we must honor contracts. On Monday, the president scrapped that line, hoping to dodge the outrage.

Good cause people are angry about these bonuses.

[polichick]

3. Here's what I hope the President remembers throughout his term...

"People are angry, but they want this president to succeed. Mobilized citizens can help him to prevail."

[Better Believe It]

10. And also remember that ....

If Obama "goes with the other side, they will bring him down."

[Occam Bandage]

11. The People do not speak as a unified bloc.

It's easy to say "the People want X," but yet when it comes time to put pen to paper and write the jots and tittles of legislation, the only thing that it's clear that The People each had their own particular ideas of what X meant and how it might be gotten.

[Jennicut]

12. Yup. My parents think he is a socialist but never mind that.

I think most want him to succeed and need to also vent their anger at govt. and wall st. The way to fix all the problems in the economy however are very complicated and not everyone agrees. Not everyone wants the banks to be nationalized but they want the problem fixed somehow, someway. It does not matter how we get there.

[Median Democrat]

13. Don't Articles Without Comment Belong In Latest Breaking News?

What posts belong in what forums?

[obiwan]

14. Give the president some time. Two months is not enough.

PATIENCE is needed. Fuck instant gratification! Every good thing takes time.

We would all be better off (and a lot calmer) if we all followed golden rule #1: a closed mouth gathers no foot.

It took 8 years of f**ked up rule to get us to this point. It will take longer than 2 months to fix everything.

[BlooInBloo]

15. Shorter: Unless he does what *I* say, he's not listening.

[paulk]

16. the author makes a good point

You can put him down with your clever one liners, but

Geithner is Paulson redux, and for a guy that ran as a change agent, that's not good enough.

Or was Obama's campaign of change and hope just a lie?

Was "change we can believe in" just another empty slogan?

[FrenchieCat]

17. Can you provide a bit more detail on your statement?

You say that Geithner is Paulson redux? Please tell me exactly how, in details rather than in a one line drive by. Thank you.

[stevenleser]

18. Ya beat me to it Frenchie! :-)

When you get a chance, I could use more help with the anti-Obamites at OEN.

[FrenchieCat]

19. The know-it-alls are everywhere I see!

Wish more of them actually knew something instead of vogue posing by borrowing somebody else's words minus the comprehension. :(

[Armstead]

21. They are both creatures of Wall St. dedicated to saving the dinosaurs

The similarity is that both are locked into the mindset of Wall Street, and propping up these monopolistic banks that should instead be dismantled and their assets and power redistributed among a broader base.

This moment shouod be a wakeup call and a "teachable moment" aboiut the dangers of allowing financial institutions (and other corportations) to become "too big to fail."

[paulk]

24. that and this new bailout plan of Geithner's

is pretty much the same plan of Paulson's from several months ago.

Obama had a real opportunity to live up to the promise of his campaign here; is he really the change agent he ran as or is he just another Wall Street tool? I hope for the former and fear for the latter.

btw - thanks for the reply to FC - I have that poster on ignore. The either/or, black/white world inhabited by the true believers, where any questioning of the Chosen One puts you completely in the other camp, not to mention automatically IQ deficient, gets really old...

[Realtalk]

20. I would say no...

You'd think a man consistently preaching the same theme since the mid 80's, long before his entrance into politics, was lying?

[Armstead]

22. I love that guy

Greider is one of the most clear-eyed political/econpomic journalists we have.

I only wish he had a bigger platform in the media.

[Teaser]

23. "Listening" != "Agree with"

.

[Armstead]

25. Did you bother to read the article?

[jaycal]

26. Goldman Sachs Reaps $6B After $1M Obama Contribution

He was listening...

http://thebulletin.us/articles/2009/03/10/top_stories/doc49b61e46e935b133022700.txt

to Goldman Sachs...

[biopowertoday]

27. Obama is listening to Geithner -not Axelrod on the one.......see this.......

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/geithner-unable-to-escape_b_178006.html


Take the Steering Wheel out of Geithner's Hands


Arianna Huffington

Posted March 23, 2009 | 10:32 AM (EST)

On February 10th, the New York Times reported that there had been a "spirited" battle within the Obama administration over restrictions on executive pay and bonuses, and over attaching stringent conditions to any bailout money given to banks.

The clash pitted Tim Geithner, who opposed the restrictions and conditions, against David Axelrod, who favored them. According to the Times, Geithner had "largely prevailed."

In light of what has happened since then, that outcome must now be viewed as a tragic surrender to Geithner, Summers, and the political/Wall Street class -- a "victory" that could lead to the unraveling of the president's entire economic policy.

Maintaining the public trust is always important for a leader, but especially so during hard times. There is a fascinating chapter on Nelson Mandela in Stan Greenberg's new book, Dispatches from the War Room, in which Greenberg writes about how even the revered Mandela suffered a loss of public confidence when change did not come fast enough after he took office. "Don't assume the current euphoria, even with your high approval rating will carry you through," Greenberg counsels Obama, stressing the need to try to build up enough trust so that the public will stay with the president until they can actually experience change.

The Axelrod camp understood this and, according to the Times' February story, argued that "rising joblessness, populist outrage over Wall Street bonuses and expensive perks, and the poor management of last year's bailouts could feed a potent political reaction if the administration did not demand enough sacrifices from the companies that receive federal money."

Axelrod was right. And his loss has already cost the young Obama administration a lot.................