Krugman: Failure To Rise

[depakid]

I’m finding it hard to read about politics these days. I still don’t think people in the administration understand the magnitude of the catastrophe their excessive caution has created. I keep waiting for Obama to do something, something, to shake things up; but it never seems to happen.

Here’s what I wrote http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/opinion/13krugman.html?_r=1">in February 2009. It’s pretty rich that now the usual suspects are accusing me of having shared the administration’s optimism. But that’s a trivial point; the important thing is that all signs are that the next few years will be a combination of economic stagnation and political witch-hunt.

This is going to be almost inconceivably ugly.

More: http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/failure-to-rise/

-just a hint here, from Paul Krugman (and anyone else with half a lick of sense):

Just to be clear, progressives would be foolish to sit out this election: Mr. Obama may not be the politician of our dreams, but his enemies are definitely the stuff of our nightmares. But Mr. Obama (and his followers) have a responsibility, too. They can't expect strong support from people that they keep ignoring and insulting.

[Mimosa]

1. I agree with you, Depakid

And Krugman.

I will stand up for the President on principle. He has to stand up for us too. :)

[Tesha]

4. Why does he have to "stand up for [you] too"?

You're willing to give him your vote no matter
what he does so why will he concern himself one
whit with what you think or expect?

This is *PRECISELY* why progressives and liberals
are constantly shit on by "our" party: the party bigwigs
*KNOW* we're willing to give them our vote, time and
time again, for exactly *NOTHING* in return. So they,
time and time again, give us exactly nothing.

Tesha

[lunatica]

2. My definition of Progressives is that they connect the dots

If you don't see the consequences of not voting and the GOP gaining power then you're not a Progressive. You're an idiot and you're contributing to Idiocracy.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

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

[lunatica]

5. Understand consequences of one's actions is a kid cheering for a team?

Connecting the dots is voting against my own interests? Wow! Maybe you should read what I said again before your foot goes any deeper down your throat. Progressives connect dots. They understand action and consequences. If they don't they aren't Progressives.

[RBInMaine]

7. Anyone who sits out thinking that will "punish" Dems into being "more progressive" and thus helping

RePUKES by default has a very NUTTY manner of thinking. Yeah, let them go ahead and do that then see how happy they are with the drunken orange cigarette sucker in charge of the US House of Reps. Let's get into reality here.

GOOD POST.

[depakid]

12. No true Scotsman...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Progressive constituencies understand actions and omissions quite well- and the record is replete with instances where we can "connect the dots."

[SusanaMontana41]

8. With all respect,

I think it is our president who isn't connecting the dots.

Why the ad hominem attacks on Obama's critics? We're doing what he told us to do: hold him to his promises.

I left name-calling behind when I left grade school. "Thanks" for the trip down memory lane.

[lunatica]

11. Connecting the dots isn't just the job of the President

If you think you can pass on connecting the dots then you're not very committed are you? Why do you think you can pass on that yet hold the President accountable?

[SusanaMontana41]

15. Touchy, aren't we?

Where did I say I "passed" on connecting the dots?

Do you break for hallucinations, too?

[Jakes Progress]

16. That's your definition?

It would be yours alone. Progressive minded people might well connect the dots, but that is hardly the salient element of their character. You might want to rephrase your post. Maybe that you believe that good progressives connect the dots and agree with you on the outcome. But to define them as people who connect the dots...well, that's idiocracy.

Some progressives might connect the dots to conclude that voting for the lesser of two evils has not gotten us anywhere near a functioning government for the people. Some might argue that the country needs to suffer under conservatives a little more to remember how bad it is. We went out and elected someone we thought would work for the people more after 8 years of bush. But we goofed. We got less hope and more pragmatism, less change and more incrementalism. I'm way to soft hearted to see the suffering that would result from another republican administration, but voting for At-least-I'm-not-maccain didn't really get us much closer to something better.

It may be moot anyway. Two years of playing footsie with the republicans didn't get them to love Obama. It was a stupid plan and it didn't work. Chances are that there are too many stupid people out there and we will lose the Senate. Then we will have the last two years spent in hearings and inquiries and crap. Many of us suggested that we didn't have all that time to slowly make change. Obama took his shot, but I'm afraid it is falling short. He thought change meant singing kumbaya with the republicans. When the country elected him, they thought it meant change from corporate cronyism, wars without end, moving money from the poor to the rich. That was the change we wanted.

[RBInMaine]

6. Per Maddow : MANY accomplishments. And certainly PROGRESS even if not purity.

[Aramchek]

9. can't ya hear, can't ya hear that Thunda!!!

[bertman]

10. When I vote, it will be for PROGRESSIVE Democrats only. The rest of them

can go to hell for all I care.

I'm sick of being told that I have to vote for Democrats or the Republicans will take over. The way I see it, the Republicans are calling the shots now and have been throughout this Presidency.

Take your pick: bleed to death slowly or bleed to death quickly. Either way you're dead.

[Aramchek]

13. when you breath, do you breath progressive air only??

I'm guessing you don't have any dependents.
If you did, you wouldn't risk their future just so you can be spiteful.

[bertman]

18. Spiteful? You're kidding me, right?

I'm being realistic, Aramchek.

Nothing in the Democratic party will ever change if we continue voting for the "centrists" who control it.

This administration and its centrist policies has been a betrayal of Democratic values. A massive outpouring of hope and political renewal has been squandered by a party that worries more about catering to the right, to Wall Street, and to the Corporate PTB than it does its base. I refuse to give my money or time or my vote to someone who does not share my values.

It's people like you who allow that horrendous centrist Democratic DLC agenda to survive because you think there is no other choice. There is another choice. That choice is to show the Democratic leadership that they cannot be Republican lite and still hold their jobs.

[Steely_Dan]

14. I Cannot Stress Enough...

that everyone here should read the comments associated with Krugmans article. I assumed that DU has a certain bias meaning that comments made here can be somewhat extreme. This is particularly true with regard to criticisms of the President. Apparently, we are not the only ones who are outraged. Read all seven pages of the comments. It is clear that if those contributors are an accurate slice of American opinion, the Left is truly not only unhappy with Mr. Obama, but they are bewildered and even shocked at the inaction of the current administration.

http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/28/failure-to-rise/

-P

[depakid]

17. Yep- and these are generally educated and thoughtful posts

with far less of the fatuous bile one sees in most newspaper comment sections.