Monday, December 8, 2008 - 3:00 PM
Liberals are growing increasingly nervous – and some just flat-out angry – that President-elect Barack Obama seems to be stiffing them on Cabinet jobs and policy choices. Obama has reversed pledges to immediately repeal tax cuts for the wealthy and take on Big Oil. He’s hedged his call for a quick drawdown in Iraq. And he’s stocking his White House with anything but stalwarts of the left. Now some are shedding a reluctance to puncture the liberal euphoria at being rid of President George W. Bush to say, in effect, that the new boss looks like the old boss. “He has confirmed what our suspicions were by surrounding himself with a centrist to right cabinet. But we do hope that before it's all over we can get at least one authentic progressive appointment,” said Tim Carpenter, national director of the Progressive Democrats of America. OpenLeft blogger Chris Bowers went so far as to issue this plaintive plea: “Isn't there ever a point when we can get an actual Democratic administration?” Even supporters make clear they’re on the lookout for backsliding. “There’s a concern that he keep his basic promises and people are going to watch him,” said Roger Hickey, a co-founder of Campaign for America’s Future.Steve Hildebrand pushes back at the Huffington Post. I look forward to the 2010 debate about whether:
It's hard to know what a truly progressive government would be like. Huge spending programs via running up enormous debt, enormous expansion of government bureaucracy, universal government-run health care, a chastened foreign policy, a pledge to drastically curb carbon emissions, a rewriting of trade agreements, saving failing businesses and their flabby unions through tax dollars?
That sounds just like what Obama intends, despite his appointments.
What is wrong with these whiners? It's not like Obama has shafted them on the major goals, like new infrastructure/unemployment spending and health care reform; in fact, several of his choices (like Daschle) are specifically designed to help get the ball moving in those areas.
Yet they continually focus on idiocy like the lack of a "quick drawdown" (even though Obama promised no such thing), and an immediate repeal of tax cuts for the top bracket.
Also, at what point can we talk about “movement progressives”?
You made me laugh with that, but as a moderate to liberal Democrat it also makes me nervous. Yikes!
Some of the people quoted in the story may be working strategicly to push the national dialogue to the left. But the specifics mentioned don't strike me as serious concerns.
The tax cuts for the wealthy will go away in 2009 or 2010. I don't recall that Obama specified which year it would be during the campaign. Given the current economic crisis, 2010 might be a better choice.
I was never in favor of a windfall profits tax on the oil companies, but in any case the oil companies are no longer deriving windfall profits from high oil prices.
As for Iraq, Obama said always said that he would listen to the generals and work out a responsible plan for withdrawing from Iraq. Note that the SOFA negotiated by the Bush Administration says that, "All United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory no later than December 31, 2011," so even if Obama should turn out to be a Bush clone we would still be out of Iraq.
I love Hildebrand's analysis: the talking points already are determined, it's just a matter of which one will prevail.
These people were not paying attention.
The Obamaniac in the office next door was shocked to learn after the election that O really does intend to fight a war in Afghanistan, just like he said he would.
He's basically a Clinton Democrat. Always has been. He's really good with head fakes though, as you'd expect from a basketball layer.
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(6)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE