Truthdig - Reports - Making Him Do It

			November 22, 2009 Log in / Register
			Text Size

Intelligentsia Against Intelligence

Throw the Money Changers Out of the Temple

Obama's Job Approval Slips Below 50 Percent

Battlefield in the War of Ideas

Yuletide Weirdness With Your Host, Bob Dylan

Battlefield in the War of Ideas
By Eugene Robinson

Intelligentsia Against Intelligence
By David Sirota

Enough G-2 Talk Already
By William Pfaff

Despite Subsidies, Class Sizes Rise in California Schools
By Louis Freedberg and Hugo Cabrera, California Watch

Obama’s Job Approval Slips Below 50 Percent

Iran to Test Its Readiness

Brit Warns Against Leaving Afghanistan

Obama Warns of Iran Sanctions

Lou Dobbs for President?

YouTube Videos to Wear Captions

‘Left, Right & Center’: The Geithner-Summers Backlash; Is Palin Dangerous?

Throw the Money Changers Out of the Temple

Yuletide Weirdness With Your Host, Bob Dylan

Hedges and Friends Debate Illusion, Conservatism and 9/11

Freedom’s Fight: Part II
By Gary Phillips

Claire Wasserman on Europe’s Islamic Immigrants
By Claire Wasserman

Oprah Sets Her Show’s Expiration Date

Behold the Food of the Future

Financial Meltdown 101

A Dig compiled by the editors of Truthdig

Vetting Sarah Palin

A Dig compiled by the editors of Truthdig

Hostile Takeover: How Big Money and Corruption Conquered Our Government—and How We Take It Back

By David Sirota
$11.16

Making Him Do It

Posted on Jan 29, 2009

By David Sirota

When they write their retrospectives about the era that ended with the 2008 election, economic historians will undoubtedly credit George W. Bush with almost single-handedly moving the country to embrace extremist conservatism. It’s a simple storyline: Cowboy president drives bewildered American herd over laissez-faire cliff. What such reductionism will ignore, though, is what we must remember now: Namely, that Congress also played a decisive role in the stampede.

As former House Republican leader Tom DeLay said, he and his colleagues deliberately started “every policy initiative from as far to the political right” as possible, so as to shift “the center farther to the right.” The formula emulated Franklin Roosevelt’s fabled admonishment to allies: “I agree with you, I want to do it, now make me do it.”

With Bush, congressional Republicans knew they had an ideological comrade in the White House. But they also knew he was confined by the (minimally) moderating desire for re-election and the (even more minimally) moderating limits of his national office. So, to reach their goals, conservatives had to compel their presidential friend to do what they wanted—and compel him they did. When Bush’s tax cuts and deregulatory schemes hit the Capitol, Republicans inevitably expanded them to fully achieve the right’s objectives.

Of course, that triumph was the country’s loss, as Republican policies thrust the political center off a conservative precipice and America into an economic free fall. And as we plummet, we are desperately groping for a lifeline.

If we are lucky and we end up snagging one that saves us—a huge if—it will be one that is strong enough to snap the center back from the conservative brink. This super-durable bungee cord must have the force of law, meaning it will be woven by Democratic legislators now exerting as much pressure on President Obama’s left as congressional Republicans focused on President Bush’s right.

Advertisement

When, for instance, Obama hedged on his promise to revoke $226 billion worth of Bush’s upper-income tax cuts, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D) pushed him to fulfill the pledge and put the money into programs that better guarantee job creation.

When Obama initially offered up a stimulus bill filled with discredited business tax breaks, Democratic senators forced him to back off. Reps. David Obey, D-Wis., and Jim Oberstar, D-Minn., then argued that the president’s proposed infrastructure investments were too small to boost the economy. That led House Democrats to increase Obama’s spending targets.

As stimulus negotiations continued, Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., tried to add provisions letting courts renegotiate banks’ primary-residence mortgages so as to prevent more foreclosures. It’s a commonsense proposal: Judges already have the power to renegotiate vacation-home mortgages, and the New York Federal Reserve Bank says existing bankruptcy laws are exacerbating the foreclosure crisis. While Obama opposed the initiative out of fear that banking industry opposition might slow the underlying stimulus bill, Conyers’ effort ultimately made the president commit to supporting the reforms in future legislation.

Then there was the progressive reaction to Obama’s demand for more financial bailout money. Turning a routine committee hearing into a modern-day incarnation of the Great Depression’s Pecora Commission, Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., upbraided a Federal Reserve official for refusing to disclose which banks are receiving taxpayer dollars. The spectacle was one of many that whipped the House into passing a bill that attached strings to the funds. Obama responded by committing to enact some of the restrictions by fiat.

At once complementary and adversarial, this intragovernmental squabbling probably makes the conflict-averse Obama uncomfortable. But the “make him do it” dynamic could finally bring the center of Washington’s political debate closer to the progressive center of American public opinion. Even more important, it is precisely what will help the new president avert an economic disaster.

David Sirota is the best-selling author of the books “Hostile Takeover” (2006) and “The Uprising” (2008). He is a fellow at the Campaign for America’s Future. Find his blog at OpenLeft.com or e-mail him at ds@davidsirota.com.

TAGS: bailout banks bush congress conservatives debate delay democrats economy election fdr foreclosure house law legislation money obama pelosi politics progressive republicans sirota spending stimulus taxes

Related Entries

November 21, 2009 Obama’s Job Approval Slips Below 50 Percent
November 20, 2009 Obama Warns of Iran Sanctions
November 20, 2009 Battlefield in the War of Ideas
November 20, 2009 Intelligentsia Against Intelligence
November 19, 2009 Despite Subsidies, Class Sizes Rise in California Schools

Email to a friend

Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.

Previous item: The GOP's Soundproof Room

Next item: When Did We Stop Caring About Civilian Deaths During Wartime?

Elsewhere: .

Comments

Are you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig.

By blogdog, February 2 at 4:33 am #

http://uk.reuters.com/article/featuredCrisis/idUKN08534236

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-01/09/content_10626712.htm

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1053951.html

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/01/08-9

Report this

By cyrena, February 2 at 1:52 am #

By blogdog, February 1 at 12:35 am

“Ceryna: the congressman my friends sent to replace the former reviled Repiglicrat, placed his very first vote, along with most of the rest of them, for the resolution supporting Israel’s invasion of Gaza, as if it said anything everyone didn’t already know.”

~~~

Blogdog:

This is a tad bit confusing here, since at least *I* am unaware of ANY ‘resolution’ by the US Congress to ‘support’ Israel’s latest carnage in Gaza. So, you’re gonna have to tell me about that, and hopefully a link to such a ‘vote’. I’m really not at all aware of this.

I DO know that when the US was the only one to vote AGAINST the truce/ceasefire resolution of the UN. (The vote was 14 to 1, with the US abstaining) and later we read that Olmert had pressured Georgie Boy, and so Georgie Boy then told Condi the Rice not to ‘support’ such a resolution in the UN vote.

I cannot imagine how or why our Congress would ever be involved in a decision for Israel or anybody else to attack anybody else. I mean that has obviously occurred during the last 8 years via the old neocon/Zionist agenda of the Twin Terrorists, but that isn’t something that Congress votes on, any more than the Israeli Parliament votes on who will be the targets of Israel’s political assassinations. The evil doers set up all of those extra-legal activities without consulting their respective Congresses.

On the rest, I definitely ‘hear ya’, and I’ve considered moving out of the country myself. I would have, had Obama not been elected.

But, thank the gods and the rest of us who worked out asses off…he was. Based on what he’s done in just the 12 days since he’s been on the clock, (with ‘official powers’) he has not disappointed. In fact, I continue to be more and more impressed. But then, I happen to be among those who can appreciate Obama’s political finesse, in dealing with a very neurotic social psychology here in the US. I look far more at what he’s actually DOING, (which that now official signature) than what he’s saying. From my professional and pragmatic view, he’s laying the ground work, (in plain sight of those who are paying attention) for all of the corrections that are needed to undo the damage of the former fascist regime.

Obama Is a Two-Faced Liar. Aw-RIGHT!
Friday 30 January 2009
by: Greg Palast, t r u t h o u t | Perspective

“Republicans are right. President Barack Obama treated them like dirt, didn’t give a damn what they thought about his stimulus package, loaded it with a bunch of programs that will last for years and will never leave the budget, is giving away money disguised as “tax refunds,” and is sneaking in huge changes in policy, from schools to health care, using the pretext of an economic emergency.

Way to go, Mr. O! Mr. Down-and-Dirty Chicago pol. Street-fightin’ man. Covering over his break-your-face power play with a “we’re all post-partisan friends” BS.
And it’s about time.

Frankly, I was worried about this guy. Obama’s appointing Clinton-droids to the Cabinet, bloated incompetents like Larry Summers as “Economics Czar,” made me fear for my country, that we’d gotten another Democrat who wished he were a Republican.
Then came Obama’s money bomb. The House bill included $125 billion for schools (TRIPLING federal spending on education), expanding insurance coverage to the unemployed, making the most progressive change in the tax code in four decades by creating a $500 credit against social security payroll deductions, and so on.

It’s as if Obama dug up Ronald Reagan’s carcass and put a stake through The Gipper’s anti-government heart. Aw-RIGHT!”

The rest is at the link. (And yes, I thoroughly enjoyed it. So much that I’ve cross-posted it here)

http://www.truthout.org/013009R

Report this

By SusanSunflower, February 1 at 3:41 pm #

I find the juxatposition of the lack of oversight of the bail out funds with the spreading peanut-salmonella recall mess (this factory had a long history of violations and it is suggested that “internal controls” detected likely contamination ages ago) in the shadow of the international Chinese melamine contamination mess (which I know I felt was under-reported here in the USA in favor of election euphoria) ...

Sirota wrote elsewhere (published on Common Dreams) about the “problems” with Obama’s “Buy American” promise ... yes, protectionism is unattractive and potentially devastating to our neighbors and the world economy ... unfortunately American bizness is so addicted to outsoucing to the lowest possible bidder (with enough distance to eliminate meaningful accountabilty via oversight of business practices) that we have accusations that our very own monstrous border wall with Mexico is being built with illegal labor ... much as post-Katrina reconstruction was alleged to be subcontracted to companies using illegal labor ... which is not suprising given the apparent revolving door of illegal labor staffing our food processing plants and cleaning our wall-marts.

Apparently it’s “moving to the left” to demand that businesses abide by existing laws and regulations ...

Should we hope that the “average american working stiff” reacts with anger rather than despair? How can we best transform that anger and energy to the greater good.

Jobs.

Report this

By blogdog, February 1 at 5:35 am #

Ceryna: the congressman my friends sent to replace the former reviled Repiglicrat, placed his very first vote, along with most of the rest of them, for the resolution supporting Israel’s invasion of Gaza, as if it said anything everyone didn’t already know.

I didn’t vote for that Dem, just like I didn’t for any of Reds. I voted only for progressive 3rd party-sponsored or independent candidates, and in doing so will never send anyone to congress, but simply can’t stand those sold-out parties.

Recently the local weekly (mostly dedicated to resonating the Satyricon, while taking up some of the edgier political topics) asked all our congress folk if they would support investigating the outgoing regime. Less than half would even reply - neither Senator. Thank goodness at least 2 are supporting Conyers’ initiative - neither form my district.

Guess I could move, but if I do it will be out of the country, probably for good this time. It’s pretty discouraging trying to make a living as an artist in a culture that doesn’t need artists, only celebrities.

And on that note: Hey, how about that Oprah? She’d have brought some numbers to C-Span. But not much chance now that Blogo has bit the dust. She’d have probably turned him down anyway. Why take your numbers where you can’t collect on them? But then how many more numbers in any column does she need? In fact, considering all she’s got, she could probably win a Senate seat as an independent.

Report this

By KDelphi, January 31 at 9:49 pm #

Lets “make DC do the right thing”—who get their salaries?

Report this

By KDelphi, January 31 at 9:20 pm #

This next $500 will be gone as quickly as the first.

If they dole it out paycheck to paycheck (which GOP will probably not approve—Blue Dogs either), instead of, say, paying a living wage, it will be , for working class, maybe $20 a week.

How much better to put it towards health care, child care, school grants, etc.

Report this

By SusanSunflower, January 30 at 10:54 pm #

It’s Super Bowl Weekend ... it would have been great if Team Obama had distributed their talking points so Obama Nation could seriously rebutt the Limbaugh Dittoheads they encounter this weekend ...

I’m just saying ... that part is not rocket science.

I had a neighbor, in my very liberal little community, who I grew up with who loved (loves?) Limbaugh ... Limbaugh was the dad he never had ... Limbaugh was “so sure of himself” ... he had an opinion about “everything” ...

My friend was severely dyslexic and was not “self-taught” as I suspect most of us have been to some degree or another. He loved how by repeating “ditto head” talking points he brought his liberal friends and neighbors to the point of speechlessness (or apoplexy) .... which was how we got to talking about his “relationship” with Limbaugh ...

it’s not content, it’s the attitude .... that’s what sucks them in and that’s what makes them stay ... it’s a later-in-life fraternity with code words and secret handshakes ...

I think—for the sake of my friend’s feelings—I refrained from mentioning things like brown shirts and the rise of democratic socialism and it’s charismatic leader ...

Yes, he makes me feel so good ...

Report this

By SusanSunflower, January 30 at 9:59 pm #

Yes, it’s difficult. Sirota and others (including Paul Krugman) have serious doubt and problems with aspects of the “stimulus plan”—some shared by some of the Republicans, though Republican “rhetoric” and “arguement” are almost oxymorons, most I’ve just heard have been whining about Democrats giving away free money (A practice with which they have no problems when a Republican is in charge—see all pork barrel budget items). ...

Since very little of this money is likely to reach the voters who elected Obama in, say, the next 90 days ... since so much emphasis is on “bailing out” fat cats, it’s pretty hard for me, and I imagine plenty of other working stiffs, to rally to Obama’s cause ...

He seems to be infinitely more “interested” in alternatives proposed by the Republican and the monied elite ...

I’d like him to try to win my enthusiastic support of his stimulus. ...

People said “Bambi meets Godzilla” and Obama supporters had vapors ... The GOP appears to be poised to “redefine itself” based on forcing Obama to give ground.

Gosh. I’m shocked.

Report this

By cyrena, January 30 at 9:57 pm #

By Ed Harges, January 30 at 2:15 pm

• “Do you hear that, all you Obama protectors who complain about us critics on the left who don’t think that having elected our wonderful Obama is enough, and now we should all be meek and quite?”
Aw Ed
We’ll allow you and Sirota to actually think you’re MAKING Obama do stuff. It’s good for business. That he was gonna do it anyway doesn’t have to matter if you don’t want it to.
But clearly I’m not among those who think that having elected our wonderful Obama is ‘enough’. Nope, I never bought into the Mulatto Messiah persona that some many of his so-called ‘progressive’ critics (what a joke) condescendingly assigned to him. I know what the limits of the national office involve, but I guess that’s because I was the nerd who paid attention in civics class.
I don’t think Obama expects any of the American population to be ‘meek and quite’ as everyone has been for the past 8 years either. In fact, he’s made accessible (and rapidly) all of the ‘tools’ that the meek and quite of the last 8 years can finally use, keeping in mind that EVERYBODY has pretty much been meek and quite while the Dick Bush thugs destroyed us. (that’s because the ones who started out less than ‘meek and quite’ were quickly neutralized).
So, I say GO for it, but make it count. If ya’ll are gonna MAKE Obama do something, it means taking some responsibility for who you send to Congress. Sirota makes the point here, but I think it was an accident:
• “…What such reductionism will ignore, though, is what we must remember now: Namely, that Congress also played a decisive role in the stampede…”

The same Congress that played more than a ‘decisive’ role in the stampede, (I mean COME ON…every single piece of shit Dick Bush did to us was passed by this same meek and quite Congress, and wouldn’t have happened otherwise.) And, WE allowed them to represent us. Every Republican or anybody else that ever voted for a Republican was in the stampede. So yeah, SIrota’s right, we must remember that now. Keep sending Repiglicans to the Congress, and see how much you think you can MAKE Obama (who DOES recognize the limits of his National Office as described in the US Constitution) do then.
Meantime, if Obama needed any ‘lessons’ or needed a ‘test’ for his post-partisan idea, he got it with this stimulus package. We saw immediately that the Repigs aren’t gonna allow ANYTHING that he comes up with to reach ANY fruition. Even after the ‘accommodations’ that were put into the package for their supposed benefit, not to mention the benefits of their constituents’, (which is the point by the way) they all voted in typical group-think lockstep against it. Didn’t even wanna take it up, so they didn’t offer a plan of their own. It was just a massive ideological “cut off the nose to spite the face” action.

Fortunately, we have enough sane Democrats and an Independent or two who are willing to do the peoples work. But if you guys don’t start paying attention to who you send to the Congress, it won’t make a damn bit of difference.

Report this

By Ed Harges, January 30 at 7:15 pm #

The Roosevelt “make me” remark means this: “OK, so you’ve elected somebody who’s basically on your side. But that’s enough. The moneyed interests are so powerful, that you have to scream and yell and raise hell and MAKE ME do what I’m inclined to do for you, so that they will not be able to stop me.”

Do you hear that, all you Obama protectors who complain about us critics on the left who don’t think that having elected our wonderful Obama is enough, and now we should all be meek and quite?

No way. Yes, we elected the likeliest candidate to do what needs to be done, but we still have to MAKE HIM DO IT.

Report this

By SusanSunflower, January 30 at 2:13 pm #

Obama will need to “enroll” the American people to carry his banner ... he will need to reach our and educate them ...

He will not be successful at hiding behind the skirts of obstructionist republicans or the lack of a Democratic majority.

The Senate vote will be instructive as to just how far out on that limb Senate Republicans are willing to go.

Given Obama’s natural conservatism, it is doubtful Team Obama will happily credit American progressives with the impetus for change or a hand in creating the direction of that change.

They are rioting in France.

Why isn’t anyone outraged by the sheer number of apparently preemptive or “prophylactic” layoffs by many bedrock American corporate institutions.

“Got mine, screw you.”

Report this

By Little Brother, January 30 at 1:20 pm #

Meh.

Report this

By Tim Kelly, January 30 at 12:30 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)

Again with the belief that the Democrats are the friends of progressives? When do progressives actually wake up? “Make Obama do what the Democrats want.” What about “make the Democrats do what the people want?”

Report this

By Purple Girl, January 30 at 11:01 am #

Can’t pay taxes if WE have NO JOBS, Can’t bring down the Deficit If WE have NO JOBS. Companies can’t survive, or hire workers if their customers Have NO JOBS! Our Banks can Not lend If the American people are not interested in borrowing Because WE Have NO JOBS.Not to mention we can not meet our mortgage and loan obligations If WE have NO JOBS! Our Kids can’t go to college,and thus Buy homes If We have NO JOBS to get them there- so the future is fucked too!
I don’t need ‘No Stinking’ Tax cuts, I need a JOB!!!
No Jobs means more people on unemployment, thus a skyrocketing deficit with nothing to show, except yesterdays meals now in the toilet. Our kids don’t need Shit, they need their parents to earn a living and build infrastructure which they will not have to build later at a higher rate! which at this rate they will not be able to afford on their McDonalds Wages!
Banking and investment Brokers Lived by the Sword (survival of the fittest) LET THEM DIE BY THE SWORD, Freeze and Seize ALL their Personal assests, Prosecute them and Nationalize the Industry!. Take the Remaining 350 Billion Bank Bail out and invest in JOBS!

Report this

By Shift, January 30 at 7:52 am #

Obama is now prepared to support greater assistance to the Banks without having explained to the American People why the banks deserve it.

Wealthy people have no skin in this game. Until the wealthy are taxed adequately to pay for their own misdeeds, I will not support another bank bailout.

Report this