Is the left blaming Obama for the GOP jihad against him?

[azmouse]

I know Joan Walsh was a Hillary supporter but I think this is an interesting article.

Quote:http://www.salon.com/news/politics/2008_...08_primary

I've already written about why I think liberals pondering "buyers' remorse" over Obama is useless and divisive. My discussion with Melber and my Facebook friend made me realize something else. One of my primary complaints about Obama supporters in 2008 was the way so many blamed the Clintons for the GOP crusade against them, as though Republicans would have played fair if only the unethical Clintons hadn't given them Whitewater, Travelgate and most notably, sex scandals. That was unfair to the Clintons, and it was also naive. It hugely underestimated the ferocity of modern-day GOP attack politics. Now I find myself wondering if progressives are over-focused on Obama's perceived shortcomings when it comes to dealing with Republicans, because we likewise don't want to deal with the amoral political savagery of the enemy he faces.

I know: Amoral political savagery is pretty strong. I think it's fair. Just Tuesday Rush Limbaugh, the head of the Republican Party, said the London rioters are "the equivalent of Obama voters in this country." Way to go, Rush! That's false, racist and unspeakably ugly all at the same time. One after another of the GOP presidential candidates has come out against the debt-ceiling deal -- and then they blame the president for the S&P downgrade their own intransigence triggered. Likewise, Republicans accused Bill Clinton of everything from murder to drug-running to betraying the American military, while one philanderer after another pushed for his impeachment over a sexual indiscretion.

*snip*

I think many on the left anointed Obama the only progressive in the race out of a rescue fantasy. But it's possible people who want to see Obama face a primary -- and I do not, as I've said too many times to count -- have the same fantasy with a different, as yet unnamed savior. It gives progressives a sense of control: It's not that Republicans are better organized than we are, or that they'll fight Democrats by any means necessary; it's our fault that we somehow chose the wrong candidate. At least we might have it in our power to make better choices. But I think it's time to reckon with the fact that no matter whom we choose, Rush Limbaugh and his Republican Party will do whatever it takes to see them fail.

Also read: http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/joan_w...index.html

[Eponine]

Probably. They seem to blame him for everything. In the opinion of the PL, he's probably guilty of personally causing heat waves, drought and even the Japanese earthquake and tsunami.

[NJMaverick]

Nice article and good points being made.

[Willinois]

People who are looking for just the right candidate to save the day and make their dreams come true will always be disappointed. Every time.

That's why Obama told us repeatedly during the campaign that it's not up to him alone. It's up to the people to make change.

[Ikonoklast]

As if President Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, hell, you pick a name, would have been treated any differently by the Republicans.

They'd make Jesus H. Christ out to be an anti-Semite if he was elected Democratic president.

[azmouse]

(08-10-2011 10:28 AM)Ikonoklast Wrote:  As if President Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, hell, you pick a name, would have been treated any differently by the Republicans.

They'd make Jesus H. Christ out to be an anti-Semite if he was elected Democratic president.

I don't think any candidate would have been treated any differently by the Democrats either. For the PL, it's not about who they elect, it's about who they could have elected. No one will ever be good enough for that crowd.

[Ikonoklast]

(08-10-2011 10:35 AM)azmouse Wrote:  

(08-10-2011 10:28 AM)Ikonoklast Wrote:  As if President Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry, hell, you pick a name, would have been treated any differently by the Republicans.

They'd make Jesus H. Christ out to be an anti-Semite if he was elected Democratic president.

I don't think any candidate would have been treated any differently by the Democrats either. For the PL, it's not about who they elect, it's about who they could have elected. No one will ever be good enough for that crowd.

You are correct. The Hillary supporters would have thrown her under the bus and been bemoaning that they didn't vote for Nader.

[jaxx]

Quote:Now I find myself wondering if progressives are over-focused on Obama's perceived shortcomings when it comes to dealing with Republicans, because we likewise don't want to deal with the amoral political savagery of the enemy he faces.

Maybe, but they'll never admit it. Much easier to demand the dead FDR and LBJ who had huge majorities.

Quote:I think many on the left anointed Obama the only progressive in the race out of a rescue fantasy.

No Joan, we didn't anoint PBO, that was done by the rightwing. But thanks for playing.

[azmouse]

(08-10-2011 10:30 AM)jaxx Wrote:  

Quote:I think many on the left anointed Obama the only progressive in the race out of a rescue fantasy.

No Joan, we didn't anoint PBO, that was done by the rightwing. But thanks for playing.

I think that's a hint of her Hillary support coming out. I rolled my eyes at that from her, but many Hillary supporters are still bitter over the "only progressive" label being applied to Obama.

[jaxx]

Joan's a trip. I wonder if she is now getting scared about reelection and sorry for the stuff she has said.

The articles were interesting.

[suzie]

I've noticed that she's been changing her tune about Obama, from the "eek, he's NOT Bill C," attitudes of earlier columns.

Jaxx might have a point about getting scared.

[Cha]

Why wouldn't they? No blame is too ridiculous for them to latch onto with their relentless whiny voices.

[RoyGBiv]

Why not. The Republicans are blaming Obama for everyone not liking them.

I have a split toenail. I'm certain it is Obama's fault.