For Villagers, Republicans are “moderates” if they’re reasonable dinner party guests.

via Eschaton: It’s Just Tone.

Yes, and this revisionist policy position syndrome affects more people than you think. See one Bill Maher.

I’ve heard him say quite often that former Vice President Dick Cheney is to the left of President Obama on marriage equality.  President Obama has successfully led the repeal of DADT, extended benefits to domestic partners of executive branch employees, supports Civil Unions, stopped the DOJ from defending DOMA in court. Prior to that, Obama as US Senator and US Representative had a record of supporting Civil Rights for LGBT Americans including supporting hate crimes legislation that includes LGBT as a protected class. The sticking point here is that Obama supports civil unions (short of gay marriage), while Dick Cheney supports marriage equality although like Obama  he says (marriage is the province of the states). But Cheney’s strong personal support of LGBT rights amounted when hedged against the Bush/Cheney’s platform resulted in substantial setbacks to marriage equality and civil rights for LGBT Americans.

Cheney was a long serving US Representative, a  Secretary of Defense, director of the Council of Foreign Relations and a very powerful vice president for the bulk of George W. Bush’s 8 years in office. It’s true, as  Secretary of Defense he was first quoted on the record as referring to the policy of banning gays in the military as “an old chestnut”. But not that old of a chestnut:

Increasingly, toward the end of his tenure, Cheney had to consider social issues affecting the military forces, particularly the status of homosexuals in the military and the role of women in combat. In the face of pressure from some members of Congress and the public at large, Cheney reviewed standing DoD policy on these matters. He decided that the existing policies–a ban on homosexuals serving in the military and the exclusion of women from combat positions–were correct and did not need to be changed.

During and after his tenure as VP, Cheney also professed his belief in full marriage equality, but he did little beyond these proclamations of personal belief to advance the rights of LGBT Americans with regards to these issues. Cheney picked himself for the number two job in the Bush administration as head of Bush 2000 VP search committee and it was evident then that a Bush/Cheney administration would never support repeal of DADT or marriage equality and in fact would push for less civil rights for LGBT groups. During the 2000 and 04 elections Bush/Cheney, ran on a platform that made them the bulwark protecting real ‘murkins and their children from teh ghey marriages.

This was a big motivator for evangelicals, the group that when energized supercharges the ground game for Republicans. To tweak the issue prior to the US Presidential Election in 2004 and Mid Term elections in 2006, the Bush Administration introduced legislation for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and woman. These “sanctity of marriage” amendments failed, but showed that no federal action was possible. “The Sanctity of Marriage” was up to social conservative evangelical voters.  With this demagoguery as a motivator, from 2002 to 2008, social conservatives proposed and passed anti-marriage equality ballot measures in 29 states that amended their constitutions to be anti-gay marriage.

Degree, magnitude, process and consequence of political actions matter. Cheney was vocal or personally adamant in his support for marriage equality and civil rights but this was largely absent from Cheney’s legislative, cabinet and vice presidential agendas. These same issues have been political priorities in President Obama’s considerably shorter political career. Cheney squandered his opportunity to be politically “on the left” of Obama on these issues in any substantial way.

Fort Bragg, we’re here to mark a historic moment in the life of our country and our military.  For nearly nine years, our nation has been at war in Iraq.  And you — the incredible men and women of Fort Bragg — have been there every step of the way, serving with honor, sacrificing greatly, from the first waves of the invasion to some of the last troops to come home.  So, as your Commander-in-Chief, and on behalf of a grateful nation, I’m proud to finally say these two words, and I know your families agree:  Welcome home!  (Applause.)  Welcome home.  Welcome home.  (Applause.)  Welcome home.

The 9 years later, the Iraq War is drawn to a close.

President Barack Obama, Vice President Joe Biden, Bill Daley, and interim Chief of Staff Pete Rouse walk along the Colonnade of the White House prior to President Obama's announcement of Daley as his new Chief of Staff, Jan. 6, 2011. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)

Daley was a poor hire in these times.  A guy ingratiated to business and not to party politics or populist movement.

Daley, 63, says the chief of staff job is the best he has ever held, though there is “nothing I’ve seen here that I didn’t know about politics. Politics is all about relationships, people. A lot of it’s emotional. It’s not rocket science.”

Daley also says the White House is less besieged than it may sometimes appear.

via Exclusive: Bill Daley, unplugged – Roger Simon – POLITICO.com.

A guy who ushered NAFTA through congress for President Clinton is the wrong guy to hire when the GOP has no interest in even passing bills they have proposed in past congresses, the free trade agreements were all but teed up for the GOP lean house and basically 50/50 senate and the general public really is worried about jobs here over all. Rouse is a guy who seems like you tell him what you want and he tells you the one to nth amounts of ways to get it done.

Picking up chatter from live mics and then recounting to the public is no different than what WikiLeaks does:

A staff member reportedly explained that the headphones to go with the translation sets were not yet being handed out because this would have allowed journalists to listen in on the private conversation still going on. Half a dozen journalists immediately plugged in their own headphones and caught three minutes of the private exchange.

The conversation apparently began with Obama criticising Sarkozy for not warning the US that France would vote in favour of the Palestinians’ application to join Unesco, the United Nations agency for culture and education.

One French journalist told Arrêt Sur Images that the conversation was broadcast for around three minutes before officials realised the mistake. Another told the website that the reporters agreed not to publicise the remarks because of their sensitive nature.

via Sarkozy and Obama’s Netanyahu gaffe broadcast via microphones | World news | The Guardian

WikiLeaks had it’s problems (namely protecting sources), but they just focused on this type of journalism: getting people with access to information hidden by the powerful to release documents that eliminate the truth.

But just a quick anecdote. A acquaintance of mine from college is a Conservative Republican and posted to his facebook feed: “Great job Obama: DJIA 10,998.30 -297.51.” on the 9th of this month. Liberal bloggers picked up the echo chamber of this nonsense Fox Nation headline declaring that the stock market tumble was Obama’s fault disregarding the true story: Greece’s  economic issues and the Euro-Zone’s austerity measures have continued to keep sending shock waves through the markets. These awful news headlines will always be have two fold impact on the reader: first by over hyping some imagined error committed by the President to a shocking world altering crisis the idea of Obama is a “wrong track” president takes hold, second by burying the real crises, the reader is never informed.

A lot of people watch Fox News or Fox News shows. People that aren’t necessarily staunch conservatives. Until Democrats develop political presence and personalities (Beyond Obama and the Clintons) take the air out of the room, this type of lie by headline will continue to take hold in the national conversation. It’s not about arguing with Fox News logic, it’s about getting people to focus on other sources. I’m not saying I know how, or that I get paid to figure that out, I just hope that the people that do get paid are figuring it out.

I just watched this yesterday. I tend to be less upset about Obama or his performance. I give him a B+ to A- depending on what news I hear about MMS or the EPA this week.

Politically, it was a good speech in the fact that:

• Stopped negative “caving” beltway press narrative and gave them one liners that most of the beltway insiders enjoy like: “It’s simple math” and “Pass this bill”
• Laid out some basic, understandable policy initiatives related to things we can touch/feel/see: bridges, roads, labor, payroll tax cut, unemployment extension, etc.
• Was “a jobs plan” that makes the Republicans play on Democrats home turf (unlike the debt ceiling mess which hinged on GOP’s fraudulent deficit concerns)
• Was watched by 31m+ viewers in 23m+ households. That means a lot of people are concerned enough about the future, but still trusting of the president to listen to what he has to say. (also they aren’t wrong headed, backwards priority having jerks like me who went to get a seat at the bar at 6:50 to watch the beginning of Fantasy Football Season)
• Helped to stem liberal criticism of Obama’s priorities and Democratic criticism of Obama’s alleged neglect of the bully pulpit

I always think summers have been disastrous and the fall to Spring months have been the best times for the Democratic Party  under the Obama Administration. So now is the time when for some reason, the Dems tend to get their ducks in a row.

Either way, for his administration, this is crunch time, the “4th quarter”: capital injection, job programs and state aid needs to come from the Federal Government and/or The Federal Reserve to have time to work through the economy.

Anyone who is rooting for 44 should all just hope he’s less like Lebron and more like say Hank Aaron.

We liberals are just going to have cold summers. The Luntz talking point parade starts every spring and rolls into August. By the time football pre-season is here, Dems feel like the sky is falling. Obama is a celebrity. Health Care is death panels and government takeover. We don’t need revenues.

We (professional left, rank and file Democrats and MSNBC watchers) just have to get used to it and make spring to summer local politics/liberal activist season. Every year. Do summer like Wisconsin.

With that, I think everyone who has been complaining all week may want to check his speech in Grand Rapids, Michigan today. He’s back on it.

Pundits: “He should call Congress back to Washington”

Two term  Governor John Corzine and Senator Harold Ford wanted Obama to call congress back in session. As if he would look strong if he said “get back here” and then Boehner and McConnell just ignore him.

Obama is past that. As he crosses the nation, bet you he will be focusing on jobs. Jobs. jobs.

“You voted for a divided government, not a do nothing government”

In his speech he said elected officials need to get out of Washington and go listen to voters and come back and get ready to pass some jobs bills.  Obama is using the people as the lever against the GOP: look petty or come to Washington and get things done..

“These are things I already proposed”

Obama is about to go on a jobs bus tour and tout his jobs initiative while the GOP is weak in the polls after the debt deal nonsense. The fall is coming.

“Back in 1984, just 26 percent of the people voting Democratic for Congress said they were liberals. . .that fraction has now risen to 41 percent.”

These numbers explain a lot. John Boehner governs like a guy who speaks for Republican voters who are 67 percent conservative. Obama governs like a guy who speaks for voters who are just 41 percent liberal.

So Westen’s scoring is skewed.  Why? The ideological makeup of the Democratic party is (and has been) mostly moderates, a lot of liberals, and a solid minority of conservatives. The moderates and conservatives who are Democrats may not respond to the liberal narrative Westen feels we Democrats (who he equates with liberals) need to hear.

Cornel West, has started a DPFL using the FDR Scoring System:

It was a chat that found West imparting wisdom about the critical importance of Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s (FDR) Works Projects Administration (WPA) as an example from which America could be learning. He also provided some illumination as to why Obama has not chosen the course of reigniting FDR’s grand civic plan in a way that is appropriately nuanced for today.

Well, it seems FDR wasn’t the liberal invincible bully pulpit angel everyone makes him out to be. In 1938, some of his New Deal passed between 1933 and 1936, was repealed or weakened by a wave of Republicans and Conservative Democrats who (surprise) voted together to repeal or strike down some of his liberal policies in coming years.

In the hard-fought 1938 congressional elections, the Republicans scored major gains in both houses, picking up six Senate seats and 80 House seats. Thereafter the conservative Democrats and Republicans in both Houses of Congress would often vote together on major economic issues, thus defeating many proposals by liberal Democrats.^[2] A handful of liberal measures, notably the minimum wage laws, did pass when the Conservative Coalition split. 

Liberals should remember, the Democratic Party and FDR were very much leaders of their time, not ours. US Olympic Legend, Jesse Owens, harbored no love for FDR or Truman. And FDR and Truman’s snub of Owens seems a bit more substantial than Obama’s imagined snub of West.

[Jesse] Owens said, “Hitler didn’t snub me – it was FDR who snubbed me. The president didn’t even send me a telegram.”^[13] On the other hand, Hitler sent Owens a commemorative inscribed cabinet photograph of himself.^[14]  Jesse Owens was never invited to the White House nor were honors bestowed upon him by president Franklin D. Roosevelt (FDR) or his successor Harry S. Truman during their terms. In 1955, President Dwight D. Eisenhower honored Owens by naming him an “Ambassador of Sports.”

And there’s more:

Although northern white liberals were theoretically sympathetic to the plight of African Americans, Poole says, their primary aim was to save the American economy by salvaging the pride of America’s “essential” white male industrial workers. The liberal framers of the Social Security Act elevated the status of Unemployment Insurance and Social Security–and the white workers they were designed to serve–by differentiating them from welfare programs, which served black workers.

Not only FDR, but liberals were not liberal for enough to Jesse Owens or black workers of FDR’s time. And in fact members of the left in FDR’s time weren’t too hype on the New Deal, contrary to Westen’s assertions. The country’s government can work better, the administration can work better, but while comparing Obama to previous Democratic POTUS’s we should be careful not to re-invent predecessors or imagine a US government that never existed.

They all had their warts, and no Democratic President was or will be at the very left of their governing coalitions and significant valuable progress was still made by each, including Presidents FDR and Obama. But they are both Democrats.

For being President during the worst economy since the depression, he’s holding strong with liberal support. The public favors Obama after the debt ceiling debate.

The sky is dark, but it’s not falling.

Hey, remember when House Majority Leader Eric Cantor said President Obama walked out of the debt talks yesterday? So, yeah — Obama says that never happened.

“No,” Obama told Cox TV’s Scott McFarlane in an interview Thursday. “At the end of the meeting, what I said to the group was what the American people feel: We have a responsibility to do the right thing. We shouldn’t be partisan, we should solve problems.”

via Obama: No, I Didn’t Storm Out Of The Debt Ceiling Talks (VIDEO) | TPMDC.

I’m sure Obama is annoyed and pissed off. But I don’t believe Cantor is the guy who can push him past a boiling point.