|
The Scared President |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=5903"><span class="small">Michael Tomasky, The Daily Beast</span></a>
|
|
Monday, 19 September 2011 20:00 |
|
Introduction: "A new account of Obama's White House alleges that the president's staff ignored his orders - and got away with it. Michael Tomasky on Obama's failed leadership, and how he can fix it."
President Barack Obama walks outside to speak with the media accompanied by members of his cabinet at the White House, 05/07/10. (photo: Getty Images)

The Scared President
By Michael Tomasky, The Daily Beast
19 September 11
A new account of Obama's White House alleges that the president's staff ignored his orders - and got away with it. Michael Tomasky on Obama's failed leadership, and how he can fix it.
his is just about the right time, according to recent history, for the appearance of inside-the-White-House accounts that show the president in an other-than-flattering light. For the first couple of years, while insiders are still trying to advance and curry favor, background quotes in such articles and books tend to show the POTUS as resolute, thinking of the big picture while those around him pursue their narrow agendas, and doing all those admirable things Kipling once advised.
By now, the ship is leaking, figuratively and literally. While news stories about Ron Suskind's new book "Confidence Men" have emphasized Tim Geithner's supposed betrayal of Barack Obama on the question of winding down Citigroup, we should all be more interested in what the book tells us about Obama. The early accounts suggest that we should worry what he's learned in the job so far.
I should note that I haven't read the book and will purchase it on the same schedule as regular mortals. I guess I should note also that I'm on record as taking Suskind at his word in such matters. In early 2004, when Suskind and Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill produced "The Price of Loyalty," I reviewed it for The New York Times and found it persuasive. That book was the first to confirm what everyone knew anyway: that the Bush White House was run according to politics, not policy. "Confidence Men" also confirms what we knew about Obama's White House: that the president appointed the wrong economic team from the start, failed to crack down on the banks, and was Solomonic to a fault when formulating responses to the financial crisis (oh, and news flash: Larry Summers is hard to work with!).
That would be interesting without being shocking. But the indictment goes one mortifying step deeper: Geithner and Summers and Rahm Emanuel, and perhaps others, sometimes ignored Obama, refused to carry out his orders, and, in Summers's case, mocked him, saying at one point to then-Budget Director Peter Orszag that "there's no adult in charge" in the White House. And while I don't yet know whether Suskind emphasizes this point, let's carry the critique one step further: They did so, as far as we know, without suffering any consequences at all.
That's why the concern here isn't what the book tells us about Geithner. It's not completely clear from press accounts whether Geithner directly countermanded an order about Citi. In its article from last week, the Associated Press called Obama's directive an "order to consider." I often order my 14-month-old daughter to consider making less of a mess while eating. So who knows what that even means. But it does seem clear that once he learned that Geithner ignored this option, Obama didn't do much of anything about it. And, well, Geithner does still have his job.
What now? Fire the staff, as James Carville suggested last week? Actually, that couldn't hurt.
That's the problem the book reveals. Adam Moss and Frank Rich of New York magazine did get an early copy and read it, and in an online dialogue posted over the weekend, they home in on what Rich calls Obama's "intellectual blind spot." Obama even recognized it himself, telling Suskind he was too inclined to look for "the perfect technical answer" to problems; Rich quotes Suskind as writing that Obama always favored policies that were "respectfully acknowledging opponents' positions, even those with thin evidence behind them, that then get stitched together into some pragmatic conclusion - but hollow."
That sounds awfully apt to me. Obama was afraid to be the president. He listened to a dozen viewpoints and tried to come up with something that made everyone happy. Unfortunately, "everyone" included people on his team who were looking out for the banks more than for the public (or for their own boss), and it included people on Capitol Hill whose clear agenda was Obama's political destruction. It's the central - and depending on how the next election turns out, possibly decisive - paradox of this president: In trying way too hard to look presidential in the sense of "statesmanlike," he has repeatedly ended up looking unpresidential in the sense of not being a leader.
What now? Fire the staff, as James Carville suggested last week? Actually, that couldn't hurt, especially in Geithner's case, and probably in Bill Daley's (the apparent real target of Carville's arrow). A dramatic gesture can help push the reset button. But it's important that if they be replaced, they be replaced with the right kinds of people. Obama needs people who will push him to go against his instincts toward consensus. Tell him everything he doesn't want to hear.
Most of all, remind him, and impolitely if need be, that there are millions and millions of Americans who invested great hope in him, and he has let them down. Let them down terribly. I wonder if anyone has ever uttered this deeply sad and plainly true sentence to the president's face. If not, it's high time.

|
|
FOCUS: Texas Republicans Should Read the Bible |
|
|
Written by <a href="index.php?option=com_comprofiler&task=userProfile&user=7118"><span class="small">Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News</span></a>
|
|
Monday, 19 September 2011 15:54 |
|
Gibson writes: "Even conservative Christian students at the university where Rick Perry made his remarks about leading by a Christian example agree that it's 'un-Christian' to deny life-saving medical care to the uninsured. And plenty of Christian leaders are still calling for an end to brutal budget cuts that kill jobs and force more working families into poverty."
Texas Gov. Rick Perry speaks to the first general session of the 2010 Republican Party of Texas Convention in Dallas. (photo: LM Otero/AP)

Texas Republicans Should Read the Bible
By Carl Gibson, Reader Supported News
19 September 11
Reader Supported News | Perspective
exas Gov. Rick Perry recently said America should be guided by "the Christian values that this country was based upon." Even though Article 11 of the John Adams-endorsed Treaty of Tripoli states "the Government of the United States of America, is not in any sense, founded on the Christian religion," I'm sure it warmed the hearts of Christian voters in the room. However, Rick Perry is the absolute worst model of a Christian leader.
The scriptures are clear about the necessity of helping the sick and the poor. Proverbs 3:27 instructs those to not withhold good from the deserving when it's in their power to do so. Jesus defined the Christian's role of aiding the needy in Matthew 25: 35-41, adding that those who deny the needy the help they need do it to him also. Jesus also warns, speak out against religious hypocrites in Matthew 23. The idea of wealth redistribution isn't new - Luke the Apostle actually advocated for it in Acts 4, in a passage called "Believers Share Their Possessions."
Yet, Rick Perry instead chose to deny public healthcare to tens of thousands of his fellow Texans with reckless cuts to Medicaid. 4.6 million Texans are living in poverty, with a poverty rate three percentage points higher than the national average. After Governor Perry cut millions from volunteer firefighter and forest service budgets, Texas' wildfires are raging to this day.
Instead of redistributing wealth, Perry's friends in the capitol denied help to struggling people in his state in the midst of a $27 billion revenue shortfall, and chose to reward owners of $250,000 yachts with a generous tax break. Perry, who constantly criticizes federal entitlement programs like Social Security and Medicare as "unconstitutional," apparently feels entitled to $600,000 in taxpayer money to spruce up his rented mansion.
Not to be outdone, Ron Paul recently hinted during the CNN-Tea Party debate that allowing the uninsured to die was "what freedom is all about," before finally relenting and saying churches and charity could likely pay for life-saving healthcare for a hypothetical uninsured patient in intensive care.
This is a pretty callous statement coming from Paul, considering his 2008 campaign manager Kent Snyder lacked health insurance and died of pneumonia two weeks after Paul's campaign concession. Snyder's mother is unable to pay the $400,000 cost of her son's medical bills, despite help from churches, charities and a website set up by his friends.
Even conservative Christian students at the university where Rick Perry made his remarks about leading by a Christian example agree that it's "un-Christian" to deny life-saving medical care to the uninsured. And plenty of Christian leaders are still calling for an end to brutal budget cuts that kill jobs and force more working families into poverty.
If America is to truly be guided by Christian values, Christians would do well to vote for those who actually practice what they preach. While Perry and Paul demand cuts to public programs and healthcare for the uninsured, President Obama is finding his inner Luke and asking the richest Americans to share their possessions to help lessen the burden of deficit reduction already on the shoulders of working families. The Tea Party's favorite candidates should take a cue from the president and truly embrace the Christian values they speak about.
Carl Gibson, 24, of Lexington, Kentucky, is a spokesman and organizer for US Uncut, a nonviolent, creative direct-action movement to stop budget cuts by getting corporations to pay their fair share of taxes. He graduated from Morehead State University in 2009 with a B.A. in Journalism before starting the first US Uncut group in Jackson, Mississippi, in February of 2011. Since then, over 20,000 US Uncut activists have carried out more than 300 actions in over 100 cities nationwide. You may contact Carl at
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

|
|
|
The Call to Occupy Wall Street Resonates Around the World |
|
|
Monday, 19 September 2011 11:20 |
|
Micah White and Kalle Lasn write: "There is a shared feeling on the streets around the world that the global economy is a Ponzi scheme run by and for Big Finance. People everywhere are waking up to the realisation that there is something fundamentally wrong with a system in which speculative financial transactions add up, each day, to $1.3 trillion (50 times more than the sum of all the commercial transactions)."
Blocked from Wall Street by police, activists gathered in Zuccotti Park in downtown Manhattan on Sunday, 09/18/11. (photo:Kevin Hagen/WSJ)

The Call to Occupy Wall Street Resonates Around the World
By Micah White and Kalle Lasn, Guardian UK
19 September 11
We need deeper changes to our financial system, or tent cities of people angry at corporate greed will keep appearing.
n Saturday 17 September, many of us watched in awe as 5,000 Americans descended on to the financial district of lower Manhattan, waved signs, unfurled banners, beat drums, chanted slogans and proceeded to walk towards the "financial Gomorrah" of the nation. They vowed to "occupy Wall Street" and to "bring justice to the bankers", but the New York police thwarted their efforts temporarily, locking down the symbolic street with barricades and checkpoints.
Undeterred, protesters walked laps around the area before holding a people's assembly and setting up a semi-permanent protest encampment in a park on Liberty Street, a stone's throw from Wall Street and a block from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
Three hundred spent the night, several hundred reinforcements arrived the next day and as we write this article, the encampment is rolling out sleeping bags once again. When they tweeted to the world that they were hungry, a nearby pizzeria received $2,800 in orders for delivery in a single hour. Emboldened by an outpouring of international solidarity, these American indignados said they'd be there to greet the bankers when the stock market opened on Monday. It looks like, for now, the police don't think they can stop them. ABC News reports that "even though the demonstrators don't have a permit for the protest, [the New York police department says that] they have no plans to remove those protesters who seem determined to stay on the streets." Organisers on the ground say, "we're digging in for a long-term occupation."
#OCCUPYWALLSTREET was inspired by the people's assemblies of Spain and floated as a concept by a double-page poster in the 97th issue of Adbusters magazine, but it was spearheaded, orchestrated and accomplished by independent activists. It all started when Adbusters asked its network of culture jammers to flood into lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens and peaceful barricades and occupy Wall Street for a few months. The idea caught on immediately on social networks and unaffiliated activists seized the meme and built an open-source organising site. A few days later, a general assembly was held in New York City and 150 people showed up. These activists became the core organisers of the occupation. The mystique of Anonymous pushed the meme into the mainstream media. Their video communique endorsing the action garnered 100,000 views and a warning from the Department of Homeland Security addressed to the nation's bankers. When, in August, the indignados of Spain sent word that they would be holding a solidarity event in Madrid's financial district, activists in Milan, Valencia, London, Lisbon, Athens, San Francisco, Madison, Amsterdam, Los Angeles, Israel and beyond vowed to do the same.
There is a shared feeling on the streets around the world that the global economy is a Ponzi scheme run by and for Big Finance. People everywhere are waking up to the realisation that there is something fundamentally wrong with a system in which speculative financial transactions add up, each day, to $1.3 trillion (50 times more than the sum of all the commercial transactions). Meanwhile, according to a United Nations report, "in the 35 countries for which data exist, nearly 40% of jobseekers have been without work for more than one year."
"CEOs, the biggest corporations, and the wealthy are taking too much from our country and I think it's time for us to take back," said one activist who joined the protests last Saturday. Jason Ahmadi, who travelled in from Oakland, California explained that "a lot of us feel there is a large crisis in our economy and a lot of it is caused by the folks who do business here." Bill Steyerd, a Vietnam veteran from Queens, said "it's a worthy cause because people on Wall Street are blood-sucking warmongers."
There is not just anger. There is also a sense that the standard solutions to the economic crisis proposed by our politicians and mainstream economists - stimulus, cuts, debt, low interest rates, encouraging consumption - are false options that will not work. Deeper changes are needed, such as a "Robin Hood" tax on financial transactions; reinstating the Glass-Steagall Act in the US; implementing a ban on high-frequency "flash" trading. The "too big to fail" banks must be broken up, downsized and made to serve the people, the economy and society again. The financial fraudsters responsible for the 2008 meltdown must be brought to justice. Then there is the long-term mother of all solutions: a total rethinking of western consumerism that throws into question how we measure progress.
If the current economic woes in Europe and the US spiral into a prolonged global recession, people's encampments will become a permanent fixtures at financial districts and outside stock markets around the world. Until our demands are met and the global economic regime is fundamentally reformed, our tent cities will keep popping up.
Bravo to those courageous souls in the encampment on New York's Liberty Street. Every night that #OCCUPYWALLSTREET continues will escalate the possibility of a full-fledged global uprising against business as usual.

|
|
Don't Be Silenced |
|
|
Sunday, 18 September 2011 19:15 |
|
Excerpt: "By continuing to push and prod we give hope to countless Americans on the verge of giving up. We give back to them the courage of their own convictions, and thereby lay the groundwork for a future progressive agenda - to take back America from the privileged and powerful, and restore broad-based prosperity."
Portrait, Robert Reich, 08/16/09. (photo: Perian Flaherty)

Don't Be Silenced
By Robert Reich, Robert Reich's Blog
18 September 11
The Election of 2012: Why the most important issues may be off the table (but should be on it).
e're on the cusp of the 2012 election. What will it be about? It seems reasonably certain President Obama will be confronted by a putative Republican candidate who:
Believes corporations are people, wants to cut the top corporate rate to 25% (from the current 35%) and no longer require they pay tax on foreign income, who will eliminate capital gains and dividend taxes on anyone earning less than $250,000 a year, raise the retirement age for Social Security and turn Medicaid into block grants to states, seek a balanced-budged amendment to the Constitution, require any regulatory agency issuing a new regulation repeal another regulation of equal cost (regardless of the benefits), and seek repeal of Obama's healthcare plan.
Or one who:
Believes the Federal Reserve is treasonous when it expands the money supply, doubts human beings evolved from more primitive forms of life, seeks to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and shift most public services to the states, thinks Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, while governor took a meat axe to public education and presided over an economy that generated large numbers of near-minimum-wage jobs, and who will shut down most federal regulatory agencies, cut corporate taxes, and seek repeal of Obama's healthcare plan.
Whether it's Romney or Perry, he's sure to attack everything Obama has done or proposed. And Obama, for his part, will have to defend his positions and look for ways to counterpunch.
Hence, the parameters of public debate for the next fourteen months.
Within these narrow confines progressive ideas won't get an airing. Even though poverty and unemployment will almost surely stay sky-high, wages will stagnate or continue to fall, inequality will widen, and deficit hawks will create an indelible (and false) impression that the nation can't afford to do much about any of it - proposals to reverse these trends are unlikely to be heard.
Neither party's presidential candidate will propose to tame CEO pay, create more tax brackets at the top and raise the highest marginal rates back to their levels in the 1950s and 1960s (that is, 70 to 90 percent), and match the capital-gains rate with ordinary income.
You won't hear a call to strengthen labor unions and increase the bargaining power of ordinary workers.
Don't expect an argument for resurrecting the Glass-Steagall Act, thereby separating commercial from investment banking and stopping Wall Street's most lucrative and dangerous practices.
You won't hear there's no reason to cut Medicare and Medicaid - that a better means of taming health-care costs is to use these programs' bargaining clout with drug companies and hospitals to obtain better deals and to shift from fee-for-services to fee for healthy outcomes.
Nor will you hear why we must move toward Medicare for all.
Nor why the best approach to assuring Social Security's long-term solvency is to lift the ceiling on income subject to Social Security payroll taxes.
Don't expect any reference to the absurdity of spending more on the military than do all other countries put together, and the waste and futility of an unending and undeclared war against Islamic extremism - especially when we have so much to do at home.
Nor are you likely to hear proposals for ending the corruption of our democracy by big money.
Although proposals like these are more important and relevant than ever, they won't be part of the upcoming presidential election.
But they should be part of the public debate nonetheless.
That's why I urge you to speak out about them - at town halls, candidate forums, and public events. Continue to mobilize and organize around them. Talk with your local media about them. Use social media to get the truth out.
Don't be silenced by Democrats who say by doing so we'll jeopardize the President's re-election. If anything we'll be painting him as more of a centrist than Republicans want the public to believe. And we'll be preserving the possibility (however faint) of a progressive agenda if he's reelected.
Remember, too, the presidential race isn't the only one occurring in 2012. More than a third of Senate seats and every House seat will be decided on, as well as numerous governorships and state races. Making a ruckus about these issues could push some candidates in this direction - particularly since, as polls show, much of the public agrees.
Most importantly, by continuing to push and prod we give hope to countless Americans on the verge of giving up. We give back to them the courage of their own convictions, and thereby lay the groundwork for a future progressive agenda - to take back America from the privileged and powerful, and restore broad-based prosperity.
Robert Reich is Chancellor's Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley. He has served in three national administrations, most recently as secretary of labor under President Bill Clinton. He has written thirteen books, including "The Work of Nations," "Locked in the Cabinet," "Supercapitalism" and his latest book, "AFTERSHOCK: The Next Economy and America's Future." His 'Marketplace' commentaries can be found on publicradio.com and iTunes.

|
|