Obama not picking enough "progressives" and "liberals?" Here's an idea!

[wyldwolf]

Let's decide on the definitive definition of the terms liberal and progressive. This shouldn't take long. By the time I get back from the office snack machine, I'm sure we'll have it settled.

[Occam Bandage]

1. Liberal: A person to the left of the persons whom Obama has picked so far.

Progressive: A Liberal with twice the self-righteousness.
Centrist: A person whom Obama has picked as a Cabinet member.
Hawk: See "Centrist."
Wall-Street Sellout: See "Centrist."
Neoliberal: See "Centrist."
Conservative: See "Centrist."

[leftynyc]

7. I love your definitions

First time I've laughed out loud all day. Many thanks.c

[bunnies]

13. roflmao!

Genius! :rofl: :applause:

[DontTreadOnMe]

2. Well I'll start with Number One:

1. You are not a liberal or a progressive if you served in either of the Bush Administrations.

Gee, that didn't take long.

[wyldwolf]

3. the first two responses both have merit!

[Occam Bandage]

4. Great. Obama's been appointing liberals all over the place!

[Buzz Clik]

5. Screw the definition. Keep in mind that Obama campaigned on the concept ...

... of eliminating the ridiculous, counterproductive extreme partisanship that currently poisons the political system.

Anyone -- ANYONE -- who is howling and peeing because Obama's cabinet is not extreme left enough is part of the problem. We're looking for solutions, not more of the same old shit.

Just get the hell out of the way if you don't want to help.

[wyldwolf]

6. that was a thread stopper! Good job.

[Buzz Clik]

8. The current definition of "not liberal enough" by the detractors is "doesn't embrace my pet issue"

I doubt anyone is honest enough to admit that.

[leftstreet]

14. What is this "partisanship" of which you speak?

What gridlocked, deadlocked, fubar-ed domestic and international policies have been poisoned and halted during the 2 Bush administrations?

:shrug:

[DevonRex]

9. I'd say the current trend is to say what liberals and progressives are NOT.

Apparently (to some people) if Obama has picked someone for a position, he/she is automatically NOT liberal or progressive.

[leftstreet]

10. Better yet, let's define "change" n/t

[Buzz Clik]

11. If we got to the point where conservatives no longer believe that "liberalism is a mental disorder"

... or that those on the left no longer believe that conservatives all embrace the concept of "I've got mine, screw you!", would that be a change you could believe in?

[emulatorloo]

16. This article is a pretty good attempt:

Posted by DeepModem Mom:

-------------------------------------------------------------
Obama puts premium on competence: "point by point refutation of Bush's handling of the White House"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4586567

WP political blog, "The Fix," by Chris Cillizza
Barack Obama and the Cult of Competency

Barack Obama won the White House last month in large part by running against George W. Bush and tapping into the public perception that his administration has been ineffectual in handling important policy questions. So it's not surprise that in the first month of his transition to the presidency, the president-elect is putting a premium on competence above all else.

From his decisions to bring in former rivals (is everyone sick of the "Team of Rivals" references yet?) to his repeated emphasis on the qualifications of each of his nominees for the Cabinet, Obama's first month as the president-elect seems designed to serve as a point by point refutation of the way Bush handled the White House over the past eight years.

Where John McCain was marginalized/punished following his 2000 primary challenge to Bush, Obama put his main primary rival -- Hillary Rodham Clinton -- into one of the most important spots in his Cabinet. Where Bush was seen as installing his Texas team into the White House, Obama has purposely avoided putting his closest Chicago confidantes (with the exception of Valerie Jarrett) into high-ranking positions.

Looking at the last month then, that cult of competency (not bad, eh?) -- more so than any grand ideological vision -- is the common thread that ties together all of Obama's picks for his Cabinet and White House senior staff to date.

Obama seems far more focused on ensuring that his nominees have impeccable credentials and a readiness for the job rather than that they fit into a specific ideological box or share a particular vision on the issue (or issues) they will oversee in his Administration....

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2008/12/polling_the_transition_obama_s.html

[sohndrsmith]

12. Thank you. : ) When I read the title to your post, I planned on replying

with idea that I am not sure that 1) there is a formal definition that is specific (or updated) enough to fit the situation or that 2) any two people would agree with that definition as it stood.

Thanks! K & R (even though I'm not sure what "Kick" is). : )

[Pyrzqxgl]

15. Listen to the Phil Ochs song " Love me, I'm a Liberal"

Back in those years I called myself a "radical democrat". My definition came from Aamon Hennacy who ran
Joe Hill House in Salt Lake City. He said "a radical is anyone who doesn't need a cop to tell him what
to do, because he knows what to do". Definitions of all these words (liberal, progressive, radical) have
all changed so much over the years. I don't know what the hell I am anymore (the description changes day
to day, not me, the description). I don't imagine you, me, or Obama have the same definitions either, but
we aren't in charge & he is.