Naomi Klein: "Yes We Can" was a marketing ploy. Like a corporate "No Logo"

[Go2Peace]

AMY GOODMAN: Naomi Klein, I wanted to talk specifically about the kind of branding that you begin your introduction with in No Logo at Ten, how branding has changed. Give us some specifics.

NAOMI KLEIN: Well, I mean, it’s—it always—branding is expert at absorbing its opposition. So, I gave a couple of examples of companies that had gone “no logo,” an example of Absolut vodka taking their label, their logo, off the bottle. And Starbucks opened, interestingly in Seattle, a store without their brand on it at all. They’re trying to make their brand disappear. So, you have this evolution in corporate branding.

But, what I decided to focus on is not how corporate—the latest gimmicks and techniques of corporate branding, but, rather, how politicians were—and, indeed, how government has absorbed the techniques honed by the corporations in the ‘90s in creating and selling their super brands. And now they’re being used by political parties, by politicians really, to sell themselves.

And I’m afraid, I think, that that’s where Obama fits in, that he really is a super brand on line with many of the companies that I discuss in No Logo. And he has many of the same problems as the companies that I discuss in No Logo, like Nike and Apple and all of these—Starbucks—all of these, sort of 1990s, sort of, lifestyle brands that co-opted many of the, you know—the iconography of the transformative political movements like the civil rights movement, the women’s movement. And that was really the hallmark of 1990s branding.

One of the things in this—you know, a large part what I write about in No Logo is the absorption of these political movements into the world of marketing. And, you know, the first time I saw the “Yes, We Can” video that was produced by Will.i.am, my first thought was, you know, “Wow. A politician has finally produced an ad as good as Nike that plays on our, sort of, faded memories of a more idealistic era, but, yet, doesn’t quite say anything.” We think we hear the message we want to hear, but if you really parse it, the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions.

And, you know, I think that that explains in some sense the paralysis in progressive movements in the United States where we think, Obama stands for something because we—our emotions were activated on these issues, but we don’t really have much to hold him to because, in fact, if you look at what he said during the campaign, like any good super brand, like any good marketer, he made sure not to promise too much, so that he couldn’t be held to it.

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/23/naomi_klein_on_climate_debt_why

[Go2Peace]

1. The unrec's start. Don't like Naomi Kline?

Ignore at your own peril. These are big players. They will become as large a force as the "Blue Dogs". This *is* news and is appropriate to this discussion.

[elocs]

7. 24 hours from now UnRecs won't make a bit of difference, but kicks will.

Although it was nice of you to point out the UnRecs and give them the attention they desire.

[Nikki Stone1]

55. Be careful.

you have mail

[Raster]

58. The "unrec" crew tries to knock out a post early on. Those that are most critical of the party line

get special treatment.

[Name removed]

149. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[noamnety]

2. linking to one of my old posts on the subject

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x108670#108948

[Go2Peace]

6. It's significant, for good or bad

Liberal media is dissallusioned and Obama needs to step up and take notice and make a move to show he is seriously listening. There should be nothing unexpected. Obama himself said we had to "keep pressure on him" from the grassroots. Well, that is EXACTLY what is going on. This is not an "affront", it is democracy in action.

Obama engages the democratic process, if nothing else was promised he has promised that he will represent us and listen to those who voted him in. Well, those who voted him in want more listening. What a PERFECT Democratic opportunity. The question is: Is he really as "grassroots" as he led us to believe? I still think it may be so, but this is the point at which he needs to come forward and acknowledge.

Obama is so good at compromise and listening right? He has done a such a good job showing that to the right and to the corporations, it is puzzling why it should work so differently for those who elected him. He needs to change that perception.

[omega minimo]

87. As Ms. Klein said,

"We think we hear the message we want to hear, but if you really parse it, the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions."

[Skittles]

3. Yes We Can was always a giant pile of bullshit

apparently it meant Yes We Can Win the Election

[Go2Peace]

15. I still don't believe it was meant to be that, but it sure seems to begoing that direction

Power does strange things. I think Obama meant well but he has let his values fall to the side. I don't think it is too late, yet.

[Nikki Stone1]

54. Do you know how many Dems and Progressives were banned from DU for saying just that?

During the primaries? During the election?

[pinto]

116. Just an FYI -

No established member gets banned for a single comment or without consensus of the moderators. Revoking a poster's membership is not taken lightly. Each and every decision is discussed among the moderators and based on the member's overall posting history and in the frame work of our membership guidelines. All revocations of memberships are reviewed by the Administrators.

Thanks.

[Nikki Stone1]

133. I'm not going to fight with a moderator, pinto

But, I do respectfully disagree with you.

And that is where I am going to leave it.

[Eric68601]

182. I disagree as well

I was baned out a few months back because someone didn't like my website.

I never promoted it EVER, but merely had it listed in my profile. I was subsequently banned for no reason what so ever. This came just days after I had donated to DU.

[natrat]

191. try posting something on the bilderbergs-they swoop in and delete that real quick

[femrap]

125. You're right...

You'd think they would be invited back considering where the administration is.

[debbierlus]

128. I fell in line. I am so ashamed of myself. I joined the hope train and I knew better

I thought that Obama might take the extraordinary opportunity and run with it. I thought maybe with the people behind him, he would at least TRY to take the lead.

Granted, I fell off the bandwagon about two weeks after inauguration. We have to hold to our principles as liberals, we are rendering ourselves completely irrelevant.

[truedelphi]

76. So apparently on Election Night the message became "Yes We Did"

And then it became "Chains we can believe in."

(Another Du'er should get the credit for the "Chains" idea, but I cannot remember who it was.)

[backtomn]

78. I agree

That is all that it has meant, so far.

[MissDeeds]

101. +1

Vacuous rhetoric. Que the apologists.

[amborin]

137. "yes, we can" = "NAFTA, We Have To"

[tranche]

176. It's called a campaign slogan dumbass.

Not bullshit. A campaign slogan. That's what it is.

[Bonn1997]

4. Very interesting analysis

[Solomon]

121. Sooner or later, they all begin to take themselves

a little too seriously.

Naomi Klein is no exception.

[Mithreal]

196. She has earned her credibility.

[Kolesar]

5. Fuel efficiency standards, funding for renewable energy, withdrawl from Iraq...

I am getting what I want from the new president.

[thenam]

8. re: Fuel efficiency standards, funding for renewable energy, withdrawl from Iraq...

Then you didn't ask for much, if anything. We also differ somewhat on how we define "withdrawal from Iraq."

[Mithreal]

122. The kind of withdrawal where more mercenaries are hired

and us troops are not called combat forces.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/06/01-6

Obama Has 250,000 'Contractors' in Iraq and Afghan Wars, Increases Number of Mercenaries
Newly released Pentagon statistics show that in both Iraq and Afghanistan the number of armed contractors is rising. The DoD says it sees “similar dependence on contractors in future.”

According to new statistics released by the Pentagon, with Barack Obama as commander in chief, there has been a 23% increase in the number of "Private Security Contractors" working for the Department of Defense in Iraq in the second quarter of 2009 and a 29% increase in Afghanistan, which "correlates to the build up of forces" in the country.

[bertman]

171. Just for the record, these "contractors" are not necessarily even Americans. Many of them

have come from the ranks of some of the most heinous regimes on the planet.

Just imagine how they might be used if the President--any President--felt that he needed some more "professional help" to control unrest in the U.S. Bush did it in New Orleans.

This contractor surge is not just for foreign "interventions", folks.

[natrat]

192. can't wait for "private security forces" to be unleashed domestically, happy times

[jonnyblitz]

10. ..withdrawal from Iraq, ESCALATION IN AFGHANISTAN.....

i am so sick of you apologist FOOLS listing withdrawal from Iraq as a PLUS when he is just going to turn around and send them off to DIE in Afghanistan.

[Kolesar]

16. Obama has not announced anything about Afghanistan yet

He is reevaluating our options. That's what I want: a president who collects data and reflects on his next actions.

Calling me a fool was out of order. How would you like if I commented on your grooming?*

*I met you at the 2004 ANSWER antiwar rally.

edit:2004

[Naturyl]

56. How would "grooming" possibly be relevant to anything?

[ChiciB1]

104. UH, I Think An Announcement Has Just Been Leaked To David Shuster...

YES WE CAN... send troops to Afghanistan! Seems he said something about other's saying this could be Obama's WATERLOO!

That's about all I caught, don't quote me for sure, but I KNOW I heard them saying that a decision HAS BEEN MADE!

Media can get it wrong, but I'd bet you'll be hearing it soon! Shuster is pretty good, with Nora alongside! So it may be YES WE CAN all over again!

And, NO I AM NOT HAPPY, should this be the case! I've already commented several several times about how I'm getting more and more disillusioned about Obama and Congress! HOPE & CHANGE ARE two different things for sure, there was a LOT of HOPE and CHANGE does take time, but it seems I'm seeing it "not so much" even IF it takes time! Some things are just STAYING the same and not so much CHANGE when it come to the really BIG issues!

JMHO

[MissDeeds]

106. Oh please

Our troops are still dying in Afghanistan while he mulls what exactly our mission is. If he doesn't even know what the mission is, why are people dying for it?

[backtomn]

81. What withdrawal from Iraq??

Am I the only one that is missing the point here???

[Go2Peace]

11. That is good policy, but not "Change" in the way it was presented, regardless, will he LISTEN and

respond to those who voted for him.

How can you not understand? He reaches across the table for everyone except his own grassroots. I am not saying he has to change everything he is doing, but we need to be heard. Why is he treating us like stepchildren? Why do corporate powers get special access and we get almost no access? I just don't get it.

He did not campaign on "a few good policies", he campaigned on Yes We Can. We are the "We", why does he treat us like "No You Can't"?

[Kolesar]

17. He killed that antimissile program that was a huge irritation for the Russians

And I mean the Russian people/electorate, not just Putin and his puppets.

[femrap]

126. We can't print that much $$$$ to

pay for that.

By saying he 'wants to finish the job' in Afghanistan, he better be ready to enact a War Tax on the rich. It's simply disgusting that the poor and working classes pay for this war with their lives. Or bring back the Draft.

[Luminous Animal]

44. You left out, "Replacing troops with private contractors."

It's a nasty slight of hand that Obama is doing in Iraq.

[kenny blankenship]

59. Not to mention the fact that he is simply following Bush's timetable

[twitfinder]

157. Wowsers....

"Not to mention the fact that he is simply following Bush's timetable"

Someone who actually reads and understands the show.

[backtomn]

Hello????

What fuel efficiency standards?? What funding for renewable fuels?? (Bush did that), Withdrawal from Iraq???? Nice try. Maybe it is time to wake up. None of Obama's promises are coming true.

[backtomn]

79. Hello????

What fuel efficiency standards?? What funding for renewable fuels?? (Bush did that), Withdrawal from Iraq???? Nice try. Maybe it is time to wake up. None of Obama's promises are coming true.

[amborin]

136. you're kidding, right?

the fuel standards are watered down---again

no progress on Climate change talks coming up in Copenhagen

and launching a green economy???????

etc.......

[Kolesar]

141. You haven't a clue what you are talking about eom

[amborin]

159. certainly applies to you! you have no idea what you're talking about

i've written and published on fuel economy standards!

[bridgit]

9. Of course it was, and I feel for people that never saw it coming

[Go2Peace]

12. I haven't completely given up

Not because I think Obama is listening well or because he will overcome whatever is keeping him from fulfilling the promises to his grassroots, but because I still believe he may "wake up" from the insulated place he has been keeping himself and realize the errors he is making. He is an intelligent man. I just don't understand why it hasn't happened already.

[bridgit]

18. Me neither, and it is because he is an intelligent man...

that he opened his eyes and discovered where he is and rightly so. Princess Diana, maybe a lame comparison, used to call them "the grey men" well,

Firstly my thought is that some of the very grey-est men in the world likely guard the crown jewels of Britain, but I think her point was that there came that time when she was sat-down and explained the greater workings swirling above all heads...including her's and including Obama's, if you will, in that I know we have our own very, very slate grey thinkers and so,

"Nice drive, Mr. President" has become, "Nice 3pt shot, Mr. President cool Ray-Bans!"

I do too much of this stuff for a living but if that isn't 'branding' then nothing is

[snake in the grass]

138. Speaking of Grey Men...

...might I suggest the novel http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momo_(novel)">Momo from Michael Ende? This is one of the best books I've ever read. Although some consider it a children's book, it deals with some heavy themes and is a great read for adults as well.


The Grey Men steal time from humanity.

[alterfurz]

61. I'm still hoping that after the current market bubble bursts,

and the public rejects yet another "too big to fail" bailout, Obama may finally break with TPTB and find his inner FDR. At least with him there's still that potential.

[Naturyl]

120. There is?

FDR potential with Obama? Really?

[alterfurz]

134. just saying that if depression does deepen further,

thus creating many more millions of desperate citizens, there's at least some chance that a basically decent & somewhat enlightened President might yet do the right thing --of which there'd be zero probability under McCain/Palin.

[Are_grits_groceries]

13. And we are surprised because?

All campaigns are marketing their candidates. Obama's hit on an excellent logo, slogan, and message. That overall strategy was able to keep the basics in place and in the public's mind for the duration. Ultimately, that was one reason Obama was able to withstand the accusations thrown at him.

All politicians would love to find this level of success. They just haven't been as good at it. A lot of them wobble around and change before they hit on an overall idea that will stick. They need to do more testing in groups before they launch what should be their overall image to people for the duration.

If Fiorina had done this, she never would have made a website with 'Carlyfornia' as the title. That has gotten her nothing but ridicule.

[Go2Peace]

14. That is not "change" then. The nation does not need another corporate market lie

I refuse to believe what you just said was true. Because that simply is not acceptable. This is a democracy, what you just described is the head of a corporatocracy. I don't accept that, and still have hope he will wake up when here realizes what he is doing, because using marketing in place of substance is just another name for democratic corruption. We can NEVER let ourselves get to the place where that would be acceptable.

What is accepted in selling products is not acceptable for a just democracy. If you believe such marketing is acceptable your belief is part of why this country is falling apart.

[Are_grits_groceries]

23. Marketing or messaging...semantics.

I am just pointing out how I think campaigns are run now. I'm cynical about the process, but I believe this is how it works. I also don't think this is so different from the past. The methods are more sophisticated now.

Call it marketing or whatever you want. Candidates should have basics that can reach the public. Why is it wrong to prepare something simple that will be effective and reflect the candidate?

The problem lies in misrepresenting what they really stand for in their basic symbols, slogans, and positions. People don't question the message enough. Candidates do need something simple that people can remember. They can't win ONLY on policy statements or more detailed info because the details won't stick. Even when they are making speeches, they are supporting their basic themes.

Hillary is another example of muddling. She was all over the map in responding to the Obama campaign. She changed all the time trying to find some effective way to disparrage him.

She might have been better served to find a strong and basic method to present herself first. That should have been pushed into the public's minds. Then she would have had an anchor about herself when she did move to a message to attack him.

[Go2Peace]

25. No, "Marketing", when applied heavily to the Political world, is another name for PROPAGANDA

It is not acceptable to fool the grassroots in this case, period. As I mentioned before, I have not given up. Why not just ask yourselves, why is the grass roots not getting any attention? And for a movement that was brought into power by the grassroots, both figuratively and to a large extent financially, why don't we have access to Obama?

[Are_grits_groceries]

29. Meh.

Propaganda:
2 : the spreading of ideas, information, or rumor for the purpose of helping or injuring an institution, a cause, or a person
3 : ideas, facts, or allegations spread deliberately to further one's cause or to damage an opposing cause; also : a public action having such an effect

It's all propaganda in some form. Propaganda isn't necessarily lies.

You are squabbling now about the message he presented then. Did he deliberately deceive people or did people deceive themselves? Did he deceive people at all? If he seems to have changed, why? Is it out of some necessity that he has run into, a realization that he has to prioritize or something else.

In addition, when trying to affect change, the policies he wanted met the facts that were there when he took office. Actually governing is a whole different ball of wax.

I don't like some things I have seen at all. I am squabbling about those.

Please show me one politician who had a campaign that stated ideas that they actually carried out in totality. They all say things that mesh with their views that they will never be able to fulfill. Some are probably policies that they know they can't deliver even if they try. And they might try. Others are ideas they hope to be able to change.

[Go2Peace]

33. Actually, we have a far larger propaganda budget than the USSR ever had

Another thing that I would love to see Obama "change".

[Go2Peace]

34. dup

Hit the button twice, oops

[sendero]

32. All we would ask..

.. is that one's slogan have some basis in reality.

[butterfly77]

198. The republicons are...

they are studying what he did to win and are copying I have heard some of them on various talkshows talking about their little cults around the country.

They really believe that they are inclusionists and think they are working with the grassroots..They are trying to be community organizers but they are only organizing Caucasians..

[Kolesar]

19. Unrec for the lugubrious malaise...eom

[willing dwarf]

20. The choice between cynicism and hope is yours

Naomi Klein makes a good argument, but you can look at the same campaign and see that it was an attempt to engage ordinary people and to step away from the big-money lobbyist approach to politics. How else can that happen? How can the ordniary citizen grab hold and have any impact at all compared with the big money interests?

I believe that Naomi Klein is describing the way that the campaign happened, and attributing a motive to deceive which isn't necessarily there.

Obama is the only politician who seems to be trying to connect with us at the grassroots level. If we decide he's doing it just as a gimmick and we decide not to trust the process , then we can only loose. If we decide to keep on playing, even though the game is stacked against us, we're at least not going to miss our chance.

I think it's a choice between cymicism and hope, and I'd rather choose hope.

[Go2Peace]

26. He WAS connecting at the grassroots. He ASKS of the grassroots, but he is not LISTENING

and responding to the grassroots.

Yes, I am losing hope, but I did not start there.

[polichick]

31. Looks like he used the grassroots but answers to corporate America. nt

[Go2Peace]

37. It looks like that, but I still do believe he will change direction once the pressure builds enough

from the grassroots. I see his current direction as more of a "mistake" and error in judgement. He needs to be brought around by the people that put him into the Presidency. I think it just might happen. There is a LOT happening in the blogisphere and in liberal media pushing back to make that real change.

[polichick]

47. Here's an interesting piece that talks about Obama supporters...

...both grassroots and corporate.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x497902

[SammyWinstonJack]

45. YES INDEED!

x(

[ChiciB1]

107. +100 At Least! I Feel "Used" Because I Worked So Hard To Get Him

elected. He wasn't at the top of my list, but I did it anyway!

Geithner & Summers bother me a LOT... and don't get me started on Rahm and the Blue Dogs!!

[omega minimo]

90. The third option is objectivity

a realistic view of the truths in what she is saying about how our politics and government are run now.

a realistic view of the presentation from the very first dynamite 2004 speech which fits her comment:

"We think we hear the message we want to hear, but if you really parse it, the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions."

[willing dwarf]

119. Well said

I think you are right. I think Naomi Klein is probably right, but I don't that means that the campaign was a cynical ploy merely to get elected. I think the open ended rhetoric suited Obama's way of thinking and trying to find a third way between the extremes of political and commercial pressure.

I'm not sure if he will be able to succeed, and I'm sure he won't be able to do it alone, but I'm thankful that he is trying.

Having listened to Taylor Branch talking about his taped conversations w Bill Clinton made me realize that we really did loose the opportunity to choose hope over cynicism. The cynical view that everyone is for sale creates the expectation that they are. It's so frustrating.

[omega minimo]

158. I don't know if any of us have any idea

who our president really is, what he really "wants" to do. There is certainly a general sentiment on DU that he may not be "allowed" to -- alluding to TPTB which now it's not too :tinfoilhat: to mention...

IMHO "a cynical ploy merely to get elected" appears to be a requirement, because of the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ controlling elections. Even if Obama were our dream humanistic president, it seems the ploy goes with the territory.

[StreetKnowledge]

127. I don't mean to break your heart, friend, but here is how it really is.

"Obama is the only politician who seems to be trying to connect with us at the grassroots level."

This is delusional. That concern stopped on November 4, 2008, when we elected him President. Since then, it's quite clear that nobody in the Obama Administration cares about the base the put him in the White House. He promised change, and we haven't gotten it, entirely because the United States' political system is dramatically corrupted. The entire US government has become subservient to corporate America and the tens of thousands of lobbyists who inhabit Washington. There are a few people who care about that base, but they don't hold the reins of power in either party.

Naomi Klein is right here. Corporate America owns Washington, and short of us figuring out to remove their influence - which I can't think of how we'll do that short of running every single lobbyist out of town on a rail - we're not gonna get what we want. The lobbyists will always get what they want, because they are the ones who hire former Congressmen and women and Senators and pay those currently in office. The change can't come from within, because very few of those lobbyists would be willing to sacrifice much of their livelihoods to help the people.

[pundaint]

130. You can choose to believe or not believe in the words,

but if you observe the actions, you'll see the truth. I see nothing sufficient on the domestic side that I would have voted for, nothing on the war side, nothing on the leadership side, and in summary, no change. He is way better on diplomacy. That is enough to be better than the other choice in the last general election, but he is vulnerable in the next primary and without Republican help, in the 2012 general.

[natrat]

195. yea dem turnout will be abysmal and independents won't go dem likely

[HamdenRice]

21. Oh Noes!1!! Obama used a campaign slogan!!1! Impeach him already!!!!11

[Go2Peace]

24. Nope, you are not listening. slogans are not "change"

People want politics to change, not just policies, althought it would be nice to get real change of direction in policies as well. So far we just have some good and some bad policies. This administration only transformative compared to the last, but in real historical terms this is not "change" yet.

But the real issue is where is the "We" in "Yes We Can"? All Obama needs to do is reach out and work with the grassroots that he helped build. What exactly is so difficult to grasp about that?

[HamdenRice]

27. "People want politics to change, not just policies" -- ROFL!

So what is "change" other than "change in policy"? Ending the war in Iraq, ending warrantless wiretapping, enacting Keynesian economic policies, replacing warmongering with diplomacy, restoring due process in criminal trials, ending extraordinary rendition, ending torture, closing Guantanamo -- all these things are the change in policy I voted for.

What is change that is not change in policy -- a pony for every citizen? Free candy in every subway car? Rainbows every day? Obama to wave a wand and make the Republicans both rational and nice so "politics" change?

:rofl:

Hint: The government works through policy, not magic.

Dag, I cannot wrap my mind about the way some people think about politics and policy.

[Johonny]

48. You can't give Obama any credit

If the guy does something he promised to do like say a tax cut for the majority of Americans, you must ignore it at all costs. If he does something normal like play a pick up basketball game, it must be over analyzed until some secret flaw in why it's not ok for him to do it is found. We must not ever accept Obama as doing his best. He is always in the wrong. A fake and a shill.

TippyCanoe and Tyler too. Yes they just invented branding in politics. LOL to this article.

[quaker bill]

22. So, they have discovered

that politicians tend to want to seem profound while not painting themselves into a corner?

My goodness, this is earth shattering news. Who would have thought such a thing possible?

You know, it is sort of like when they say "read my lips, no new taxes", they don't really mean it.

I for one, rather assumed Barack Obama was a politician when I first heard from him at the convention in 2004. My hope was that his skills as a politician were sufficient to dislodge republicans from the Whitehouse. It turns out that his skills were more than sufficient to the task. I got what I paid for and am quite happy with the result. I never expected the country to turn on a dime. Heck, six years ago 85 percent of the American People thought invading Iraq for no discernable reason was a good thing.

I have stopped seeing yellow ribbon car magnets and "W - the President" stickers. My drive to work is so much more peaceful and pleasant. Change is in the works, some has happened already and the rest will take time.

[Go2Peace]

28. That happens whenever a democrat gets elected, it is not part of "change"

I don't know how old you are, but styles and bumper stickers change whenever the party in power changes. When Clinton came to power long hair and hippie styles came back in, but did our fundamental approaches change? No, we simply got a reprieve, and worse, legislation and deregulation that occured on his watch are part of what led us to where we are now.

W worshippers are embarrased, but not because of Obama, but because of W. But the reality is that all this nice feeling now is not based in much of anything really changing. The same powers and base philosophies are in place.

I guarantee that most people on this board, if you would have asked them a week before the election, would not have guessed that we would not be taking a much stronger turn away from the past. But our expectations have slackened because we don't yet want to accept that we may have been wrong.

I still don't accept that. I still believe. But I don't think we will get there unless we all rise up and MAKE the President listen. And I believe that is happening. You guys should just get on board and let's all make change happen, just as Obama said it is all supposed to work???

[omega minimo]

93. Impeachment "Off The Table" was a huge clue that not much was going to change....

"I guarantee that most people on this board, if you would have asked them a week before the election, would not have guessed that we would not be taking a much stronger turn away from the past."

Many, maybe, not "most."

[quaker bill]

164. Many people on this board

may have imagined a great many things on the eve of the election.

I am old enough to have missed the draft for VietNam by roughly 20 days. My lottery number was 7 of 365. I protested VietNam, some of my friends went and did not come back, some went and came back forever changed. I organized protests of Reagan's deployment of first strike nukes. I helped organize the Green Party in FL and was a speaker at their first state conference back in the 1980s. I worked for Al Gore in Fla. I worked for Howard Dean in FL and later for John Kerry and finally for Barack Obama. Note, that I did not work for Clinton as while I thought him better than GHWB and Dob Bole, I was never taken with the man.

You are not going to "make the President listen". We are not going to do it either. Even if we tried and were to some extent successful, nothing that fails to pass congress actually ever happens. You might believe congress succumbs to pressure, but in this you would be incorrect. Barack could indeed act like a demanding monarch, but in doing so would only fail, and fail sooner. Capturing the congress and whitehouse was only the beginning of the battle, before this we were not even on the field of play. Getting there was a necessary first step but it was never going to be sufficient. It will take consistent winning for a decade or more to get the party really started. Republicans and many democrats still can and do think of the last election as an "abberation", not a "realignment". (another thing to thank GWB for, as his failure was so strong it polluted the next election) However in fact, it will only be a real political realignment if we keep winning, and winning larger.

In the face of a true political realignment, the terms of discussion will finally change, but not until it is proven. Politicians are as a class of humans among the most risk-adverse, this means that they move slowly. It is only when they know that offending us will most assuredly lose them their jobs, that actual change will happen. I am talking not of Barack, but of the Republicons and Conservadems here. If tax cutting, supply side, anti-abortion, anti-gay, chickenhawk, neo-cons have any hope of winning, then this is where the debate will stick. If you want the discussion to move on, then further punishment at the polls will have to be delivered.

I have met and work with politicians on a regular basis. With a few notable exceptions, they are far from the best and brightest among us. If you want the message to sink in, it will take far more than one or two elections to do it. There is no magic, it is a long hard slog, but we at least have won two in a row. Add on another half dozen and we will be getting close.

[Agony]

178. ➔BIngo

long,slow,hard slog... get moving, keep going.

Cheerio,
Agony

[KharmaTrain]

30. Not Enough Ponies Fast Enough...

So it took the good Ms. Klein all this time to realize politicians are sold like soap or coffee? Well knock me over with a feather...I guess those slogans like "I Like Ike" or "All The Way with LBJ" were something else. To those who put some kind of superhuman values on President Obama or that the political culture inside the beltway bubble would somehow melt away or make a 180 it's no surprise they are crestfallen that every little problems hasn't been solved their way by now.

You nailed it...President Obama is a politician...always has been. Some want him to be the Democratic equivelent of the Unitary Executive...rule by fiat and if he strays from whateever perceived position that doesn't square with their worldview, then he obviously has sold out or corrupted by some nefarious puppetmaster.

We didn't elect the man to do everything in a year...or even in four. The messes this country is mired in are deep and took decades of abuse of the political system and those who have benefitted from that abuse are still very much around and not about to give up their perks without a fight. It's as if those who voted for President Obama feel he owes them all of their priorities with little regard to the balance of power or the diverse special interests that will affect votes and moving legislation.

I have to shake my head on many of those who are ready to throw this administration under the bus...as if a McCain regime would have been a better alternative.

Yes there has been change...and if it's not what you like, then there are a lot of elections next year where you can find someone who meets the change you want. To those who are ready to take their ball and go home or join the Green party or whatever, you deserve to feel disenfranchised and you're sure to find your "heroes" are also politicians...and then what?

[Go2Peace]

35. No, too much throwing the grassroots under the bus. The time is on to put us at the table. That

simple really.

We will argue right and left but the fact is other than telling us to "shut up" and get with the program Obama is not engaging the grassroots progressives, many who were instrumental in getting him into office, the time has come and he needs the help, and besides, this is how it is supposed to work.

Why don't you guys just get on board instead of fighting and trying to tone down the inertia of the grassroot upswelling that Obama asked for. This is democracy in action. Don't you get it yet????

[KharmaTrain]

38. An Interesting Question...

...and projection. No one is telling anyone here to "shut up and get with the program"...if there is such a movement it's with those who have already thrown this administration "under the bus" for not delivering what special interest...be it healthcare or a total imposion of the economy to "show the rich" (and putting millions more out of work) or GLBT rights or ending the wars yesterday. Again...the list is long, the problems complex and the solutions aren't as simple as some here like to make them. Or that one person's priorities are more important than another and if you don't "get it" thus you must have sold out or are some king of political zombie. Methinks those so quick to condemn or write off not just this administration, but how our political system works as the ones who don't "get it".

If there is some "grassroots upswelling", many politicians in Washington don't see it. Those are the people who are voting against public option or defunding the military...not the administration. If anything, I could see some Democrats being frustrated at the "grassroots" as they're quick to condemn and even alienate some Democrats...who needs rushpublicans when there are those on your own side who are just as quick to "throw someone under the bus".

You are correct in saying this is democracy in action...and it's not pretty. It's not supposed to be. How quick one forgets the days Democrats were not only in the minority but on the verge of being "fillibustered" out of any power. Fortunately the diversity of our system prevented that from happening.

If someone is upset with their representation...there are 435 house seats up for re-election in the months ahead...that's where you should be focusing on. Jumping ship on the Democrats is just what the rushpublicans are dreaming of. Not that they have any solutions (just make the problems worse) they are hoping that many of the "grassroots" get frustrated or disenchanted and stay home next year. That's how we ended up with Raygun and Gingrich.

Cheers...

[JoeyT]

92. You have a mighty strange definition of "under the bus"

So exactly what principle of the Democratic party has the man upheld?
And yes, "Shut up and get with the program, you hippie losers!" is a very common message on here.
The left jumping ship is also how we got Bush the Lesser, and I'd bet you anything it's probably going to happen again.
There will be yet another wailing and gnashing of teeth when everyone to the left of McCarthy votes for a third party candidate and the Dem loses. And people will act like the liberals are to blame instead of the people that are hell bent on running them out of the party.

[omega minimo]

95. that also happened after the last time

Americans were promised health care and got zip ..........

[KharmaTrain]

117. The Pitfalls of Being A Majority Party...

You ask a good question about Democratic Party principals vs. those of Progressive or Liberals. The two have common ideals in many areas, but not all, nor in the priorities. Thus when you mention "principle" it has never been articulated in anything but abstracts. Healthcare was one example as there's an agreement in the need for reform, but there wasn't a clearly defined party "principal"...most never thought there'd be a serious debate and now that it's happened many are disappointed as the legislative process is both messy and time consuming. So many had their own ideals of what reform meant, but again, in abstracts. Instead we are now dealing with specifics and being a majority party that means several different sets of principals.

To those who think the Democratic Party has or is the 'liberal' or Progressive party set themselves up for a fall. It has been a party that has been sympathetic, yet never have I seen a set of "principals" such as what we see on the right. This isn't pushing anyone under the bus, just a realistic observation from a lifetime of observing our political system.

For those who think a third party will either be the solution or "teach" the Democrats a lesson, then that's a set up for another fall as it will open the door for the rushpublicans and right wing to divide and conquer as they did in the 80s and 90s...wedging Democrats and or liberals/progresives against one another. Right now we're seeing the GOOP do it to its own and to what effect? Its alienated moderates who a party needs to win a national election and alienating and eroding the party into factions that are doing more to harm themselves than to regain power.

Those who are "running out of the party" or feel run out weren't really prepared to fight in the first place...or assumed that the Democrats were going to be the ideological mirror image of the rushpublicans. I sure don't want a party where there's a "my way or the highway" attitude...I worked hard for 8 years to get rid of the unitary executive concept...something that I see those who are "disenchated" with President Obama would like to see him become. They've become impatient for changes when the cold realities are changing such an entrechened kleptocracy as we have can't be done by one person no matter how big a bully pulpit he or she has. It takes perseverence...and not frustration. If there are Democrats who put special interest ahead of their constituents or "principals" (whatever you deem them to be), then the work is to elect more and "better" Democrats or to get in the faces of our elected representatives and show them our votes and money mean just as much as one from a corporate. Running off to a third party defeats any ability to reform from within and in the end leaevs you on the outside. We're seeing a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to move this country in a more progressive direction, but it won't happen if party leaders see many ready to attack, condemn or jump ship cause they're not "pricipaled" enough.

[dotymed]

131. We still have the unitary executive

and he is pushing the "patriot act" to remain the rule of the land. From what I read on DU, most of us want what Kucinich wants. He speaks for and to us. Yet before the rest of the candidates helped take him out of the race, most people here and elsewhere thought he was a gnome with crazy ideas. Just like the MSM portrayed him, most people felt he was a joke. He was my candidate. He didn't use slogans and one-liners. He made brave choices and spoke for the average American. I would really like to see him and Bernie Sanders start their own party. They would get all of the help I could give.

[KharmaTrain]

135. Kucinich Doesn't Speak For All...

and most defnitely not for me. No one does, except me. I find common cause with candidates but I know they are politicians and ideals are wonderful but that politics is the art of the possible. Sticking to principals can result in the worst case happening, as we saw over years of rushpublican rule where they showed strength and unity while Democrats were divided on "principal" and now puts this administration in a damned if it does, damned if it doesn't position.

Just cause DK supporters tend to be more vocal, that by no means says he speaks for this DU'er...nor does any other politician. And that's what they are. They all have their special interests...one tries to find accomodation not idolization or blind devotion.

You may get your wish of DK splintering off...and so be it. Enjoy one's principals in the political wilderness.

[Go2Peace]

144. I could accept that *if* Obama was listening and allowing the grassroots a voice

But the fact that he is all but ignoring us tells me he is not yet being the "change" instrument he said he would be.

I expect Republicans to ignore my voice and not allow it in my democracy. I expect a Democratic President to run into challenges and difficulties if they attempt to make significant change.

What I *don't* expect, is for a Democratic President to almost completely lock out of the process the base that was instrumental in putting him where he is. How can you possibly justify that?

[Are_grits_groceries]

39. *sigh*

Just because I am cynical, that doesn't mean I have stopped trying. You have no idea what some of us are doing or have done. We may not post in ALL CAPS or continually urge everyone on. That's fine if you do. No sarcasm. Have at it, but please remember that what you read isn't the whole picture.

I have a much more jaundiced view of the whole political process. I am outraged, and it catches me a lot. However, I try not to waste too much time on that. It only raises my blood pressure, threatens to send me into a real depression, and uses up too much of my energy.

I get up every morning, and I spend 15 minutes being outraged. Maybe more depending on how I feel. Then I move on to more practical measures such as trying to get my point across to someone who may have some influence.

Quite frankly, I am just about outraged out. I have used up enough for 3 people because I live in SC. I am much more selective about where I aim it now. In addition, I try turn the energy I may have in outrage into a more useful form of protest.

You may be the one leading the charge, and I may be the one pushing from behind to keep the group moving. Both kinds of people are needed.

[Go2Peace]

145. I get it. Sorry. I now see we are saying similar things.

One problem of this format. Thank you for clarifying. Peace to you Grits.

[HamdenRice]

40. Do you really think you are the "grassroots"?

Obama was not elected by some extreme left "base." He was elected by millions and millions of people many of whom are Joe Sixpack AFL-CIO union workers, public employees, teachers, doctors and dentists, office workers and cubicle rats, etc., etc., etc. That is Obama's "grassroots," not you.

The idea that Obama owes some special fealty to a tiny fringe that was ready to throw him under the bus on inauguration day anyway is laughable.

He owes his fealty to the giant coalition of diverse people who elected him.

[Lautremont]

88. And what does that giant, diverse group want?

They, as a group, don't want anything specifically. They don't as a group even want anything as specific and obvious as an end to the war in Iraq - they're that diverse. So how in particular do you suggest he demonstrate his fealty?

[JoeyT]

91. Yep. Those people elected him alright.

The teachers that they're putting out of work in an attempt to privatize education. The unions they're busting. The gay people that suddenly aren't important at all anymore.

[Go2Peace]

146. And what makes you think that doesn't represent me, because it does, more than you know

. But really, other than the big union leaders, who represent lots of money as well as their base, tell me how he is reaching out to the coalation you mention? I would love to hear it.

[Enthusiast]

190. A solid majority

of Americans want a strong public option. This is not some fringe as you label it.

A majority of Americans also want out of Afghanistan. This is a tiny fringe?

A solid majority of Americans want real reform of the financial services industry. This is not some crazy fringe!

Special fealty? Who in the fuck is asking for special fealty? We only want to be listened to as what we want is MAINSTREAM.

Why do you think President Obama's approval numbers are going down? I've got a clue for you, it isn't because the Republicans are suddenly ending their approval of President Obama.

[blindpig]

36. Hindsight is golden.....

Two years ago a few had figured this out.....

It wasn't that hard, know them by the company they keep.

[midnight]

41. To bad our emotions could not be triggered by a sense of justice towards

providing equality for all.

[Echo In Light]

42. +1

[NICO9000]

86. Way, way off topic here

But just wanted to give Echo props for that great Rise Above graphics! Very cool record label!

[optimator]

43. i love Naomi

.

[PHIMG]

46. uh, duh. everything in a campaign is show business.

it fooled the people we need to fool to win elections and then Rahm takes over and we screw those very people every chance we get. there is plenty of time to fool them again in 2012.

[Romulox]

49. k/r. Naomi Klein is quickly becoming one of my heroes. nt

[dana_b]

68. me too

after reading "Shock Doctrine" and her articles in The Nation and Huff Post, I like how she analyzes what is occuring in politics, what led up to different movements/situations and how it will affect the future.

[paulsby]

50. that "yes we can" video was an eery example of the cult of personality

but of COURSE a politician is going to care about marketing, image, etc.

[Go2Peace]

148. I don't go much for media culture, but I admit it brought tears to my eyes

It is a great dissapointment that Obama has not solidified the thought expressed in the ad. The fact they created it means they understand what we really want.

Surely most Democrats understand what is different about "our guys" playing this game? We expect Republicans to be disengenuine, but with Democrats, our entire values are supposed to scream that, while we are not perfect, we don't like to play those games.

[paulsby]

184. i don't buy that for a second

i don't believe dems are any less likely to play games, lie, etc. here's the thing. politicians are not defined first and foremost by their party. they are defined as POLITICIANS. an average dem politician probably has more in common with a repub politician than a dem non-politician, for example.

i thought that ad was chilling, and made hollywood and the music industry look like a bunch of hero worshipping vacant headed sycophants. blech!

i frigging dig obama, but that commercial was just disgusting.

i know there are a lot of dems who think our guys are more likely to be honest, genuine, or whatever. i just don't buy that. i think if you study political history, you see that it's very common for people to think the people on their side (the politicians) are different/better. and it's almost never the case.

time, of all magazines, had a good article not too long ago about the history of politics in the united states and they referenced hofstadter and his book on politics and paranoia. hofstadter believed that both the left and the right are also very prone to that, and it's a somewhat uniquely american political trait. that's a different issue, of course.

and any guy who has played enough politics to get to the level of president? that's doubly true in regards to my first point.

[greeneyedboy]

51. Klein nails it as usual. n/t

[Nikki Stone1]

52. This is a surprise? Really? They used a modified Pepsi symbol for Chrissake.

I guess that makes the GOP Coke.

[Naturyl]

53. Ditto with "change we can believe in"

A lot of Orwell in that one, though. As in "change you'd better not believe in, because you're getting jack."

[Echo In Light]

63. But what happens in a society if a large enough % choose to abide illusion/fantasy as "reality?"

Double-bubble, big trouble :wow:

[Naturyl]

72. You're looking at it. (n/t)

[Echo In Light]

75. You're soaking in it!

[tranche]

177. Lot's of Orwell in that one?

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

57. Wow, what a brilliant insight!

Politicians use marketing! I never would have guessed.

[rollingrock]

64. Not many people notice it

until it is pointed out and explained to them, which Klein has done a very good job of here.

[Echo In Light]

69. And then when it is explained, many still vehemently deny it as a "conspiracy theory"

... you know, b/c it's critical of powerful people within powerful orgs that, despite the empty rhetoric & window dressing (necessary illusions), are wholly unaccountable - in any truly substantive way - to the public. And so b/c of that it simply can't be true/accurate!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

73. Really, how dumb do you have to be?

Political campaigning is nothing more than a very specialized form of marketing. It always has been.

[rollingrock]

74. People get sucked into the emotionalism

they get caught up in all the hope and change, yes we can rhetoric to really understand that what they're being sold is little more than a corporate slogan. people may have a vague sense that they are being marketed to, but don't really grasp the extent of it and just how shallow and skin-deep it really is.

[Echo In Light]

80. Worse, and more deeply rooted yet, is the birth-on cultural indoctrination

It isn't necessarily a matter of a lack of intelligence, or of over reliance on uninformed emotional reaction ...although both of those clearly don't help the matter. It's the overarching worldview Americans are conditioned with from birth on, resulting in their perceiving "reality" through a very specific, empire friendly lens.

[Naturyl]

123. Bingo

Someone who gets it on DU... refreshing.

[Go2Peace]

150. No, it is recognizing that a DEMOCRATIC candidate used marketing cynically. That *is* a change.

I don't know how old you are, but while Democrats can be crafty, they generally understood there was a pact they needed to fulfill with the common man.

Democrats must be different by definition. If they are not they are tryly destined to just become another Republican party.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

161. No it isn't new.

Did you actually buy Clinton's "Building a bridge to the 21st century" gibberish?

[LaPera]

60. Just read Naomi Klein's insightful incredible book-you will understand more than you want to believe

[dana_b]

70. No Logo or Shock Doctrine?

I read Shock Doctrine and will read No Logo soon. SD was one of the scariest and most insightful books that I have ever read.

[cadmium]

62. Not really a new insight. who didnt know this? Obama himself said

that he was a blank slate that people projected their hopes upon.

[rollingrock]

65. Not new, but it needs to be addressed and talked about

and Klein is doing just that. that is, starting a dialogue and making an issue of the fact that modern day political campaigns are very superficial and seem to have all the substance of a Pepsi commercial.

[tranche]

179. Naomi Klein isn't really making any new insights here.

She's bringing attention to herself, which is her primary concern, but I don't see anything that wasn't covered, say 500 years ago.

[Go2Peace]

151. But what happens when he no longer allows us access to the slate?

[Unvanguard]

66. Of course it was branding. What else is a political campaign? That was obvious from the start.

It's not this fact that I find notable; it's the shock and incredulity at the realization that electing Obama did not usher in a new era where everything progressives want is enacted.

If you have low expectations, you will not be unpleasantly surprised.

[Go2Peace]

152. Did you read about how this kind of marketing *replaces* social change?

It is different.

[phasma ex machina]

67. M$M riding Obama's coattails, patting themselves on the back, pitching their supposed clout. nt

[truedelphi]

71. k & r! Klein always sorts out the nitty gritty. n/t

[NYC Liberal]

77. What a bunch of bullshit. This is insightful?

Candidates have marketed themselves in elections since ancient times. You think Greek and Roman politicians didn't use marketing? There is nothing wrong with it. How else would you get people to listen up to what you have to say and get interested in learning about your ideas? You market yourself in a debate, you market yourself though speeches, you market yourself now through television commercials and the internet.

Ms. Klein says: " the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions." She misses the whole point. The point of television commercials (as one example) is not to give a complete in-depth analysis of the issues, but to get people motivated to learn more about the issues and your positions on them. That's exactly what Obama did and if she simply looked at the ads and said "Huh. Interesting." and then went about her day, well that's her problem if she didn't take the time to go listen to his speeches - which were filled with concrete ideas and real plans.

I'm not surprised though, since the same people who only looked at a few ads and cried "empty slogans! marketing!" are no doubt the same people who are shocked that Obama is considering sending more troops to Afghanistan (not just opposed, but surprised that he's doing it) when he has never, ever been against the war there. If you only looked at a few 30-second ads and never watched all the debates during the primaries, never watched his speeches on the campaign trail, and never took the time to sit down and listen to an interview with him, you would be surprised at a great many things I'm sure.

And by the way, this trend of calling anything you don't like "corporate" and anyone you disagree with a "corporatist" - that's what's devoid of substance. It means nothing, it means jack shit. Rather than making real arguments, some people here on DU and elsewhere have taken to simply slapping that label on anyone and anything with whom and which they disagree with no argument or logical reasoning. We are supposed to take it at face value that calling someone a "corporatist" or "DLC" is a valid argument in and of itself.

[Go2Peace]

154. So please enumerate how the President is reachng out to the base? Isn't that what the "we" is?

[NYC Liberal]

197. You think "Yes WE Can" referred to only the base?

Now I know you just watched some of his ads, drew your own conclusion from all 30 seconds of each, and didn't bother to go find out more about the details of his stances on the issues and where he stood.

[Enthusiast]

193. You are so right.

Our elected representative are only corporatists when they subvert the will of the electorate to do the special bidding of corporations. :sarcasm:

[pleah]

82. Well, duh! n/t

[Javaman]

83. And this is supposed to be some sort of revelation?

once that slogan was put on a bumper sticker it instantly became a logo marketing tool.

I mean, jesus, does she really think we all just fell off the turnip truck?

someone point to me one single element of any political campaign that isn't marketed to withing an inch of it's life? and to conceivably think that the campaign slogan is NOT an logo is just plain foolish.

Naomi is much better than this.

[omega minimo]

84. Xe = disappearing Blackwater

[burning rain]

85. Klein gets it.

The US has much less a civic, than a consumer culture.

[N_E_1 for Tennis]

89. I feel like I've been bambozzeled

thanks richard!

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[omega minimo]

96. Politicians have always used slogans and we are in a new era of synergy between corporations and gov

-ernment, which one of those politicians warned against. Our new young president is now in the thick of it. To get there, he had to espouse and embody the hollowness of un/branding that Klein is talking about.

Politicians have always used slogans and yet speeches of the past rang differently than the infamous 2004 Democratic speech. FDR's Fireside Chats and the 2nd Bill of Rights, Ike warning about the military/industrial/Congressional complex, Kennedy sending us to the moon ....

Obama never had that sort of resonance IMHO. From the moment I watched the crowd go nuts for his speech in 2004, I never "got it" although I respect that others did.

However, Klein has summed up what is DIFFERENT NOW quite well:

“Wow. A politician has finally produced an ad as good as Nike that plays on our, sort of, faded memories of a more idealistic era, but, yet, doesn’t quite say anything.”

"We think we hear the message we want to hear, but if you really parse it, the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions."

[Kolesar]

97. The theory of the hour--emotions can be power

Emotions are intuitive and not a result of analysis of data. However, they do represent learning and knowledge and can be used to drive good decisions.

[omega minimo]

98. In politics they are used to manipulate people and drive votes, not "good decisions"

I would have been impressed by the candidate's emotions, if they were evident, rather than the emotional response of a crowd that hadn't heard "we're all in this together" for a long while.

[jsamuel]

99. I was saying something similar during the primaries.

The Obama team was always playing up his speeches. However, when I read them, I saw that he would say a code word or phase that one side liked, then add a "but" and say the code word or phase the other side liked. That way, both sides heard what they wanted to hear and Obama never really took a stand on the issue. It infuriated me at the time. I was supporting Edwards and he took strong stands on the issues and didn't do that kind of thing. However, we all know how he let his personal life interfere with the ideas his campaign espoused.

[democracy1st]

100. K & R

[jonnyblitz]

102. ".....but, yet, doesn't quite say anything." yup. nt

[Egnever]

103. If you picked your candidate based on marketing you are a fool

and the same type of idiot that elected Bush.

All politicians use marketing duh! McCain was the straight talk express or are you that simple as to post this as some sort of evidence of some nefarious plot.

You bend yourself in pretzels to try to portray Obama as some sort of great betrayer when the problem seems to lie in your overblown expectations. Maybe next go around you will pay closer attention to what the politician has done in the past and said in the past instead of watching the flashing lights in front of you and choosing based on the best marketing campaign.

Obama so far has been exactly what I voted for, Of course I was paying attention and doing my research before I made my decision. Based on your incessant whining i am guessing you didn't or that you didn't vote for him in the first place.

[Taverner]

105. Of course it was! All political slogans are marketing ploys!

That's politics

Advertising is a direct descendant from the school of propaganda. The two are buddy buddy.

Go to Cuba and you see huge billboards saying "SOCIALISMO O MUERTE!" (Socialism or death)

Go to Miami and you see huge billboards saying "BUY ONE GET ONE FREE"

[Lex]

108. Well, duh.

Seriously, this is a light bulb moment for some?

[Politicub]

109. Why is it that America seems frozen in time, no matter who the president is?

Obama had the wind behind his back to usher in earth shattering changes. He has done some good things, but I'm still waiting for the big promises to come to fruition.

But if I understand what Klein is saying, it is that Obama never really made many of the promises we ascribe to him. Instead, we are projecting our hopes and dreams on the blank canvas he placed in front of us. It explains why there seems to be this disconnect between the jaded political establishment who see this as business as usual, political bullshit and the hopeful grass roots.

The establishment isn't surprised at the centrism, the incrementalism, the inviting of corporate interests to the table. But many of the grass roots folks who supported the election of President Obama and placed our hopes in him are shocked that the administration stands in sharp contrast to what we expected. Yes, President Obama needs the congress to pass legislation, but in the meantime he could use the bully pulpit to its fullest extent to further progressive causes.

At least this is how I feel, and I'm coming to terms with it. I don't know if we can escape this American drama from continually playing itself out.

Maybe President Obama forgotten that it was the passion of progressive and liberals combined with a strong anti-republican sentiment that culminated in his unlikely election to President.

It makes me worry about 2012. I'm convinced that Dems will not prevail without an engaged and energized grass roots. And it feels like President Obama and this democratic-majority congress are doing everything they can to tamp down the spirit of change and hope. The GOP is fanning the flames of racial and government hatred to engage their base, and it's working. This is all that matters at the end of the day when it comes to the presidential election -- who has the most impassioned base.

If you haven't read it already, I highly recommend Klein's book The Terror Dream. In it she describes how so many myths of America continue to be perpetuated, effectively crippling us from breaking free and moving forward beyond them to create a more just society.

[otohara]

110. I Like Ike!

http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&q=i%20like%20ike&sourceid=navclient-ff&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS351US355&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

I remember seeing these when I was a kid

[winyanstaz]

111. K & R.....

Naomi Klein is a great patriot...thank you so much Naomi for all you do.

[grahamhgreen]

112. We are the rabble, are we roused?

[bkozumplik]

113. Obamas initial coming out speech

I have thought exactly this since his very first speech. Obama's great with the delivery and the couching, but the critical substance just isn't there. If you look at the "gay friends in red states" speech, it was more or less devoid of content, except for a mild call for bipartisanship to address our big problems, which is a nonstarter in actual political reality. It was all hope and no content. But he had people *crying* with that speech. Lots of people.
I tried to say that a few times in blog comments and was shouted down, as if I'd just killed everyone's babies or something. People still are projecting what they want of Obama onto him, and defending him to the hilt, no matter what. Its impressive, and it will be studied and used repeatedly from now on. This is just the beginning of this in politics. There really is no going back.

[Go2Peace]

155. I would just be happy with the "across the isle" Obama approach. If he only reached out to his base

then maybe folks can work together to make that change happen. But he is ignoring his base and keeping them out. And bringing people together is supposedly his strenght right? So what really gives? I just don't get it. I think we have to get so angry he HAS to turn around. I believe that is the only thing that will wake him up. And from the looks of it appears to be happening very quickly.

Now if only his inside advisors will recognize that the base is not deserting or disrespecting him, but just expressing their wishes, and does not try to fool him away from the people. That will be a disaster for all of us. I really think all this is what we need.

We are *not* like the teabagers. We are not looking to be violent or destroy. We are doing something much more democratic, we are expressing our desire, and yes, dissatisfation, to the leadership, and demanding in a democratic and people empowering way. This is what we have all been talking about, that people need to get fed up enough to get in the streets. Well, if we embrace and encourage each other, either that will happen, or even better, the administration wakes up and embraces the people and meets them halfway.

We are not in the streets yet, but it is spreading across the spectrum, into the netroots and into the liberal media. There is hope in THIS, more hope than in the existing status quo of the BeltWay.

[ecstatic]

114. I can see why people who were silly enough to vote based on a slogan are so bitter now

:crazy:

[newtothegame]

115. No, but it was...

"Yes We Can Make History." That's all many DU'ers cared about, and once that was done, nothing else mattered. We posted pictures of Obama in his sunglasses while millions mourned the passage of Prop 8.

[pollo poco]

163. yes we can pretend we support civil rights

So exciting. But civil rights is about more than AA rights. Bigots who are cool with Obama get to think they are sooo liberal.
They ridicule gays and women with impunity, 'cause "that's different".

[lxlxlxl]

118. blame will.i.am

i hate will.i.am and was always surprised that someone that considers themsleves an artist got such praise for just reciting someone else's speech over horrible music arrangements. don't get me started on this country's artistic expression in 2008. we were better off with mayfield, redding, simone, coltrane, etc...etc... 2008 had nothing

[Go2Peace]

156. I actually thought it was well done. What makes it empty is that it is not representative

[PM Martin]

169. Coltrane: YEA! will.i.am: NAY!

The "putz" known as "will.i.am" clearly has enough money to weather the current storm.
Millions don't.

As for the name: "will.i.am" :rofl:

[femrap]

124. Anyone who had studied

marketing saw what the Obama campaign was doing. I spoke of it at the time, but everyone was caught up in the 'Change.'

He has broken some hearts, I'm sure. Me, I'm a cynic and have seen it all before. I expected this from Obama.

I wish he would be a man in the mold of FDR....of course FDR had General Smedley Butler who alerted FDR to the coup d'etat that was planned against him. FDR used that to get his legislation through. If they fought him, he would reveal their intentions and Treason charges could have resulted.

Thinking of this brings some ideas to the fore......

[Kolesar]

142. Obama should be buying off the troublesome Senators with pork spending they can take home..

...and use to get reelected.

Vote for health care, get an airport or highway in your state. Easy.

[femrap]

160. Yeah, we really need Senators

like Landrieau, Lincoln, Nelson, Pryor, etc. 30 years ago, these senators would be considered 100% republicans.

I'm so tired of our nation trending to the right...

Hell, Jesus was a Liberal! And he was NOT a fan of the Rich!!

[mirrera]

129. Love Naomi Klein...

[emulatorloo]

132. This is kind of what the wingnuts say. That Obama is a cult celebrity.

I don't think this adds anything to the discourse.

[closeupready]

139. Oh, someone's got something on her/she sold out/she didn't get her pony/she

_________________. :sarcasm:

K&R

[Stinky The Clown]

140. They key paragraph in that clip, for me, is this:

"One of the things in this—you know, a large part what I write about in No Logo is the absorption of these political movements into the world of marketing. And, you know, the first time I saw the “Yes, We Can” video that was produced by Will.i.am, my first thought was, you know, “Wow. A politician has finally produced an ad as good as Nike that plays on our, sort of, faded memories of a more idealistic era, but, yet, doesn’t quite say anything.” We think we hear the message we want to hear, but if you really parse it, the promises aren’t there, it’s really the emotions."

I think that may be a source of some of the disillusionment with Obama. People are now realizing they got fooled and they don't like it.

While I cite the above, I must add (for the stalkers) that is not my issue with him .... just my observation.

[seeinfweggos]

143. nothing new, really

here are some good ones just from a wikipedia glance, some better than others. but pres. obama is hardly the first to engage in sloganeering. not even close.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._presidential_campaign_slogans

[thegoodfight]

147. here is

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gXL998q7skI

A little info as to whats the real deal with Obama, from a world renowned journalist who does amazing work for humans rights.

[DailyGrind51]

153. It takes a really rich President, like FDR or JFK to implement real change.

Only a rich liberal doesn't give a damn about raising corporate money and can do what is necessary rather than what will not hurt fund-raising efforts.

[Name removed]

162. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[imdjh]

165. Naomi Klein is a pig.

[Go2Peace]

166. Well thought out remark, LOL

[imdjh]

168. I've been dying to say it all day. Who knew an opportunity with impunity would show up?

[RufusTFirefly]

175. Wonderful. The last word.

Thanks so much for all your obvious insights and extensive research.

[PM Martin]

167. I must recomend this one.

It is sad to see Obama throwing away such a break chance to undo the harm of corporate influence that has taken over the world this past generation.

[Enthusiast]

194. I see it as you do, PM Martin. nt

[davidpdx]

170. I like Klein, but don't always agree with her

The far left has pretty much abandoned Obama from the start. They are disgruntled because it took a larger coalition of people to get him elected then they want to believe. Obama wasn't elected by the far left and liberal Democrats, the truth is he was elected by an entire spectrum of people including many cross over Republicans (granted they were the ones who are more liberal Republicans). I'm a liberal Democrat and can realize this much.

It seems like Klein thinks Obama is the only one who has used a successful slogan. History seems to fail her greatly. While he made have had the most SUCCESS, in doing so, he certainly is not the first nor the last. People should take their time machine back to 2000 (don't mention 2004 since I think Kerry, while a good candidate, didn't have that great of a campaign) and think about the slogans used then that were successful. What about 1992 and 1996? Klein also fails to take into account in previous elections there were differences in communication methods as well. Campaigns can reach more people more easily now. Getting a message out is just as important as the message itself.

This past year I read The Shock Doctrine and also downloaded the movie to watch afterward because I was impressed by the book. However, I think on this particular subject she is wrong.

[BrklynLiberal]

172. Kicking in order to come back to this.

[budkin]

173. I have a lot of respect for Naomi Kline, but I don't know about this...

[nevergiveup]

174. "It's Morning in America"

"All the Way With LBJ", "The New Frontier", "We Like Ike", "Yes We Can"....... Campaign slogans are a dime a dozen and go way back in American history and most stir good feelings yet don't really say much. The only one I can think of that really was specific was "A Chicken in Every Pot" promised by Herbert Hoover and everyone knows what that got us.

[tranche]

180. Naomi Klein discovers the campaign slogan!

Earth shattering. :eyes:

[stopbush]

181. It's easy to blame Obama for the lack of change when Congress is the real problem.

Grassroots can get you elected, but it doesn't help when you have a Congress of primo uomos to deal with.

Example: Obama said he wanted to close Gitmo, but Congress refused to appropriate the money to do so. They will appropriate $ for wars and military because it gets them re-elected. They won't support health care reform because it will dry up the campaign contributions.

Obama realizes this, and I think he also realizes that more than a few DINOs in Congress need to be replaced ASAP. I think he's sitting back and allowing the movement to target the Nelsons and the Landrieus and replace them with more progressive types to grow without it being perceived as his initiative.

At the same time, Obama has to keep his base of support within Congress, but unfortunately, even the most-progressive leaders need the largess that is provided by military bases in their districts. That means Obama will need to toe the "I'll win this war" line until after the 2010 election.

I don't envy him his position - left a catastrophic mess by Junior and struggling to find support within his own Party.

[Go2Peace]

183. He lost that support the minute he closed the grassroots out of government

He very deliberately kept the grassroots out of his cabinet in favor of mostly corporate representation. How exactly can you feel bad for the position he HAS CONTROL OF. The choice to isolate himself from his support has been HIS and his alone and he has every capability to change that. I can go for the "has a difficult job", but not for the "pity him he cannot do anything". He has been his own worst enemy by siding with the powers and trying to negotiate with Republicans.

Hell, Clinton had a less corporate cabinet than Obama has surrounded himself with.

[BillDU]

185. Ploy...

Not only is it a marketing ploy, it is also a fact that empowers people.

[BillDU]

186. Repugs

Republicans are...sorry...we didn't.

[BillDU]

187. Sorry.

Oh I apologize. I did that answer my own statement thing accidentally again.

[earth mom]

188. Glad Naomi Klein is speaking out about this, though some of us have been saying this all along.

Even on election night Obama warned everyone that he would do things we wouldn't be happy about.

Very few noticed or cared about that warning at the time.

[Enthusiast]

189. Did anyone ever consider

that the PTB want a 2012 Republican presidential candidate so BAD that the country will automatically continue with 4 more years of "Yes we can!" ?

Just a question. Like everyone else, I am trying to remain objective and trying my best to understand what is going on in this country.


But, I as read the signs, things are looking very bad. And I don't just mean the economy or the wars. Something fundamental was transformed during the eight Bush years. We know for certain, for example, that clear criminal actions on the part of the Bush Administration are being overlooked by the Obama Administration.

This sure isn't about not having a pony. It is about a complete capitulation on health care reform and re-regulation of banking and related industries. Why do we hear remarks about having a pony when these issues are so fucking serious? I think it is only part of the obfuscation and smoke screen effort. "Move along, nothing to see here."

[BillDU]

199. No!

No! Yes we can is a fact. If you want us to lose then you can do it on your own. Meanwhile, in good course of time, we will accomplish our goals.