Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Where Was The “Professional Left” A Year Ago?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 12:51 PM
Original message
Where Was The “Professional Left” A Year Ago?


Where Was The “Professional Left” A Year Ago?
by Sally Kohn
August 16, 2010

On May 12, 2009, I attended a briefing at the White House as part of a group of grassroots activists and community artists. Mike Strautmanis, Chief of Staff for the Office of Public Liaison and top White House advisor Valerie Jarrett, made some remarks about how community activists have a seat at the table as the Obama Administration sets the agenda for change. I raised my hand. Sometimes, I said, the role of advocates isn't to be inside at the table, but entirely outside the room, "creating the political space needed for change".

Strautmanis bristled visibly. He criticized the "professional left" (he didn't use this exact phrase, but it's what he meant) for approaching the Obama Administration with an "outdated mindset", holding protest signs outside the fence instead of realizing what it means to be "inside the fence". At the same time, he not-so-subtly warned that those who criticized the Administration, instead of cooperating, would find themselves back on the outside.

Throughout early 2009, stories suggest Strautmanis' threat wasn't hollow. The White House convened a weekly meeting called "Common Purpose" at which DC progressive organizations were invited for what many have called a "very one-way" conversation where the White House dictated its agenda and appealed to the professional left for back-up. In April, 2009, according to people who were at one Common Purpose meeting, White House advisors told the "professional left" to tone down rhetoric about huge bonuses paid to AIG executives. The left, in general, toned it down.

In August 2009, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel made a rare appearance at a Common Purpose meeting to scold progressive groups in Washington for attacking conservative Democrats in Congress who were obstructing progressive policies on Capitol Hill. Emmanuel called the strategy "f*ing retarded" and ordered the professional left to cease and desist. Much of the left did, in fact, stop the attacks on Blue Dog Democrats.

Firedog Lake blogger Jane Hamsher has been almost singularly brave in covering this. Back in April 2009, Hamsher wrote:

"There's a big problem right now with the traditional liberal interest groups sitting on the sidelines around major issues because they don't want to buck the White House for fear of getting cut out of the dialogue, or having their funding slashed."


Yet all evidence suggest that, from early on, President Obama failed to definitively side with ordinary Americans in the struggle against the tyrannical interests of big business and Wall Street. John Judis writes in his excellent analysis in The New Republic:

"Obama's policy followed the same swerving course as his rhetoric. One week, he would favor harsh restrictions on bank and insurance-company bonuses, but, the next week, he would waver; one week, he would support legislation allowing bankruptcy judges to reduce the amount that homeowners threatened with foreclosure owed the banks; the next week, he would fail to protest when bank lobbyists pressured the Senate to kill these provisions. But, more importantly, Obama-in sharp contrast to Roosevelt in his first months-failed to push Congress to immediately enact new financial regulations or even to set up a commission to investigate fraud.".


Perhaps if the "professional left" had been doing its job and holding the President accountable early on - not in the spirit of destroying his presidency but, rather, strengthening it - there would not have been such a vacuum of public frustration into which Right wing critics could easily step. The White House was naïve to not distinguish between constructive criticism and destructive criticism at a time when listening to the former might have helped avoid much of the calamity in which the Presidency now finds itself. Instead, by trying to be superficial friends with both sides, Obama and his team have ostensibly made enemies on all sides of the aisle. Except with big business and Wall Street. They're still good friends with them.

Read the full article at:

http://movementvision.org/

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
SarahB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:00 PM
Response to Original message
1. As long as, no matter what,
it's the "professional left"'s fault. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. If I recall, they were upset about Obama shooting those poor innocent pirates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostInAnomie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #2
9. +1
Thanks for reminding me about that. I forgot how those innocent pirates were forced to kidnap people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:01 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Just like people taking all those bait cars.
Finders keepers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
12. Obama shot some pirates? How'd I miss that?
Did he use a sniper rifle at range, or get them up close and personal with his 9?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 08:58 PM
Response to Reply #12
42. I think he used his roundball moves to sneak up on 'um and pop a cap
in the back of they heads while they were mind-boggled by his agility.

Besides, he'd already turned in his sniper rifle and his 9, as part of his "Kill the Second Amendment" plan. He had to borrow Biden's backup .38 for the job.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Marr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 06:27 PM
Response to Reply #2
20. I recall a few complaining about it-- very few.
Let's be honest.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:32 PM
Response to Reply #20
46. All the same jokers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tridim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:11 PM
Response to Original message
3. They were still pouting about Hillary's loss
Even after Hillary had long since moved on to bigger and better things.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:16 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. ..but she isn't any more "left" than the President..
..same corporatist-agenda, different gender..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 06:52 AM
Response to Reply #4
31. Hillary's advantage over Obama was experience with the GOP
and experience of actually living in the vicinity and knowing the people she was going to be dealing with. I doubt many people expected her agenda to be much different but I do think she would have been stronger on women's rights issues than Obama and possibly stronger on children's issues. I don't think she would have touched food stamps and I don't think she would have started a commission on Social Security.

And no, I didn't vote for her. That is, however, an amalgamation of the personal assessment I had of her at the time and now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #3
11. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #3
14. Right. The left wanted a card-carrying member of the DLC
instead of a mere fellow-traveler.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
5. Back then
we were all in wait-and-see mode, giving him the benefit of the doubt.

Now a year later we can see clearly that he does not deserve the benefit of the doubt, and that's why we're up his tailpipe on every issue now.

Why did he deserve the benefit of the doubt then, and not now? Easy - just count the seemingly endless list of false promises that were made to secure our cooperation in what turned out to be a full-corporatist policy agenda.

Fool me once...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
6. They were trying to give Obama a honeymoon, that's where. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nightrain Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. highly knr. Good to hear from a "professional leftie" about her experience..
Many of us have surmised that such co-optation of activist groups has taken place, out of fear of the Administration's wrath. Witness moveon, HRC, and other organizations' boundless support for less than progressive policies.

Jane Hamsher is very brave and deserves our support.

Thank you very much for posting this article. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GeorgeGist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 01:51 PM
Response to Original message
8. As I recall they were pointing out Obama's phony ...
Health Care Reform plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:16 PM
Response to Original message
13. being rounded up into the Veal Pen?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #13
15. "Message Discipline."
This administration's interactions with "the left" amounts to one-way communication and "message discipline."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nashville_brook Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #15
18. Hamsher's work on that issue a year ago was amazing -- i had wondered what happened to
Plouffe's network. well...it wasn't convenient anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mimosa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #15
28. Message discipline will never work
We who got Obama elected could have been kept on board IF that's what they'd wanted to do.

They would have needed to follow through on 2 or 3 vital campaign promises. But many saw a sell out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:48 AM
Response to Reply #28
36. Telling people what the message is and expecting them to
spread it isn't exactly a two way street, is it? I don't know about those groups invited to WH meetings, but I can speak for myself. I don't need anyone telling me how to spin things their way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bitwit1234 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:41 PM
Response to Original message
16. Truthfully!!!!!!!!! what is and who are the professional left.
is that a made up group, Gibbs thought of all by himself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lucky 13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 02:58 PM
Response to Original message
17. We let him have a honeymoon. We trusted the direction he was taking us.
Edited on Tue Aug-17-10 03:00 PM by Lucky 13
And no... I was never a Hillary supporter. I didn't hate him from the beginning. I was one of his fiercest defenders from early in the primaries to General to NOW.

We let him have a honeymoon. We trusted the direction he was taking us. We recognized he couldn't do it all at once. We realized he'd be given a shit sandwich. We were patient.

But it's been long enough. He's had opportunities to show that fight and he's come up lame, when he's even tried at all. People are getting restless and starting to ask what happened to the progressive champion we thought we elected.

I want to believe that the President is the guy I thought he was, but more and more, I'm just feeling used. And abused. Not only is he not fighting for what he said he would, his administration is denigrating those who try to hold him to it. It's a slap in the face.

And it's because Conservadems think they have us over a barrel. Maybe they do. But push us just far enough and third party candidates start to look preferable. At least voting for true progressives, regardless of their elect-ability, allows me a minimal level of self respect vs. voting for people actively working against me, but that are slightly less bad than the worst.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluethruandthru Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. Well said! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
flyarm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #17
40. + 1 million!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 06:26 PM
Response to Original message
19. Criticizing the
stimulus bill that increased food stamps.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluenorthwest Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. Is that what the stimulus was all about, really? Foodstamps?
Can you tell me what percentage of the stimulus went to Foodstamps? I expect silence rather than a factual response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProSense Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 11:12 PM
Response to Reply #22
27. Here:
10.4 percent, including 2.5 percent in food stamp funding, went to "Aid to low income workers, unemployed and retirees (including job training)"

Payments to Social Security recipients and people on Supplemental Security Income were parts of the ARRA.Total: $82.2 billion

$40 billion to provide extended unemployment benefits through Dec. 31, and increase them by $25 a week
$19.9 billion for the Food Stamp Program
$14.2 billion to give one-time $250 payments to Social Security recipients, people on Supplemental Security Income, and veterans receiving disability and pensions.
$3.45 billion for job training
$3.2 billion in temporary welfare payments (TANF and WIC)
$500 million for vocational training for the disabled
$400 million for employment services
$120 million for subsidized community service jobs for older Americans
$150 million to help refill food banks
$100 million for meals programs for seniors, such as Meals on Wheels
$100 million for free school lunch programs


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eridani Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #19
26. We criticized if for more emphasis on stupid tax breaks at the expense of job creation
Who in bloody hell is stupid enough to make big changes in their yearly spending because they get a couple of hundred dollars more for a tax refund? Having a job vx not having one will sure change your spending habits though.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Loricat33 Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 07:05 PM
Response to Original message
23. Looking in the wrong place
Instead of criticizing the President, look at the Congress. We have turned around a Blue Dog Congress Member in our district. Organize Progressive in those Blue Dog district and change them...run Progressives with Progressive Messages in the primaries to scare those Blue Dogs. It's the same tactics the Tea Party people are using against middle of the road GOP members. If the Congress was more progressive the President would be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #23
25. I don't agree. What do the conservative Democrats have to fear?

They might be defeated in a primary? Not if they get President Obama's help!

And should they lose in an election what horrible thing will happen to "blue dog" conservatives? They'll be rewarded by Wall Street and Corporate America with multi-million dollar "advisor" and lobbyist jobs!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JoeyT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Aug-17-10 10:19 PM
Response to Original message
24. Fighting for healthcare reform, IIRC.
You know, writing letters to politicians. The fun stuff.

Most of us supported the hell out of him and HCR. Until it became obvious he was looking for reasons to weasel out of actually reforming anything.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 06:03 AM
Response to Original message
29. And there you have it, in black and white
or whatever colored print you like.

The "professional left" doesn't WANT to be at the table where they might have to compromise. They want to be noisemakers on the outside.

This is basically what I have said in various posts here and there.

It is also counter to the average Americans common sense on how government can be effective. How do we know this? Because Presidents are very often elected on the presumption or promise they will bring the factions of various sides together to make reform happen. Clinton and Obama both preached this kind of promise, even Dumya with his compassionate conservative lie, was trying to appeal to this basic idea.

When progressives sabotage that basic idea, they harm the Democrats at the ballot box, they lose independents who wanted reform. (HAVE YOU CHECKED THE POLLS LATELY?) Now calm down liberals, I fault the other side to a much larger degree. But it is more difficult to make that case when our side is also seen as not willing to resolve issues in a constructive way.

eom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #29
32. "resolve issues in a constructive way." = Surrender to Republican and Wall Street demands
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 08:47 AM
Response to Reply #32
34. We're afraid of losing at the table
Edited on Wed Aug-18-10 08:54 AM by BootinUp
so we just won't show up. Good plan.lol.

And you wonder why the politicians, independents, and other people that want to move forward get sick of the shit?

We do have grievances from the last 30 years, no doubt, and they should be represented properly in any negotiations.

(edited to include more people sick of the shit from ideologues)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:29 PM
Response to Reply #34
44. Based on what? The folks that are afraid are the perpetual majority unicorn calvary
The seats at the table are reserved for "stakeholders", pretending someone you went out of your way not to invite and had locked up for trespass when they popped in, refused to come is a cheap shot.

Not dissimilar to Reagan emptying the asylums, kicking the shit out of the vets, created a recession on purpose, and claiming the homeless want the lifestyle.

The left isn't wanted at the table because the left isn't in the same book much less the same page with how to slice the pie as the "stakeholders".

Claiming the left doesn't want a seat at the table is like calling ketchup a vegetable because you cut school lunch funding.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 10:11 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. I assume
you read the piece in the OP.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheKentuckian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. Yep
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BootinUp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #48
49. Well
Its not too complicated. I don't intend to repeat myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cornermouse Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 06:26 AM
Response to Original message
30. Translation: Its all the left's fault.
Edited on Wed Aug-18-10 06:26 AM by cornermouse
They should have found a way to hold the President accountable without holding him accountable enough to ruffle feathers on anyone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 08:33 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. That is exactly what I got from it too
Obama's failures are the 'libruls' fault

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SarahB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 12:39 PM
Response to Reply #30
38. Yep. Excellent translation. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tavalon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
35. We have been holding him accountable from the beginning
I've praised when he's done something good and I've scolded and withheld reward (money and volunteerism in campaigns) when he and other blue dogs have behaved badly. Many of us have been doing what he asked of us on election night - we have been pushing and pushing and pushing. Just as he asked. But man, he and his administration sure are pissy about us actually doing what he asked of us.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
midnight Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
37. K&R.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cap Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
39. where was the professional left, two years ago?
working hard to get Obama elected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
freebrew Donating Member (478 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
41. Right here, Buddy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bertman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:06 PM
Response to Original message
43. I have to admit Rahm was right. I am feeling "fucking retarded". Because
I actually believed that President Obama and the Democrats would fight for the working class and change the way things are done in Washington.

I guess that was pretty fucking retarded believing that campaign rhetoric.



Also, I have a question. When I sent many many many dollars to President Obama's election campaign did I automatically get a membership in the "Professional Left" club? I sure hope so. But I haven't gotten my membership card yet, so I'm a bit put out.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
McCamy Taylor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Aug-18-10 09:31 PM
Response to Original message
45. Good lord. Tom Paine was part of the "professional left."
Edited on Wed Aug-18-10 09:33 PM by McCamy Taylor
That was over 200 years ago. Efforts to paint the left as new or fringe are really hilarious. Have none of these folks ever heard of the Levelers?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 11:23 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC