Who is more correct about the current President--Rachel Maddow or Cenk Uygur?

[geek tragedy]

Relevant quotes:

Maddow:

It turns out that a lot of things that have happened in the less than two years of this administration are the biggest or first or most important in generations. On the occasion of the Wall Street reform announcement today, Taegan Goddard at "CQ Politics" wrote, "Not since FDR has a president done so much to transform this country."

Even before today`s historic Wall Street reform agreement, President Obama, of course, did what politicians have been trying to do for more than 60 years. He passed health reform, which, for the first time, establishes government responsibility for the health care of American citizens.

Consider also the stimulus bill. It didn`t just throw a lasso around our entire economy and yank and yank it back from the brink. It also pumped about $100 billion into the crumbling embarrassment of our national infrastructure and transportation system.

It was the largest investment in infrastructure since Ike. For solving our country`s energy problems, something Obama has compared to man walking on the moon, it contained about $60 billion in spending and tax incentives for renewable and clean energy, also a historic investment.

It also included an unheralded but giant investment in science and tech, amping up the budgets at NASA, the National Science Foundation, and an experimental energy research agency that was created under President George W. Bush, but never funded until now.

President Obama also expanded state kids` health insurance to cover another four million kids. He signed the Lily Ledbetter Fair Pay Act amending the 1964 civil rights act for equal pay for equal work.

. . .


In each of these achievements and in the list of things he has yet to do - "Don`t Ask, Don`t Tell," closing Guantanamo - in each of these things, there is room for liberal disappointment. I sing a bittersweet lullaby to the lost public option when I go to sleep at night.

But presidential legacies are complex. Not even the Reagan administration`s legacy is pure as the conservative-driven snow. But Taegan Goddard at "CQ Politics" was right today about nothing this big happening since FDR.

The list of legislative accomplishments of this president in half a term even before energy reform which he`s probably going to get to is, to quote the vice president, "a big freaking deal." Love this administration or hate it, this president is getting a lot done.

The last time any president did this much in office, booze was illegal. If you believe in policy, if you believe in government that addresses problems, cheers to that. Good night.

Cenk Uygur:

Who is More Conservative: Ronald Reagan or Barack Obama?


If you think that’s an absurd question, you’re not alone. We had this discussion on The Dylan Ratigan Show when I was filling in for him on MSNBC and both of my guests thought it was absurd. A conservative website led with the headline that it was absurd (though they did not present one single fact to back up their claim). Except as it turns out, based on the facts, it is a really hard question to answer. And it would be absurd to claim otherwise.

Ronald Reagan:

• Gave Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants
• Negotiated with Terrorists (Traded Arms for Hostages with Iran)
• Raised Taxes on a Large Scale Four Times (After Initially Lowering Them)
• Negotiated with the "Evil Empire" without Pre-conditions
• Made a Decision to "Cut and Run" From Lebanon After Our Troops Were Attacked

In fact, as you look at the Reagan list, it seems he is the exact opposite of what conservatives now claim they want. It looks like the caricature of what they think liberals do. There is no way that even Dennis Kucinich would be able to do all of those things; he certainly wouldn’t negotiate with terrorists the way Reagan did.

Of course, Reagan also took the country further right in many ways but our political spectrum has moved so far to the right that he looks left behind by comparison. So, let’s go to Obama and see what that "socialist" is up to.

Barack Obama:

• Escalated the Afghanistan War (Added 30,000 More Troops)
• Escalated the Afghanistan War (Added 30,000 More Troops)
• Has Ordered Drone Strikes (Assassinations) on US Citizens Outside the Country
• Gave Drug Companies Near Monopoly Power by Barring Imports, Extending Patents and Not Allowing the Government to Negotiate Better Prices
• Funneled Billions into the Biggest Banks in the Country After They Crashed the Economy
• Stacked Deficit Commission with Fiscal Conservatives
• Lowered Taxes Significantly (Stimulus Bill)
• Ordered Increased Offshore Drilling Before BP Spill

The Obama team would argue that they did a lot of this because the Republicans made them do it. First, that’s entirely untrue because the Republicans didn’t make them pass any bills. The GOP also didn’t give most of this legislation a single yes vote, so they could have been entirely ignored if Obama had the courage to do that. And many of the items on the list are executive actions, which the Republicans have no control over.

Second, conservative is as conservative does. If you implement this many conservative positions, are you really sure you’re not one?

Now, people will cry and scream that we had the most historic health care reform and will soon have the most historic financial reform ever. Isn’t that progressive enough?! No, that’s nonsense. They are called historic only because the White House called them that. Financial reform is a joke that still leaves the big banks in charge and has failed to end "too big to fail." And yes, health care reform actually covers more people if they ever get it (maybe in 2014) and if they can afford it (depends on what private insurance decides to charge them), but it still leaves the health care system exactly as it was before. This is the progressive change people voted for?

The bottom line is that, no matter what the reason, Obama seems to be in some important ways significantly to the right of Reagan on the political spectrum. If Reagan ordered the execution of US citizens abroad, he might have been impeached. If Obama tried to give undocumented immigrants blanket amnesty the way Reagan did, he might be impeached.

I don’t think Obama is a hard right-winger. It’s just that the political establishment in this country has moved so far to the right (though not the public, according to polls on specific issues) that as a natural politician when he goes to appease them, he is solidly center-right on the spectrum.

Maddow Link:

http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100007220&docId=l:1212120026&isRss=true

Cenk Uygur:

http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/58915/

[Demeter]

1. Reagan Massively Affected Reality

Obama changed perceptions.

[geek tragedy]

3. So you think Maddow is full of crap on this? nt

[xchrom]

2. Either the Devil or God is in the details. Nt

[Lionheart23]

4. Does Obama have to be FDR or more conservative than Reagan?

Can't' he be somewhere between?

[geek tragedy]

6. That's why I asked which is 'more correct'

Is he someone who has enacted some major progressive/helpful policies, albeit ones with flaws and weaknesses, or is he essentially offering Republican policies without many meaningful accomplishments?

[MedfordTim]

5. They're BOTH right - what's the fuss?

Obama has gotten bills through - but they are watered down, could be worse than nothing bills - when you make mud pies, you may make 20 pies, but they will STILL be mud.

And Cenk is right - this country has moved steadily to the Right since Jimmy Carter - what, you thought Clinton was Liberal?? Obama has kept in place the WORST of the Bush years and EXPANDED some of them.

Stop squabbling and focis on the REAL bad guys.

[geek tragedy]

7. If Obama=Reagan, then he is one of the bad guys. nt

[ihavenobias]

11. My take

It depends on the issue. The larger issue is about how Washington has shifted so far right since Reagan and how the current Dems aren't doing a very good job of shifting it back in a large-scale way. Yeah, yeah, large scale change takes time, but that's an incredibly unsatisfying response that misses the point.

Example: I don't personally know anyone who thought we'd get single payer health care. But I also don't know anyone with even the most basic negotiation skills that thinks that your opening offer should be what you want to end with. So in the case of health care, opening with the public option knowing full well the right would explode and chop that half loaf into yet another half (and on and on) was at best an honest and enormous mistake. At best. If you want to sell your house for $300,000 (and the appraiser said it's worth around that amount) you'd be crazy to list it for $300,000. Maybe you'd go with $315-350+, but again, you would never, ever open with what you hope to finish with.

If it truly was half a loaf (better regulation of the industry without so many gigantic loopholes along with a decent public option) I'm a pragmatist who would argue it's a base that could be improved upon. As it stands we have crumbs to be easily swept in the garbage by the next Republican administration. Easy for me to say? Considering I'm uninsured with a pre-existing condition with a girlfriend in the same boat, no.

PS---As for the poll, Maddow is more popular and this was posted in GDP (not GD) which pretty much guarantees a certain result. Not to mention the hilarious, biased way the poll choices were framed:

Flawed but with great accomplishments
Obama may be worse than Reagan

This is like those GOP push polls.

[JTFrog]

19. Yea, you have no bias.

:eyes:

But you're damn right Rachel is more popular. She wicked smart and has exquisite debate skills. She can go toe to toe with anyone out there.

And she would never resort to filling time for her show by bashing hot plus size models. :shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

8. "Obama has kept in place the WORST of the Bush years and EXPANDED some of them."

That quote is so full of horse manure, I don't even know where to start!


Did I say that quote is a bunch of shit?

Cause yes...it is!

[jonnyblitz]

10. oh please. that quote is RIGHT THE FUCK ON when it comes

to the war in afghanistan.

[geek tragedy]

12. So, you're in the "Obama=Bush" camp

or are you in the "Obama=Reagan" camp?

[Chulanowa]

33. No, it's not.

That you think so seems to indicate you have a very weak grasp of the difference between liberal and conservative, and how it impacts the war.

First off, the popular position that we should have everyone home by last Tuesday is not "Liberal." There are a lot of liberals who are ardently anti-war, nothing wrong with that; but that is not in and of itself a liberal position. There are plenty of arch-conservatives who are against the war too. it's a philosophical position, not one necessarily displayed on the right / left spectrum (or even that silly graph chart that the Libertarians love so much)

Now the conservative position on the war is extravagantly displayed by how Bush handled it. The military was massively downsized, and then thrown into a war, with the difference made up by private companies such as Bechtel, Blackwater, and, my favorite, Custer Battles (Seriously, that's the name of the security group). Funding for the war effort was kept super-tight, to the point where the soldiers involved were lacking necessities such as armor and ammunition! This is how a conservative handles a war - declare a war, then declare "hands off" policies and let the magic of the market do its work. This is exactly what Bush did in Afghanistan and Iraq. There's plenty of money for political donors, friends of the family, and cronies, but very little reaches the ground for reconstructive efforts of military support

A liberal approach would be exactly what Obama did - return the focus of military operations to the military, tighten the operation while loosening the purse strings, and expanding the forces to a level needed to conduct the operation effectively. it hinges on strong central planning and involvement from the civilian government, with a greatly reduced impact from private industry. It represents a shift in tactics from an imperialist venture to one that tries to involve and accommodate the locals. Though funding is increased, it's better-managed, with a lot of overhead cut to make sure that as much money gets where it needs to go.

[Chulanowa]

9. I don't think Cenk knows much about Reagan

'Cause that is an extraordinarily cherry-picked selection, with glaring omissions.

"Negotiated with Terrorists (Traded Arms for Hostages with Iran)" - At the same time he was arming Iraq with chemical weapons and free Intelligence in order to enable him to kill as many Iranians as possible, in order to exact revenge against the Iranians for daring to throw out the shah and expose US complicity in that despot's human rights abuses.

"Raised Taxes on a Large Scale Four Times (After Initially Lowering Them)" Yes, after initially lowering them, causing the economy to fall into a hellhole of a recession, because he was a believer in Market Magic. He also did the most harm to the labor movement in the entire history of the United States.

"Made a Decision to "Cut and Run" From Lebanon After Our Troops Were Attacked" After we had sent them into Lebanon to back up Israel in what became a genocidal civil war in the first fucking place.

Maybe Cenk does know, and is just trying really, really, really, really, REALLY hard to make Obama look bad. Hell, the positions enumerated for Obama are n't especially conservative, save for the stacking of the deficit commission.

[frazzled]

15. The "negotiated with terrorist (Traded Arms for Hostages)" thing is just mind-numbing

Was Cenk not alive then? Ollie North had this crackpot scheme to sell arms to Iran in return for hostages (it was really a scheme involving a group of moderate Iranians to influence a whole lot of policy decisions about that country)--at a time when the U.S. had an arms embargo to Iran in place. Then they took the money from the arms sale and in a whole secret, cabalistic, shadow-government operation, were using it to arm the Contras in Nicaragua to defeat the elected left-wing Sandinista government--in direct contravention to Congress' prohibition in the Boland Act.

This is what Cenk admires? Has he never heard of IRAN CONTRA? It was the worst abrogation of executive power and secret government dealings I can recall in my lifetime. It was a freaking horror! I'm just gobsmacked.

He doesn't remember Reaganomics (trickle down some piss on the poor), the air traffic controller's strike (in which he fired 11,000 workers), cutting Medicaid and food stamps, Lebanon and Grenada (how could you forget Grenada?), Rehnquist and Scalia to the Supreme Court (and almost Bork!).

This Cenk person is completely dishonest and ignorant!

[Jennicut]

23. I was a mere child in the 80's and even I know all of this!

I remember watching the Iran-Contra congressional hearings on tv. Where was Cenk?

[Chulanowa]

32. Well, now, Cenk is often spot-on on his analyses. I rather like listening to his show

Apparently when it comes to Reagan though, he's a dumbass. Nobody's perfect, but... Jeeze. I kind of want to send him a book!

[vaberella]

18. Apparently once yonder year he was a Reaganite.

Yuppers, he voted for and supported Reagan.

[theFrankFactor]

13. Why not frame it this way?: Cenk Uygur: Obama may eats cereal made of aborted fetuses,

Nice... NOT.

[mkultra]

14. cenk is doing some pretty lopsided cherry picking.

[Radical Activist]

16. Just what I was about to type.

[Ramulux]

39. How so?

Is anything in his article untrue?

[libodem]

17. .

:kick:

[jefferson_dem]

20. No Contest.

Rachel rocks. She delivers fact-based reality. Cenk is a fool, and this rant only goes further to prove that.

[dionysus]

21. lol, that Cenk of the Fisher Price TV Studio Playset... he's such a card.

[Enrique]

22. there's truth in both, but Cenk's truth doesn't get on TV enough

I loved seeing him on MSNBC, he needs to get his own show there, preferably in Chuck Todd's time slot.

[ProSense]

24. The question should be: Who is delusional

Cenk wins.

[quiet.american]

25. Ding! Best answer. nt

[mike_c]

26. as usual, this debate spun off into make-believe land almost immediately....

Are people simply incapable of seeing past the way a question is framed in order to get at the essential ideas underlying it? Everyone who rapidly spun off into responses like "so Obama=Reagan, huh?" and worse, "Obama=Bush" either utterly missed the point in favor of superficiality, or they're deliberately obfuscating the point.

SOP on DU these days, but it still reeks of stoopid.

[alsame]

27. You are comparing apples and oranges. Rachel was talking

about actual policies and accomplishments, Cenk was evaluating those policies on a left/right continuum.

Cenk's point was that this country lurched so far to the right during the Bushco years that some current admin policiies - while to the left of Bushco - are still to the right of Reagan.

[ihavenobias]

30. Don't try to use nuance with this hilariously biased push poll.

It was created as a popularity contest with laughably misleading framing. At any rate, I'm amused that so many people agree with Lou Dobbs:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8716866

[alsame]

31. Quite amusing.

:rofl:

[Bullet1987]

28. Cenk didn't say Obama was worse than Reagan

The point of the segment was

1. To show how far to the Right the country has gone since the Reagan Administration
2. To kill this talk about Obama being this scary Liberal (which he is not, but the Republicans keep repeating that)
3. To show that much of what Obama supports, Reagan also supported and the Republicans were fine with it

Cenk wasn't trying to bash Obama, trust me, he's criticized him much worse. Go look at his clips on Youtube.

[Political Tiger]

29. What drugs is Uygur on?

He seems to be missing more than a few brain cells.

[Ramulux]

40. What was untrue about what he said?

[Overseas]

34. Other. //nt

[old mark]

35. Ugar is right. Obama is NOT worse than Reagan, but Obama is nowhere near

what was advertised in the election and he has consistantly sided against the workers, unions, poor, unemployed and minorities and with the banks, corporations and the rich.
Obama's policies are certainly within the realm of the moderate GOP when there was such a thing.
He is less of a real Democrat than even Bill Clinton.
It is sad that so many people think he is a socialist or a progressive when he is noe really even a liberal.

It is also sad that given the state of the Democratic Party and the US, Obama is the most "liberal" we will see in the forseeable future.
It is also sad that Ms. Maddow and so many "liberals" here worship him so much.

mark

[Hawkowl]

36. +1

[Goodnight]

37. Cenk's bus moment on DU

Doesn't mean what he says is without merit though. Not by a long shot.

[cali]

38. whoa. 44 people think Obama may be worse than Reagan?

that's some powerful stupid right there.