The One Where The Liberals Blame Obama For Everything

Filed in National by on April 9, 2012

President Obama may have many faults, but not being a spokesperson for Liberalism is not one of them. Three years later, Eric Alterman forgets everything Obama has done and blames him for everything he hasn’t done.

In fact, Obama has proved far more adept at adapting his positions toward the increasingly radical views enunciated by the leaders of the Republican Party than he has in articulating — and sticking to — an alternative vision of the role of government in ensuring a fair economic shake for all its citizens.

He asked the right question on Tuesday when he said: “Can we succeed as a country where a shrinking number of people do exceedingly well, while a growing number struggle to get by? Or are we better off when everyone gets a fair shot?” But as liberals have repeatedly learned to their dismay, the devil is not in the poetry of the president’s election-time rhetoric but in the prose of his apparent eagerness to seek out a compromise on almost any Republican proposal offered him. Liberals have spent decades trying to adjudicate the claims of their conflicting constituencies without focusing sharply enough on the economic well-being of a broad section of Americans. A fight for fairness and equity could unite the working poor and middle class in a winning coalition for the future, but the problem today for liberals is less the message itself than the credibility of the messenger.

While signaling his support for much if not all of liberalism’s cultural agenda, President Obama has occasionally tossed economic liberals a rhetorical bone — but he has also worried too much about deficit reduction. In this regard, Obama embodies the unsolved liberal conundrum. Were the president to embrace a genuinely populist economic agenda and mean it this time — just as Franklin D. Roosevelt did in his second term — he might go a long way toward solving the problem that has dogged liberalism now for nearly half a century.

Tags: ,

About the Author ()

A Dad, a husband and a data guru

Comments (4)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. liberalgeek says:

    I wonder how that primary challenge to Obama is going? I haven’t heard much about it lately…

  2. cassandra m says:

    Or even about the primary challenge to our own obstacle to economic liberalism — Tom Carper. This is from Alterman’s article:

    In other words, economic liberalism is on life-support, while cultural liberalism thrives. The obvious question is why. The simple answer is that cultural liberalism comes cheap.

    The other simple answer is that cultural liberalism doesn’t have to survive a vote in the US Congress. If there is a message here, it is that liberals haven’t learned that the path to progress on their desired legislation is a Congress that will vote for it.

  3. puck says:

    I wonder how that primary challenge to Obama is going? I haven’t heard much about it lately…

    We’re going to get right on it as soon as we “fix health care later…”

  4. Dan Boyd says:

    Carney’s on the front page of Huffington Post within reach around distance to Eric Cantor proudly watching Obama sign the “JOBS” Act. It’s gotten to the point where our only options are defacto Teabaggers (Carper,Carney,Coons) or real Teabaggers.

    Our delegation is anti-free speech (via SOPA/PIPA), anti-health care (via gutting HCR) and pro-1% Wall Street crooks. Their pro-sodomy, pro-abortion (only for those who can afford it) values and their ability to not come off as bat-bleep crazy on the campaign trail are really the only thing that differentiates the 3 C’s from the Christine O’Donnells of the world.

    While I am culturally liberal, these issues are far less of a priority to me than a reason-based Keynsian approach to economics.

    I just don’t see the point of continuing to support the Democratic Party. It’s devolved into a cross of the Vichy government and Fredo Corleone with a dash of Clay Aiken.