Robert Gibbs, Obama's White House press secretary went on Meet the Press on Sunday and said blithely that " there is no doubt that Republicans could take control of the House".
For both Democratic members of the House up for re-election and those charged with raising money for Democratic candidates, if this isn't the last straw in supporting Obama it should be.
Gibbs statement was not just politically inept,but coming from the spokesman for the president about his own party, undermines everything the Democrats need to do in order to retain control of congress. If they thought they were sounding "honest" a trait sorely missing from Obama's lifetime political resume, they were mistaken. They just sounded stupid.
Most corporate contributions as everyone knows, is based on businesses wanting to back the winner. Usually they hedge their bets, contributing to both parties but when there is a sense that there is a clear cut winner, the money usually flows in that direction. Obama just gave a lot of corporate interests a lot of reasons to give money to Republicans.
Yes, certainly Democrats could be in trouble, but what Gibbs didn't say is that the reason the Democrats are in trouble is because of a politically inept, incompetent, dishonest, double dealing, double-talking, conviction-less president who has run Democratic party initiatives into the ground , been tepid and ineffective on every presidential level and has just about everyone disgusted with him even though for very different reasons.
If Gibbs statement, which will be seized by Republicans for their own end, is part of some idiotic White House strategy to "scare" rank and file Democrats unhappy with the ineptitude of Obama into supporting Democratic candidates out of fear of a Republican take over, it is as stupid a strategy as the one Obama used during the health care debate that resulted in the Seinfeld health care bill -- something slightly better than nothing. ( And it didn't take long for the Republicans to do just that -- minutes after this was written Republican Eric Cantor issued a statement "agreeing with the White House that the Republicans can take back the House".) And the backtracking Gibbs is now trying to do is not just worthless, its not even sincere. And besides, you can't put the proverbial toothpaste back in the tube or un-ring the bell.
On the other hand, don't put it past Obama to put out a statement like that because , like the corporate interests who play both sides of the fence and hedge their bets, he is doing the same.
Much to the dismay of just about everyone, regardless of the outcome of the November elections, the country and Democrats in particular, are going to be saddled with Obama for the next two years. And Obama just might be hedging his bets as he always does, to try and be on the winning side even if it means undermining his own party, which he has to date, done better than any president in history other than George W. Bush.
Obama's willingness to throw the Democrats under the bus by re-enforcing the idea that Democrats are in such trouble they could lose the largest majority any party has had in decades, is typical of Obama.
And now Nancy Pelosi, who arm twisted Democrats to support Obama in the primaries, and the entire Democratic party can join Jeremiah Wright, the Trinity Church, healthcare reform, financial reform, the dissidents and demonstrators in Iran, much of the African American community, and Obama's own mother and grandmother ( as Ed Koch once pointed out) as those thrown under the Obama bus. But how long they stay there will depend on them.
Unless they are willing to stand up and make it clear from now on that Obama does not speak for the Democratic party, and as has been suggested before, put as much distance between themselves and Obama as possible, they will lose every close election.
Democratic candidates have to acknowledge both to Democrats and independents, and even some rational Republicans, the people who wanted a lot better than Obama can give, that they are distancing themselves from Obama. And they are doing it, not because he ran up deficits originally caused by Republicans but because he didn't deliver on real health care reform, didn't deliver on the public option the most important piece of legislation since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, didn't deliver on financial reform, has been a disaster on foreign policy and made George W. Bush look competent in his dealing with the Gulf spill.
Democrats running for re-election have two choices -- hang Obama out to dry in the same way Obama is so ready to hang them, or lose every close election.
Throwing Obama under the bus isnt that difficult and can be done with a certain deftness that is also honest without joining or giving credence to the irrational attacks of Republicans. Joe Sestak did it easily enough, made it clear he was not an Obama Democrat but stood for the things Democrats have always stood for, and won the Democratic primary over Obama's choice, Arlen Specter.
And candidates seeing positive results in distancing themselves from Obama would be a template for the Democrats in the 2012 presidential election because Obama cannot win re-election. And that winning strategy is to either convince Obama not to run in 2012, or assuming Obama refuses, for someone to mount a credible Democratic primary challenge and force the issue, which undoubtedly would make Obama the first incumbent president in history to lose the re-nomination of his party.
Don't think it cant happen, because it can. Obama's latest approval rating is 46%. The bottom has fallen out with independents. Hardly anyone is happy with him. So don't be surprised to see Obama's approval rating under 40% by the 2012 presidential elections. And no one can get elected with that kind of disapproval. As Democrats who tie their fortunes to Obama this November will probably find out.
For both Democratic members of the House up for re-election and those charged with raising money for Democratic candidates, if this isn't the last straw in supporting Obama it should be.
Gibbs statement was not just politically inept,but coming from the spokesman for the president about his own party, undermines everything the Democrats need to do in order to retain control of congress. If they thought they were sounding "honest" a trait sorely missing from Obama's lifetime political resume, they were mistaken. They just sounded stupid.
Most corporate contributions as everyone knows, is based on businesses wanting to back the winner. Usually they hedge their bets, contributing to both parties but when there is a sense that there is a clear cut winner, the money usually flows in that direction. Obama just gave a lot of corporate interests a lot of reasons to give money to Republicans.
Yes, certainly Democrats could be in trouble, but what Gibbs didn't say is that the reason the Democrats are in trouble is because of a politically inept, incompetent, dishonest, double dealing, double-talking, conviction-less president who has run Democratic party initiatives into the ground , been tepid and ineffective on every presidential level and has just about everyone disgusted with him even though for very different reasons.
If Gibbs statement, which will be seized by Republicans for their own end, is part of some idiotic White House strategy to "scare" rank and file Democrats unhappy with the ineptitude of Obama into supporting Democratic candidates out of fear of a Republican take over, it is as stupid a strategy as the one Obama used during the health care debate that resulted in the Seinfeld health care bill -- something slightly better than nothing. ( And it didn't take long for the Republicans to do just that -- minutes after this was written Republican Eric Cantor issued a statement "agreeing with the White House that the Republicans can take back the House".) And the backtracking Gibbs is now trying to do is not just worthless, its not even sincere. And besides, you can't put the proverbial toothpaste back in the tube or un-ring the bell.
On the other hand, don't put it past Obama to put out a statement like that because , like the corporate interests who play both sides of the fence and hedge their bets, he is doing the same.
Much to the dismay of just about everyone, regardless of the outcome of the November elections, the country and Democrats in particular, are going to be saddled with Obama for the next two years. And Obama just might be hedging his bets as he always does, to try and be on the winning side even if it means undermining his own party, which he has to date, done better than any president in history other than George W. Bush.
Obama's willingness to throw the Democrats under the bus by re-enforcing the idea that Democrats are in such trouble they could lose the largest majority any party has had in decades, is typical of Obama.
And now Nancy Pelosi, who arm twisted Democrats to support Obama in the primaries, and the entire Democratic party can join Jeremiah Wright, the Trinity Church, healthcare reform, financial reform, the dissidents and demonstrators in Iran, much of the African American community, and Obama's own mother and grandmother ( as Ed Koch once pointed out) as those thrown under the Obama bus. But how long they stay there will depend on them.
Unless they are willing to stand up and make it clear from now on that Obama does not speak for the Democratic party, and as has been suggested before, put as much distance between themselves and Obama as possible, they will lose every close election.
Democratic candidates have to acknowledge both to Democrats and independents, and even some rational Republicans, the people who wanted a lot better than Obama can give, that they are distancing themselves from Obama. And they are doing it, not because he ran up deficits originally caused by Republicans but because he didn't deliver on real health care reform, didn't deliver on the public option the most important piece of legislation since the Civil Rights Act of 1964, didn't deliver on financial reform, has been a disaster on foreign policy and made George W. Bush look competent in his dealing with the Gulf spill.
Democrats running for re-election have two choices -- hang Obama out to dry in the same way Obama is so ready to hang them, or lose every close election.
Throwing Obama under the bus isnt that difficult and can be done with a certain deftness that is also honest without joining or giving credence to the irrational attacks of Republicans. Joe Sestak did it easily enough, made it clear he was not an Obama Democrat but stood for the things Democrats have always stood for, and won the Democratic primary over Obama's choice, Arlen Specter.
And candidates seeing positive results in distancing themselves from Obama would be a template for the Democrats in the 2012 presidential election because Obama cannot win re-election. And that winning strategy is to either convince Obama not to run in 2012, or assuming Obama refuses, for someone to mount a credible Democratic primary challenge and force the issue, which undoubtedly would make Obama the first incumbent president in history to lose the re-nomination of his party.
Don't think it cant happen, because it can. Obama's latest approval rating is 46%. The bottom has fallen out with independents. Hardly anyone is happy with him. So don't be surprised to see Obama's approval rating under 40% by the 2012 presidential elections. And no one can get elected with that kind of disapproval. As Democrats who tie their fortunes to Obama this November will probably find out.
UPDATE: Today, Wedesday July 14th Reuters reported the following:
"President Barack Obama's fellow Democrats criticized his spokesman on Wednesday for saying they may lose control of the House of Representatives in the November election."It was an absolutely ridiculous thing for him to say," said Representative Louise Slaughter, a member of Democratic leadership. "We didn't appreciate it."
At a closed-door meeting of House Democrats on Tuesday, Speaker Nancy Pelosi ripped into White House press secretary Robert Gibbs for saying Republicans may take over the House.
Pelosi referred to Gibbs' remarks as "friendly fire," and said they are "very damaging," according to an aide who attended the meeting and asked not to be identified by name.
The aide paraphrased Pelosi as telling House Democrats that people ask her: "Why should I give money to you guys if you're are going to lose the majority?"
Why did it take Democrats four days to realize they were kicked in the teeth by an incompetent duplicituous president trying to hedge his bets? And why are they ripping Gibbs? Do they really think he made those statements without Obama knowing?
You're making a giant assumption in this assessment. Namely that the Dems are where they are by accident or by ineptitude.
ReplyDeleteThere's another possibility. The policies, e.g., Heritage Foundation/Health Insurance designed bailout bill, bankster bailout bills, not enough effective stimulus to make jobs, etc., etc., are exactly what they and their corporate backers wanted.
And next up, privatizing SS, gutting medicare/medicaid, etc. will similarly not be because they are inept or blindly wondering lost.
Where they are and what they're doing is a feature not a bug.
Another Obamanible Precedency: the first un-renominated incumbent in the history of US! Genuinely anticipated!! But who are the 40-46% of FOOLS remaining?!!
ReplyDeleteI'm a PA voter and I really don't think that Sestak beat Specter because he ran as an anti-Obama Democrat - he won because he wasn't Arlen Specter. The commercial where he showed Specter saying that he switched to the Democratic party in order to save his job - not yours - was exceedingly effective and is really what really won him the primary.
ReplyDeleteOn another note, I'd like to see Kucinich/Grayson as the Dems in the White House come January 21, 2013.
There is one thing I am certain of. Nancy Pelosi did arm-twist to keep Hillary from getting the nomination.
ReplyDeleteShe, Pelosi, couldn't bear the thought of losing her position as the powerful women in American politics. She was more concerned about that than whether Obama had the experience and tools to guide our country. She could never allow Hillary to get above her.
She had a lot of help, from Donna Brazile, Howard Dean, Ted Kennedy....and her minions in the form of Keith Obermann and Chris Matthews and other "journalists". Now, Obama will lead us all to the end of the world.....according to the Mayan calendar anyway. Or maybe, with his departure, it will just signal the end of a bad chapter on Earth.
Yes! Throw traitor Obama under the political bus!
ReplyDeletePersonally, I think Dennis Kucinich should announce his candidacy early and also announce his pick for VP, Howard Dean.
Then the two of them could go on the attack against both the Republicans AND the Blue Dog DINOs.
If they get started now with support for true progressive Democrats, perhaps they could save the REAL Democrats this November.
The Blue Dog DINOs can go to Hell. I will never vote for them or Obama again!
Kevin Schmidt
Obama-Palin 2012 !!!
ReplyDeleteshe can be his hatchet man