President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, joined by Sylvia Panetta, review troops during the Armed Forces Farewell Tribute in honor of Secretary Panetta, at Joint Base Myer-Henderson in Arlington, Va., Feb. 8, 2013. (Official White House Photo by Pete Souza)
“When I think about what it means to be a Democrat in this day and age, I start with the basic proposition that we are all created equal, that we’re all endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights,” Obama told House Democrats on Thursday at a retreat in Virginia, offering a glimpse of what’s to come in his address on Tuesday. “And my governing philosophy and my interest in public service grows out of how we make that union more perfect for more people day in and day out. And that starts with an economy that works for everybody.” – Obama’s State of the Union to add details to far-reaching second-term agenda
IF YOU haven’t been following along, it’s likely impossible you can grasp let alone understand how the compromises over the Stupak Amendment and the subsequent executive order that impacted the Affordable Care Act scuttled the the foundational support I held for President Obama, Speaker Pelosi in particular, and the Congressional Progressive Caucus. What came later, in the summer of 2011, when Obama served up entitlements to get a debt ceiling deal, did the rest. It culminated in my independent stance before the 2012 election and withholding a vote for president that resulted in an unexpected learning lesson. It’s also why I’m rooting for President Obama more than I ever have before.
Progressives and liberals had many reasons to challenge President Obama, not with a primary challenge as much as to make him pledge on priorities, but no one did. In a highly traveled article that made it around the web, “The Party’s Over,” I outlined the issues of his first term that should have made any liberal blanch when thinking about where to cast their vote. That piece, along with an article I wrote for U.S. News & World Report titled “Time for a Tea Party of the Left,” fully described what was required and why.
Watching the pro Obama forces, versus the third party patriots, whether it was for Rocky Anderson or Jill Stein or Virgil Goode or some other person [Roseanne Barr], and the Republican party fracturing, in a position of true ambivalence over the outcome put me in a unique position. It provided the opportunity to listen to people without needing to engage in debate or the notion I should work to change their mind. Outside partisan cheerleading, slews of people emailing me, commenters, listening to activist progressives, including the very closely connected, as well as my close associates and family, talking about how they were feeling about the election, Obama and what came next was enlightening. Truly removing myself from the presidential side of things to watch, write and wait for the inevitable, despite right-wingers’ ludicrous predictions, allowed me to disengage emotionally when other Democratic liberals could not.
The liberal inside me had no qualms about this choice, because regardless of what I felt I knew, the landscape and what had developed required a further test. Even as I teetered with leaving the Democratic party, in the end I did not, could not. For all its faults and they are legion, it is where my political heart is moored and not even the betrayals of Obama, but particularly the first female speaker of the House in history, and the so-called progressive caucus as well, could fully disengage me from this tether and for very good reasons.
This Democratic party association is based on policy priorities, which I believe are worth fighting to preserve, not the fan politics that has turned Congress into a feckless cheerleading outfit.
The third party candidate who did the best was Gary Johnson, with Jill Stein having a very poor showing. Politico has a good total board, state by state. None of the parties and politicians outside the big two parties really made a dent anywhere. Not one tallied over 1% of the vote total. A poll from Gallup revealed what became very obvious before the election.
My husband provided an example of what rank and file Democrats were feeling, because as furious as Mark had gotten with President Obama at times, nothing moved him from his mooring, fueled by blue collar rage at the Republicans, that Democrats remain the answer to Republicans by a mile. Once former President Bill Clinton made his speech at the Democratic National Convention, there was no shaking my husband’s belief in the importance of Obama having a second term. Long before Election Day I was convinced he was correct.
Now that it’s all over and President Obama is ready to give his State of the Union Address, made possible by the new coalition that stands behind him, I remain a recovering partisan, but have new awe for The System that cannot be moved or shaken much at all. I also have no interest in impeding Obama’s progress, though that certainly won’t keep me from continuing to tell it like it is. I just won’t make the case that having him at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue doesn’t matter, because of The System it does.
It’s easier now more than ever in my life to feel the fix is in, the game is rigged and no matter how hard you work to change things, it just doesn’t matter. – Matt Damon
Matt Damon explains in a nutshell why it’s easier on your nerves and your happiness to care less about political inside baseball and the politicians in charge and think more about your own life’s work and happiness. Keeping your voting simple: the Supreme Court. Your own personal civil rights. Your money. Mr. Damon has found his perfect pill, because to choke on activism that changes nothing is the root to madness.
Whether you’re a Democrat, Republican, progressive, conservative or independent, the most alarming constant is that we no longer have co-equal branches of government, where Congress holds the Executive Branch accountable and political affiliation is considered secondary. This is far more important to address than putting together third parties to challenge the established elite.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court and our national judicial landscape are political minefields.
We exist in a world of political sports teams where scoring for your side matters more than anything else, which is now called “principles,” but only applies to self-interest, with independents as much a part of the problem as anyone, because they actually think being outside The System makes a difference. That’s fine as long as they know they’re not moving anything. There is a much better case to make, proven by the Tea Party, that being inside the two-party system would allow them to impact things more effectively and the progressives could sure use the numbers.
There are even signs of life on the Democratic side where drones are concerned, which has arisen because of the strong outcry by progressives, liberals, and even elite Democratic politicians, because they have activist support behind them.
The top Democrats on the Senate intelligence and judiciary panels are planning hearings to consider establishing new authorities for federal courts to oversee the use of armed drone strikes against suspected terror targets worldwide. That authority would likely be patterned after the intelligence oversight responsibilities under the Foreign Intelligence and Surveillance Act (FISA), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the Senate Intelligence Committee’s chairwoman, told reporters. – Sens. Feinstein, Leahy push for court oversight of armed drone strikes
All of this is why I now stand writing about President Obama from a different vantage point. Not being a progressive activist, but instead simply a liberal political writer analyzing the terrain, I continue to root for progressives, who I truly believe are the best hope for a stronger Democratic party and thus a fairer, more democratic America.
The delicious desert to this is that the Republican Party is splintering further.
Senator Rand Paul will give the Tea Party response to Senator Marco Rubio’s Republican response to President Obama’s State of the Union.
These are our choices and the Electoral College won’t permit anything else and this is solidified and buttressed by The System that is corporation backed.
Right now Democrats are winning and in the real world where The System rules this matters. How much depends on the numbers of people who help the progressives push the Democratic elite to do what’s right. We should all hope they succeed.
This article has been updated.
“think more about your own life’s work and happiness” — YES, absolutely. The key to everything. We can’t force change in others. Just roll with it and be awesome. The more of us are awesome, the more the world shifts under our feet. Can’t lose.
TaosJohn, that is so beautifully said.
Yes! That is so beautifully self indulgently said. We need more self loving citizens like TaosJohnj. Oh! thats right, it was all that self indulgence that got us here in the first place.
You’re right fangio…we need more bile spewing hate everything governmental and all folks who try to do anything like you so beautifully chant post after post!
Given that the Tea Party has led to the fracturing of the GOP and the nomination of ridiculous candidates that stand no chance of winning, why in the world would the Democrats want one? When the Tea Party started out I was very sympathetic to its non-partisan message of fiscal responsibility. As it was co-opted by deep-pocket social conservatives and GOP extremists it became something completely different.
There have already been efforts from left-leaning websites to push ideologically pure candidates over moderates in Democratic primaries. I understand wanting your positions represented within the Democratic Party but the Tea Party model is not one to follow.
DaGoat – One year ago progressives weren’t as strong as circumstances required.
The furor that did erupt, including Occupy elements, proved there was signifant support for what his Second Inaugural Address delivered.
It was a clear signal that progressive activists had been heard, even if more pressure would have been preferable.
The Tea Party model has been INSTRUCTIVE for Dems & progressives, DESTRUCTIVE for the GOP.
That’s because the Tea Party is extreme, while more American voters actually SUPPORT progressive policy solutions.
Well said Taylor. Both the original post and this response awesome. Thank you!
Guess we’ll have to disagree on this one TM. I see most voters supporting moderate positions, not necessarily progressive ones. Sometimes those will be the same but not consistently. But you know, everybody including moderates, Teas Partiers and progressives all think most voters agree with them.
I admired the Occupy movement in that its message was not necessarily partisan, much like the Tea Party at first. It was also grassroots and did not have central leadership, similar to the initial Tea Parties. Like the Tea Party, the lack of leadership was both a strength and a weakness. The OWS movement ran out of gas but had it not the leadership void would most likely been filled by people who would have turned it to their own ends.
If the OWS could keep its message focused it could become a valuable faction within the Democrats. It’s not likely it would stay focused though, since it was by nature anarchic, and the leadership void would be filled by people with their own agendas.
You for the second time have repeated the utter bullshit that the teabaggers started out nonpartisan…they were from day ONE total and complete astro turf manufactured repugnantKLAN hate the Black guy mobs. From DAY ONE!
Thank you for your eloquent eulogy for democracy’s death in the our republic. It really is futile to resist the rise of the corporate state. The combination of corporate omnipotence infused and sanction throughout our constitution by the Supreme Court and the dismantling of programs and policies at the federal and state level that both protect and benefit the individual, we are witness to the US being reduced to a fiefdom controlled by the rich and powerful for its own pleasure.
May more conversations occur at this thoughtful level, Taylor.
No news to anyone here, but more-years-than-I-care-to-count ago, I arrived at my “liberally independent” position and perspective. I’m far from alone, of course, including with those who vote for candidates of alternative parties, fully aware that this is a part of a very long, complex process. More “no news,” I think it is absolutely essential that there are people working and analyzing, both from within the Democratic and Republican parties, and from outside those parties.
Again, there are lots of people who have made the decision to work outside the existing System. That might mean just the “basics” — for example, casting a vote for a “third” party candidate. Others put their efforts into working to change the electoral system, with particular efforts focused on the antiquated Electoral College.
We’re at a point that, just maybe, the Republican Party’s consistent Rightward move and the Democratic Party’s consistent following the Republican lead … just maybe there’s a chance at least some Democratic Electeds will actually stop following and at do a bit of Leftward moving. They won’t be “leading,” not in the sense of going first. That’s done by activists and others. But Leftward movement by Electeds, even if it’s just getting closer to what use to be the “center,” would be an improvement.
The room on the Left is there to be filled. Some never went away. Others have and are returning, or coming for the first time. But I think the obvious Left space has been and is maintained and expanded by the work of those on the inside and outside of the Corporate Duopoly. Certainly the Tea Party has contributed to this moment. So have those active in Occupy, immigration, LGBT, Walmart employees, teachers, anti-fracking, Tar Sands Blockade, etc., movements and actions.
The Two Party System is incredibly powerful, but when it’s allowed to confine how we think and converse, that’s by our choice. We have to take it into consideration, but we don’t have to accept the “you have no where else to go” limitations.
I know you’ll keep working, pushing back on the two party corporate stranglehold, which is tremendously important, Joyce. I look forward to reading every word.
The Electoral College is the first thing that has to go, which we both have written about until we’re both sick of writing about it. It’s the one most important element to break wide open American politics.
start quote:
The delicious desert to this is that the Republican Party is splintering further.
end quote
I find no joy in this whatsoever. That’s not because I am a Republican, because I am not and have never been. It’s because that “splintering” has created the modern Democratic Party, which has most of the negative attributes of the old Republican Party. There is no progressive party in America, and whichever party is in charge makes no difference in where we’re headed. It only makes a minor difference in the pace we get there.
Anyone who views the future of America in the fate of these two parties is proceeding from a point of view so narrow that it almost qualifies as solipsism. Whatever the route or mechanism, if progressive values are ever to be represented in our government’s actions, it will only happen despite these two parties, not because of them. They are both feckless and utterly corrupt, interested only in their own success. Frankly, who won the Super Bowl (whoever that was) is of as much importance to the future of America as which of these parties has control of our federal government.
Well, if we are to break up the 2 party system, then a 3rd party somewhere has to mount a serious challenge. It isn’t going to happen by magic or wishful thinking that somehow miraculously, the voters will all “come to their senses” and figure out that the 2-party system has a strangle-hold on legitimate parties.
My view is that it boils down to 2 things: Money (unfortunately) and breaking the other strangle hold the 2 parties have on the news outlets. To get to the second, you have got to have the first and you have got to have strong leaders with the ability to mobilize their base.
It seems as if these 3rd party leaders do not exist. While getting arrested for what you believe in takes courage, it takes more if you want the American voter to consider that you are a viable alternative. So far, there is no 3rd party that has done that.
In the meantime, yes, I have to focus on taking care of my family which takes up most of the hours of my days. If that is selfish and bad, then so be it.
“It seems as if these 3rd party leaders do not exist. While getting arrested for what you believe in takes courage, it takes more if you want the American voter to consider that you are a viable alternative. So far, there is no 3rd party that has done that.”
This line of reasoning always perplexes me. Those who support 3rd party candidates and the 3rd party candidates themselves are somehow more responsible for their failed candidacies than those who ACTUALLY SUPPORT candidates from the two other legacy parties.
“In the meantime, yes, I have to focus on taking care of my family which takes up most of the hours of my days. If that is selfish and bad, then so be it.”
Not sure how this relates to one’s political views.
But I respect Taylor for coming out as Center Right.
Taylor came out Center Right???? I didn’t read that in this post or any other that I’ve read. If I had, I wouldn’t be here.
To quote the article:
“Not being a progressive activist, but instead simply a liberal political writer analyzing the terrain, I continue to root for progressives, who I truly believe are the best hope for a stronger Democratic party and thus a fairer, more democratic America.”
end quote–points on which I agree.
Where do you decipher a Center Right stance in that comment? Or is your real beef with Obama? If so, I share that beef. The man is not a liberal, not a progressive. Isn’t now, never was and never will be. However, the alternative, the GOP, is a light year from Center Anything and 3rd party candidates simply are not viable under the present system [definition: they cannot win elections].
I say that as someone who voted for Jill Stein because the System sucks and is literally drawing the lifeblood out of the country. I voted for Stein [could have just as easily cast a vote for Rocky Anderson]. Not because I thought either would win but in good conscious I could not vote for either party, both beholden to the System that would eat NYC if it could. The GOP is completely demented, taken over by Birchers and so-called Libertarians. The rest are the odious Neo-Cons, who should all be cooling their feet in a jail cell. And the Dems [with the exception of a few] are willing to sell their souls to the highest bidder.
Doesn’t leave a lot of room for choice.
So, I’ll vote for the people I believe in when I have the opportunity, keep the Supremes in mind when casting a Presidential vote { I do not live in a swing state and Barack Obama couldn’t get a breath of oxygen where I live] and take care of my own the best I can. All the while, keeping my fingers crossed that the world doesn’t implode while I have my back turned.
We do what we can with what we have. It might not be great but it’s the best we have at the moment. I think it’s called treading water.
From Taylor’s original piece:
“Even as I teetered with leaving the Democratic party, in the end I did not, could not. For all its faults and they are legion, it is where my political heart is moored and not even the betrayals of Obama, but particularly the first female speaker of the House in history, and the so-called progressive caucus as well, could fully disengage me from this tether and for very good reasons.”
And in agreement with your comment, “And the Dems [with the exception of a few] are willing to sell their souls to the highest bidder.”
The Democratic Party is now Center Right. Marsh, despite her flirting with criticism of it here and there, remains a party loyalist.
As a side note, you and I chose Stein for the same reasons in 2012.
If I was a “party loyalist” Joyce Arnold would not have a prominent, uninhibited, uncensored writing position with TM.com. The first such position ever offered to any writer on any URL I have owned since 1996.
““It seems as if these 3rd party leaders do not exist.” Exactly…and until some viable, sane folks appear the chant of third party will continue to be as productive as trying to catch a fart in a wind storm with a jar without a lid. Technically possible…but HIGHLY improbable.
As for the repugnantKLAN/teabagger/UBERChristofascist splintering? YEEEEEEHA!
It’s always interesting to read reactionary responses filled with odd accusations that simply reveal some people can’t accept the truth while continuing to work for a better political system amid it. It’s amusing to me every time it occurs.
I’m grateful Joyce gets the realities and continues to make her case so eloquently without being dense about the difficulties that face those who want a third option that can actually break through The System.
Keep fighting PeggySue.
To add… As for the amusing notion that political party is what guides me, this is coming from people who are obsessed with fan politics, instead of the principles that once guided the Democratic party, which I believe are worth fighting to make prominent again. Your average person who is engaged in politics cannot think beyond a particular politician as being the problem or the solution. The Democratic party is about the principles of equality of all individuals, middle class economic empowerment, as well as the notion that we have an obligation to take care of the least among us, though that’s just for starters. In national security there are far too many similarities between the parties, though the Democratic model on the whole is a belief in diplomacy and economic aide as a “weapon,” among other things. See George Marshall. It’s the principles of the Democratic party, not fan politics that guided my choice to stay a Democratic party member.
Opting out is a valid option. Politics was the first true ‘reality show.’ The two parties are a toxic relationship that is enhanced by the media.
Kind of like some married couple who realized that they really can’t stand each other. So the outcome should be: get a divorce, work together for the kid’s sake, and get on with their own lives.
But for some reason, they enjoy making each other lives miserable and every little thing is taken as an affront against the other. So if daddy is ten minutes late dropping off the kids at the fast food parking lot; it can’t be chalked up to heavy traffic. The mom has that friend (media) who interjects saying ‘he can’t get away with that!’ Off to family court they go.
Or the mommy dropping of the kids and one of the kids pulled off his/her shoes, and she can’t find one of the shoes. A kid being a kid? Of course not; it neglect. Off too child services they go. And on and on.
Then later on they wonder why each of their circle of friends is getting smaller, only the enablers are left. Their other friends are always ‘to busy’ to stop by or have lunch. But; really, who the hell wants to spend a couple hours listening to someone bitch about their ex-hubby/wife. And probably later on in their lives they wonder why their grown children don’t visit that often and seems always busy with their lives.
But one thing they both 100% know for sure, is that all of this stuff is the other one’s fault.
This is why I love this blog.