Pushing Obama

posted by Peter Rothberg on 11/10/2008 @ 1:26pm

Email
Print
Share
- Buzzflash
- del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx it!
- Reddit
What is this?
Take Action
Comments (47)

Subscribe Now

As talk turns to whom the new President will appoint to his cabinet and what tasks they'll immediately turn themselves to in the first 100 days, a stirring new video from our friends at the Campaign for America's Future reminds us what is possible.

As scholar Anthony Badger wrote in his history of the New Deal, Franklin Roosevelt's first 100 days in office were marked by a frenzy of legislation -- sixteen pieces in all -- that reshaped and redefined the role of government. President-elect Obama would do well to be as ambitious but he needs to be pushed. Much, if not all, of FDR's programs wouldn't have been possible without strong pressure from organized movements of people. Obama needs that same kind of pressure. The movements are out there. Join one today.

Comments (47)

Thanks for the post, Peter, and in particular, the link to the Van Jones piece on the need for a green economy.

I also recommend to readers here the the latest Tom Dispatch from Michael Klare.

Excerpt:

"Of all the challenges facing President Barack Obama next January, none is likely to prove as daunting, or important to the future of this nation, as that of energy. After all, energy policy -- so totally mishandled by the outgoing Bush-Cheney administration -- figures in each of the other major challenges facing the new president, including the economy, the environment, foreign policy, and our Middle Eastern wars. Most of all, it will prove a monumental challenge because the United States faces an energy crisis of unprecedented magnitude that is getting worse by the day. "

Thus, in American energy policy lies the touchstone for the lion's share of the most serious problems that we face as a nation, and more importantly, as a global society.

THE ENTIRE PLANETARY ECOSYSTEM IS ABSOLUTELY IN PERIL.

I strongly suggest that we focus our efforts like a laser beam with that fact as our central motivating factor.

Posted by b_kool_66 at 11/10/2008 @ 2:42pm
Good pt. KOOL. I'll try to keep making that point, as I can. Nothing else much matters if we blow this one.

Posted by Peter Rothberg at 11/10/2008 @ 2:50pm
viva la revolution!

i wonder if people are practicing what they preach, i.e., making the revolution occur an act at a time, a day at a time, or waiting for some big changes from big brother?

Posted by urmygyro at 11/10/2008 @ 2:53pm
Thus, in American energy policy lies the touchstone for the lion's share of the most serious problems that we face as a nation, and more importantly, as a global society.

THE ENTIRE PLANETARY ECOSYSTEM IS ABSOLUTELY IN PERIL.

I strongly suggest that we focus our efforts like a laser beam with that fact as our central motivating factor.

Posted by b_kool_66 at 11/10/2008 @ 2:42pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Ever see "Who Killed the Electric Car"? We got new Obama mouthpiece pushing for a bailout for GM. Is the bailout going to go for a retool to electric cars? Have they made clear the strings attached to the bailout, or is this just a gimme to fund the bankrupt UAW pension and health fund in advance of GM merger or going on the auctioning block? UAW endorsed and supported Obama as I recall.

Posted by OneVote at 11/10/2008 @ 2:58pm
What a pathetic commentary on an upcoming presididency that its partisans think it has to be pushed to do the right thing. A question for these partisans: Did you get what you pushed for when you pushed for opposition to the recent FISA bill or to end funding for Iraq from this clown? No, you got what you paid for, lies and disappointment. Try this little test on for size:

Rahm Emanuel is to Barak Obama as X is to George Bush where X might be

1. Scooter Libby 2. Paul Wolfowitz 3. Richard Perl 4. Dick Cheney

And the right answer for you war-in-the-Middle-East fans ... Yup, its #4, Dick Cheney. And there you though things were going to be different.

Posted by john lowell at 11/10/2008 @ 3:31pm
Posted by john lowell at 11/10/2008 @ 3:31pm

Are you still here?

Good...thought you'd made a breakthrough and figured out that everybody has figured out that you're a perfect "reverse barometer".

LOL

Posted by Mask at 11/10/2008 @ 4:15pm
Posted by OneVote at 11/10/2008 @ 2:58pm

Sorry OV, but that money is going straight to the UAW.

Posted by ACook at 11/10/2008 @ 4:44pm
Posted by ACook at 11/10/2008 @ 4:44pm

Those poor, poor management guys at GM....

living in cardboard boxes and eating at the Soup Kitchen, while those fat-cat auto factory "workers" lay back on their yachts, sipping Dom and eating caviar!

Posted by Mask at 11/10/2008 @ 4:53pm
Posted by Mask at 11/10/2008 @ 4:53pm

Are the factory workers real Americans, because they have production jobs and live in small towns? Or are they fake Americans, with their urban elitist unions?

I always get so confused!

Posted by TexasFlood at 11/10/2008 @ 6:47pm
elitist unions. Posted by TexasFlood at 11/10/2008 @ 6:47pm

Elitist unions? Isn't that an oxymoron?

Now I'm Confused..

Posted by chaoszen at 11/10/2008 @ 8:53pm
I always thought Unions and Workers Rights were established to combat "Elitist Cartels" such as the Oil and Auto Industry.

I guess nowadays everyone has equal opportunity to be an "Elitist"

Posted by chaoszen at 11/10/2008 @ 9:04pm
Off Topic:

Does anyonw else wonder why the Bush Administration is being so "Cordial" towards the President Elect?

Could it be because they are tring to ingratiate themselves to the incoming administration?

So that they might keep many of their corrupt and criminal asses out of prison?

Hmmmm...

Posted by chaoszen at 11/10/2008 @ 9:14pm
NOPE!

Unions are just tools of the liberal-urban- elite, used to harass hardworking and honest corporate executives.

Duh.

Posted by TexasFlood at 11/10/2008 @ 9:20pm
I hope Obama's desire to be the "Unity President" doesn't blind him from serving the rule of law.

I fear that if these criminals are not punished in some way that it will "embolden" other domestic terrorists and criminals in the future.

I hope he doesn't pull a Clinton and just let bygones be bygones, look what happened after that one.

Posted by chaoszen at 11/10/2008 @ 9:24pm
Posted by TexasFlood at 11/10/2008 @ 6:47pm

Knee-jerk ACOOK anti-unionism.

She buys into the Limbaugh spin that unions "destroyed American productivity"....

yet can't explain why we were MOST productive (in the 1950s) when unions were STRONGEST and the largest percentage of the work-force was unionized?!??!???

Posted by Mask at 11/10/2008 @ 10:01pm
Posted by ACook at 11/10/2008

Money going straight to UAW isn't saving the auto industry. We have hearing the sorry song and dance about "legacy costs" making GM unprofitable. Legacy costs are vested pension and health benefits promised to union workers. Where has all the money gone? Pilferred by management.

Have the Democrats talked about putting stiff tariffs on auto imports? Why isn't this part of the economic recovery program?

Posted by OneVote at 11/10/2008 @ 11:52pm
Understand Rahm Emanuel volunteered for service in the Israeli Army during the Gulf War. Interesting. Had he ever volunteered for service in the United States Army? We were involved in the Gulf War, of course.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:05am
'AmEx becomes bank to stabilize funding

The Federal Reserve grants company's request to become bank holding company, giving it access to better funding at time when securitization dries up. By Tami Luhby, CNNMoney.com senior writer Last Updated: November 10, 2008: 8:17 PM ET NEW YORK(CNNMoney.com) -- Seeking shelter amid a global credit crunch and consumer spending slowdown, American Express announced Monday it is becoming a bank.

The Federal Reserve, using emergency power to act swiftly, granted approval for AmEx and American Express Travel Related Services to become bank holding companies......

CNNMoney.com - Today

Whoaaaah.....what is going on here? Now AmEx (a credit card company) becomes a bank so it can get bailout money. Ladies and gentleman our treasury is being looted with trillions of IOU's and we are being bankrupted (no rational ability to repay federal debt over the long term future). Where is Obama on this issue? He should be screaming bloody murder. What is going to happen to our children?

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:13am
Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:05am | ignore this person | warn this person

Watch the fate of Joe Lieberman in the Senate. Heard today that Obama (likely with a little help from his friends) is heartily recommending that Dems embrace Joe back into the fold, without conditions. Watch to see if he holds his committee chair on Homeland Security. Can you believe this BS? Dems don't need his vote, they already have a majority. Political theatre at its best.

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:22am
Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:22am

Obama is simply an AIPAC front. Of course he's going to suggest that Joe the Likudist be welcomed back into the fold, he hasn't the freedom to do otherwise. AIPAC sets the tune, BoJangles does the dance. On Iran, this clown is more bellicose than Bush. Emanuel is Barak Obama's Dick Cheney. And you thought this kind of thing was behind us.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:37am
Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:22am

OV, lowell is a nut.

He's an ADMITTED right-wing "pro-lifer" who wanted "progressives to vote for Nader" but said he wasn't going to vote for him or anybody else.

Apparently he's just going to stick around and be a nattering nabob on Obama for 4 years.....joy!

Posted by Mask at 11/11/2008 @ 07:20am
Apparently he's just going to stick around and be a nattering nabob on Obama for 4 years.....joy!

Posted by Mask at 11/11/2008 @ 07:20am | ignore this person | warn this person

I hear that Charles Schumer wants Lieberman's head....so the AIPAC coup theory just doesn't fly as yet. Chalk one up for Schumer!

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 10:17am
'Mark Vogel, chairman of the pro-Israel National Action Committee, has stated that "Joe Lieberman, without exception, no conditions ... is the No. 1 pro-Israel advocate and leader in Congress. There is nobody who does more on behalf of Israel than Joe Lieberman. That is why he is incredibly important to the pro-Israel community." According to The Center for Responsive Politics, Lieberman currently ranks fourth on the list of candidates who received money from pro-Israel PACs in 2006.[97]'

Source: Wikipedia, query Joe Lieberman

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 11:20am
Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 10:17am

Since its "as yet", probably better expressed, "chalk on up for Schumer?"

If Emanuel wants Joe back, Joe's back, believe me. If Emanuel doesn't care all that much, then maybe not. But the say so is Emanuel's not Schumer. Schumer is an appendage.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 11:21am
Posted by Mask at 11/11/2008 @ 07:20am

Please, please, Mr. Lowell, please tell me you won't bother me here for four more years. After all, this blog is mine and I should be able to do with it whatever I want. And anyway, you're just a big meanie and get me all mixed up inside. Stop it, Mr. Lowell, or I'm going to tell my Mom.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 11:37am
Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:22am

AIPAC sets the tune, BoJangles does the dance. .....

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:37am | ignore this person | warn this person

Whats your take on this?

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.politics.misc/2007

b) there is a group of dual citizenship Congress members , Senator Lieberman,R.Emanuel,R.Lantos, and others who have dual rights: when they go to Israel, they have the rights of every israeli citizen, in the USA, they are USA citizens, like in the case of R.Lowry,R. Harman,R. Ackerman,Mayor Bloomberg, Chairman Fed.Bernanke,S.Schumer,State C.Silver,etc.,etc., and if a christian Congress member would have dual citizenship, American and European, can you imagine the scandal ?, and in the case of Bernanke and Lieberman,Chertoff and others in DC, they are also ordained rabbies and/or elected members in their faith, can you imagine a priest or cardinal running for the House or Senate? as a christian i would object very strongly, i think is un-constitutional to have church members in Elected office, so why not a public debate about this issue like the caller to c-span asked?

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 11:41am
Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 11:37am

Nope...again, stick around looney...

your contradictory wackiness keeps this place fun.

Posted by Mask at 11/11/2008 @ 11:47am
Schumer is an appendage.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 11:21am | ignore this person | warn this person

Not sure if this is window dressing by Schumer or not, and I haven't been able to verify it as yet except for hearing it on the Rachel Maddow Show last night. Apparently the voting on Lieberman's holding of his chair will be secret, so we apparently will never know how Schumer votes. If history is any guide (Schumer on our current Attorney General and torture), he will voting for Joe holding his seat as I am quite confident that AIPAC desires.

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 11:49am
'Interestingly, people like Dick Durbin who is the first Democrat in the Senate -- the first Senator, and from Illinois, to support Barack Obama -- is really loaded for bear about Lieberman, he wants to kick Lieberman off that Chairmanship. Chuck Schumer, the head of the Campaign Committee likewise.'

Excerpt from: Firedoglake.com, "Schumer and Durbin Want Lieberman Stripped of Homeland Security Chair," Jane Hamsher - 11/11/08

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 12:17pm
Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 11:41am

Got an error when I entered the url you gave me, sorry.

I really don't know how Emanuel's dual citizenship allieviates concerns over AIPAC's exercize of control over American foreign policy. What ought to be evident to even the most Israeli-sympathetic observer is the utter servility of our political leadership when it comes to questions involving Israel, the recent unsupported accusations by Obama of Iran's seeking a nuclear weapon included. The American people have no more independence of action vis-a-vis Israel than flying in the air. We are being dragged like a weaker Siamese twin into problems that were never ours. And I think the problem has little to do with Jews, per se, as most Jews are known not to share AIPAC's outlook on the security of Israel. Rather, it seems more clearly one of a narrow group of activists, Jews and non-Jews, who share a Likudist vision of Israel's interests. All of this is nothing new, of course, Mearshimer and Walt having examined the question at length in a recent book which if you haven't read you might be intereted in reading: The Israel Lobby And American Foreign Policy. The authors have paid a very heavy price for having had the audacity of examining this question as have others, Jewish historian, Tony Judt, for example. Obama is literally a creature of these interests, no more no less. Tell me if you like that, please.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:31pm
Posted by Mask at 11/11/2008 @ 11:47am

Yeah, I'm sure you think its fun, douche-nozzle. You'll need to.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:37pm
Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Sorry about the link. It was too long to post correctly.

Basically, dual citizens of Israel and US in our Congress and Treasury/Federal Reserve - and some rabbi's to boot. If we still believe in separation of church and state, it would appear that principle has been shoved under the bus a long time ago. Any discussion of this issue is met with vicious attack couched in anti anti-semetic diatribe.

Good post Mr. Lowell. I will check out the sources you cited.

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 1:27pm
Obama is literally a creature of these interests, no more no less. Tell me if you like that, please.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:31pm | ignore this person | warn this person

Post script to above. Most decidely not! I find the appointment of Emanuel to be repugnant.

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 1:35pm
Knee-jerk ACOOK anti-unionism.

She buys into the Limbaugh spin that unions "destroyed American productivity"....

yet can't explain why we were MOST productive (in the 1950s) when unions were STRONGEST and the largest percentage of the work-force was unionized?!??!???

Posted by Mask at 11/10/2008 @ 10:01pm

HELLO!!! How many times have I told you I don't listen to Limbaugh!? And no, I'm not going "explain" to you about "why the unions of the 1950's were more productive". That's all water under the bridge. The current laws written to protect workers (like OSHA) were supposed to replace the need for any labor unions.

Today's unions are nothing but extortion and racketeering rings. The "mafia" never had it so good when workers were so willing to give them a cut of their pay without the Don having to send someone over to break some poor schmucks legs because he didn't pay his dues on time.

Posted by ACook at 11/11/2008 @ 1:42pm
Have the Democrats talked about putting stiff tariffs on auto imports? Why isn't this part of the economic recovery program?

Posted by OneVote at 11/10/2008 @ 11:52pm

No and because they were only joking about restructuring our current trade agreements.

Posted by ACook at 11/11/2008 @ 1:57pm
Tariffs and Import Quotas and strict protections should be part of any bill. This is just ridiculous. Oh....we can't offend our special interest group auto exporters......god help us.......

Posted by OneVote at 11/11/2008 @ 2:12pm
Posted by ACook at 11/11/2008 @ 1:57pm

"No and because they were only joking about restructuring our current trade agreements"

You can count on that. Again our friend, Emanuel, who in the Clinton Administration was central to the passage of NAFTA. And what could be more illustrative of this fact than what now has to be known as an "Obama Promise", our dear messiah's flip on NAFTA during the election campaign. Don't look for reindustrialization under this Stephin Fetchit. Too many controlling banking interests.

Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 2:16pm
Have the Democrats talked about putting stiff tariffs on auto imports? Why isn't this part of the economic recovery program? Posted by OneVote at 11/10/2008 @ 11:52pm | ignore this person | warn this person

tariffs again? nonsense. there is no purely american made car. they have all outsourced the parts, even the engine.

example, the FORD Focus, the world's best selling car. made in several countries, including the US. and they ALL have the Mitsubishi engine.

the electric car is by no means ready for prime time. for one thing making the electricity in the first place is very polluting.

to fill up your car with gas takes five minutes. how long does it take to recharge the electric car?

Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 2:26pm
We were involved in the Gulf War, of course. Posted by john lowell at 11/11/2008 @ 12:05am | ignore this person | warn this person

Israel by contrast was NOT involved in the Gulf War.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 2:28pm
Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 2:26pm

Not to belittle your overall point, which I agree with...

But, I don't believe there has ever been a Ford w/ a Mitsubishi engine (Gas, there was a diesel Ranger. Chrysler had some and rebadged mitsus as Dodges etc.)

Eric

Posted by Malcontent at 11/12/2008 @ 7:12pm
Eric Posted by Malcontent at 11/12/2008 @ 7:12pm | ignore this person | warn this person

you can look it up. I did. if you have other info let me know. don't challenge me w/o facts.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 10:20pm
Eric, I'm sorry, I cannot find the page I got this info from.

Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 10:54pm
Umm...had my own shop for 9 yrs. now... been fixing cars for 28 years (excepting the three I managed a parts store for). If you can find a mitsu powered ford, aside from the aforemention diesel ranger...feel free to link.

Not a big deal either way. Ford used to use a lot of Mazda motors and tranmissions. Probe, certain escorts, f-150 transmissions etc.

Posted by Malcontent at 11/12/2008 @ 11:01pm
I bow to your obviously superior knowledge. I'm not a car person. I am however a look it up person, and I did see that somewhere. again it don't matter, except that I may have been rude to you, something I definitely do not wish to be. most others yes, but you...

Posted by emile duBois at 11/12/2008 @ 11:15pm
:o)

Posted by Malcontent at 11/12/2008 @ 11:31pm
Shanghai VW to Show Hydrogen Fuel-Cell Passat Lingyu at LA Auto Show 14 November 2008

The car, based on the Passat, uses a fuel cell powertrain jointly developed by SAIC (Shanghai VW's parent); Tongji University and Shanghai Shen-Li High Tech Co., Ltd.

The powertrain of the fuel-cell Lingyu includes a 55 kW fuel cell located in the floor of the car, a lithium-ion battery pack and an 88 kW electric drive motor. The car has a range of more than 300 km (186 miles) and a top speed of 150 kph (93 mph) on one fill. - source (who else): Green car Congress.

This is what I mean about the pathetic lethargy of the US automotive industry and the US government in showing some leadership that might get the US driving public to re-evaluate it's commitment to the dinosaurs that are devouring our planet's energy reserves.

Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 11/14/2008 @ 1:38pm
I loved my moribund MGB as well, but hey, times change. Nowadays I would love to drive this gizmo around:

http://www.twike.us/the_twike.html

Cute, huh? And so healthy to operate.

Posted by A_Pax_On_Your_Houses at 11/14/2008 @ 1:42pm