For those who don’t know me, here is a brief, relevant background: I have a long history in Democratic and liberal politics. I have worked for several Democratic candidates and affiliated groups, I have personally raised millions of dollars for Democrats online, I was an early advisor to Actblue (which has processed over $300 million to Democratic candidates). I have worked in Congress (mostly on the Dodd-Frank financial reform package), and I was a producer at MSNBC. Furthermore, I aggressively opposed Nader-style challenges until 2008.I'll take any liberal argument against the man I can get :-)
So why oppose Obama? Simply, it is the shape of the society Obama is crafting that I oppose, and I intend to hold him responsible, such as I can, for his actions in creating it. Many Democrats are disappointed in Obama. Some feel he’s a good president with a bad Congress. Some feel he’s a good man, trying to do the right thing, but not bold enough. Others think it’s just the system, that anyone would do what he did. I will get to each of these sentiments, and pragmatic questions around the election, but I think it’s important to be grounded in policy outcomes. Not, what did Obama try to do, in his heart of hearts? But what kind of America has he actually delivered? And the chart below answers the question. This chart reflects the progressive case against Obama.
Education, politics, and anything else that catches my attention.
Monday, October 29, 2012
If You Believe In Social Justice You Must Vote Republican In This Election.
From Salon, hardly a conservative outlet:
I'm not surprised that you like this, D. However, I am surprised at Stoller for believing that corporate entities have protected their own interests to the detriment of the average American worker is somehow the fault of President Obama and his policies. The most telling aspect of this "recovery" is that the top earners suffered very little and recovered quickly - for they discovered some new realities of the mechanized economy. Basically, companies laid off many workers, requiring the remaining ones to become more productive and efficient. And they did. Thus, companies don't need to hire people back. Why would they? The goodness of their hearts? No, that's bad "business." But that has nothing to do with govt policies of the past four years. Strangely, the oligarchy which Stoller decries will only be emboldened and become the new normal under a Romney administration. That said, a vote for a third party - which I can do with a clean conscience - is certainly preferable to believing Romney has a legitimate plan to reverse the twenty-year move toward oligarchy. Thus, you really have no idea what you mean by the term social justice. But keep trying.
ReplyDeleteI don't? Really? Please, enlighten me about what I think.
ReplyDeleteBut even if you don't, I still support you in your 3rd party vote :-)
The most telling aspect of this "recovery" is that the top earners suffered very little?
ReplyDeleteHankering for the good, old days of the French Revolution in which the rich were separated from their heads? I wouldn't dust off those guillotine plans of yours just yet. Just as the radical environmentalist movement is faltering the recent resurgence in interest in income redistribution policy will subside as well. "The masses" aren't quite as dumb as you need us to be.
Oh, and a little economics lesson this being an education blog.
Our entire civilization, and your outrageous salary paid in the absence of evidence of efficacy, results from the fact that "companies laid off many workers, requiring the remaining ones to become more productive and efficient".
Productivity increases are the sole reason for the wealth that results in just about everything you see, touch, hear and everything you eat, wear, ride in, ride on, communicate with and live in. All that results from less productive people and jobs being thrust aside by more productive people and jobs.
My condolences to those less productive people but a brief study of the history of technology makes it crystal clear that not only is society as a whole better off but even those less productive people are better off not that you'll get a "thank you" from them for, say, automating them out of a job mining coal manually.
So save your insincere sympathy for people who actually deserve it like the miner who, operating a machine that's replaced twenty of his predecessors, has half his pay taxed away to fund governmental expressions of your insincere sympathy.
I am SOOOOO tired of people telling me that i must vote republican or democrat. If people actually voted their conscience, we might actually get things done . . .
ReplyDelete