Being Right on the Big Issues Means you are Left Out of the Obama Cabinet

(11 am. – promoted by ek hornbeck)

First, let me say what this diary is not. It is not an OMG, Obama fooled us and betrayed the movement.  It is not OMG, it’s all over and we must oppose Obama.  It is not, OMG, let’s start or join a third party, because the Dems are bankrupt and Obama/Reid/Pelosi are not progressives.

What I hope it is, is a springboard for discussion about why we are left out and what it means.    

I agree with the Nation’s take on this: in Obama’s cabinet and other appointments, the Left of the Democratic Party has been left out.  We’ll see how his policy is, but people make policy, and all these appointments (or rumored appointments) have had a distinctly centrist tinge.  I’m not surprised that Obama is not leaning left, because I expected mildly left of center policy choices, and we have not seen him govern yet, so we don’t yet know all his policy choices.

More, including an excerpt from the Nation blog, after the fold.  

(Also on Dkos: http://www.dailykos.com/story/…  )

While Obama prides himself on having all viewpoints represented and listening, who will argue a progressive viewpoint in these discussions?

Some might argue that Obama is the progressive left voice, but I think that misreads Obama.  Yes, he is left on some things, but his overall world view seems to “pragmatic” left of center.  Yes, in Obama’s cabinet meetings, he may be the most progressive/left person present, but that’s a problem.  His advice will mostly come from the right of him.  There need to be labor voices, economic justice voices.  DFH voices.  Those who push him out of his pragmatic comfort zone.  The Left of the Democratic Party.  To date, the Left is Left out.  And that leaves a one-sided discussion.

On major issue after major issue, it was the Left in the Democratic Party that was right, and the moderates in the Democratic Party who were wrong.  This from the Nation lays it out as I also see it:

Not a single, solitary, actual dyed-in-the-wool progressive has, as far as I can tell, even been mentioned for a position in the new administration. Not one.

Remember this is the movement that was right about Iraq, right about wage stagnation and inequality, right about financial deregulation, right about global warming and right about health care. And I don’t just mean in that in a sectarian way. I mean to say that the emerging establishment consensus on all of these issues came from the left. There’s tons of things the left is right about that aren’t even close to mainstream (taking a hatchet to the national security state and ending the prison industrial complex to name just two), but hopefully we’re moving there.

The Nation, “Left Out,” by Christopher Hayes.

So if we have been right on so many things, why are our voices left out of the White House and cabinet positions?  I know Obama’s there, but he also needs voices on the left to have a “cabinet of rivals.”

On Open Left, Chris Bowers also sees this:

I know everyone is obsessed with the “team of rivals” idea right now, but I feel incredibly frustrated. Even after two landslide elections in a row, are our only governing options as a nation either all right-wing Republicans, or a centrist mixture of Democrats and Republicans? Isn’t there ever a point when we can get an actual Democratic administration? Also, why isn’t there a single member of Obama’s cabinet who will be advising him from the left? It seems to me as though there is a team of rivals, except for the left, which is left off the team entirely.

It is just so very frustrating. It seems like the only place progressives are making any gains is in the House. We are being entirely left out of Obama’s major appointments so far. I guess everyone gets to play in Obama’s administration, except progressives.

Open Left, Chris Bowers

This is why EFCA is a deal breaker to me.  Obama must deliver it.  With EFCA, unions can grow and we can build a future where we actually have, as Chris Bowers puts it, a “Democratic administration.”  Or as Dr. Dean talked about years ago (quoting Paul Wellstone):

What I want to know, what I want to know, is what in the world so many Democrats are doing supporting the President’s unilateral intervention in Iraq?  [cheers].

What I want to know, is what in the world so many Democrats are doing supporting tax cuts which have bankrupted this country and given us the largest deficit in the history of the United States?  [cheers].

What I want to know, is why the Congress is fighting over the Patient’s Bill of Rights?  If the Patient’s Bill of Rights passes, is a good bill, but not one more person gets health insurance and it’s not five cents cheaper.

What I want to know is why the Democrats in Congress aren’t standing up for us joining every other industrialized country on the face of the Earth in having health insurance for every man, woman and child in America?  [cheers, chants “Dean”].

What I want to know, what I want to know, is why so many folks in Congress are voting for the President’s education bill — “The No School Board Left Standing Bill” — the largest unfunded mandate in the history of our educational system?  [cheers].

As Paul Wellstone said — and as Sheila Kuehl said when she endorsed me — I’m Howard Dean, and I’m here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party. [cheers].

Governor Howard Dean, M.D., Address to California State Democratic Convention, Sacramento, California, March 15, 2003

The Democratic Wing of the Democratic Party deserves a voice also in the Obama administration.

11 comments

Skip to comment form

    • TomP on November 22, 2008 at 00:57
      Author

    heard, including the many Democrats and other who got it right in the big issues, rather than just those who were wrong.  

    • Edger on November 22, 2008 at 01:24

    Steve Clemons, who writes The Washington Note, and whom I don’t think anyone would refer to as “liberal”, wrote a short commentary piece for CNN two days ago, in which he has, among other things, this to say:

    (CNN) — Hillary Clinton? Secretary of state? What is Barack Obama thinking?

    This rock star president-elect may either be confused, deluded and self-destructive in sculpting a political and policy team that has a high probability of paralyzing itself in vicious internal skirmishes, or he may just be brilliant — really, really brilliant.

    Rahm Emanuel, considered by many to be the most thuggish (and effective) of the Democratic machine’s partisans, is Obama’s chief of staff.

    Joe Lieberman, disloyal former Democrat who headlined the Republican National Convention calling GOP vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin “strong. . .compelling…competent!” will keep his place in the Senate Democratic caucus — as well as his powerful perch as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security.

    While not yet announced, indications increasingly point to Bush administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates being rewarded for out-Cheneying Cheney, having vital stewardship over America’s complex Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan portfolios and thus staying on as Obama’s Defense chief.

    Now we may be on the verge of an announcement that Obama’s “never give up, never surrender” rival to lead the Democratic Party, Hillary Rodham Clinton, may be nominated as Obama’s secretary of state.

    These early moves have been very difficult for the most liberal elements of the Democratic Party to digest as they feel they helped move the unlikely candidacy of Obama to triumph over the mainstream Clinton campaign. Now they are seeing their candidate “go Clinton” on them, at least in a number of his early political appointments.

    [snip]

    What would Obama be getting in Clinton if she is nominated?

    [snip]

    Despite [various differences – see Clemon’s article], hiring Clinton may be a masterstroke of genius that has all the markings of a high-risk, high-reward move with which this political tycoon Obama has grown comfortable.

    By bringing her on, Obama finally gets the keys to the Clinton political franchise, adding it to the Daley, Daschle and Kennedy Democratic party franchises he has already acquired and integrated. Obama neutralizes a potential rival for the 2012 race.

    Pragmatism.

  1. I have commenced pondering these issues, as well, but still reserving an out and out opinion for the moment.  I have been trying to view some of these selections of Obama’s and what the REAL meaning for them might be.

    Trying to view it from, say, a more worldly perspective, is it possible that Obama has chosen some of these people for “psychological” reasons?  Meaning, that he does not want to give the appearance of a bunch of “wusses” (a view that some might have of more leftist ideas) in control; that the world must not get the idea that we have suddenly gone soft on “terrism” (deliberately misspelled), as the Repugs would make every effort to play upon, as they undoubtedly will, anyway.  While, Obama, would, at the same time, still pursue his views and issues?  I don’t think that H. Clinton is not necessarily a bad pick for Secretary of State — she does have the experience and, if diplomacy is what Obama believes in and wants, I think she would be capable of following that philosophy — at least I would hope so.

    But, I agree, Obama should be naming some left thinking persons on many issues.  I think Robert Kennedy, Jr. for the environmentalist role is a good one, for example.  Yes, Al Gore would be ideal — but I think Al Gore is doing what he is happy doing without the politics of the government, IMHO.

    Right now, it seems there is a great deal of concern about a possible Robert Gates’ appointment for Secretary of Defense.  Here is an action from Peace Action, requesting you write President Elect-Obama about your concerns for this appointment. Rumors About War Hawks in the Obama Cabinet  What will change really look like?

    • OPOL on November 22, 2008 at 05:55

    And that’s my first ‘groovy post’ ever…I think.

    • dkmich on November 22, 2008 at 09:49

    Let’s see.  So the Democrats support the Employee Free Choice Act because it gives people the right to join a union and earn a better wage, which is why they are in Washington beating the shit out of the UAW and telling what little remains of unions, high wage American jobs, and American companies to just go ahead and die.  This is how we reward “U.S.” companies that supported this country’s war effort, paid the living wage that created the middle class, and bears the legacy and cost of this country’s national employer paid health care policy.

    Meanwhile, the prima donnas in Washington haven’t done anything about national heath care or a national energy policy, both of which would have been a boom to American unions, autos, and jobs.  So what have they been busy doing?  What else but passing more and more free trade deals while merrily deregulating the financial industry so they could whip 780 billion unregulated dollars down our throats to go along with the trillions they gave to Haliburton for the Iraq war.  Yeah, the nerve of fucking Detroit.

    To add insult to injury, Obama is now talking about postponing the renegotiation of NAFTA and supporting the idea that GM should file bankruptcy.  I can assure you this is NOT what he told MI and Ohio when he needed their votes.  

    Obama is Blue Skies all over again.  Welcome to the return of the Clinton WH.  

  2. Obama was close to my last choice in the primaries.  I like him, he is inspiring.  BUT:

    He is also way too right-wing for my taste.  I wanted a true populist…after my two favorites dropped out of the race due to lack of funds (no, not Kucinich, he’s cool but entirely too unelectable) it was Hillary or Obama.

    When I went into the voting booth during the primary, I still wasn’t sure.  That was at the end of April.

    We need to shove O to the left, with every means at our disposal, including his website.

  3. outrage. My adrenals need a rest. My journey started with Dean the line that turned me to an activist ‘I’m taking my country back and the vehicle I’m using is the Democratic Party.’ When I switched to Obama after Edwards dropped out I never thought he was a lefty.

    He used to post on dkos when he was a new senator and he took a lot of heat (including my two cents) for his unification themes. I think above all else he is a great strategic pol.I am not being an apologist. I’ve read that he does not want to make the mistakes Clinton did when he was elected, politically. No matter which candidate won the governing of a country this divided even inside the two parties, is going to be hard politically.

    I will reserve my outrage until he’s actually in office. I’ve not been to his new site for input but will. I do think he is smart enough to realize that another Clinton era is in no way feasible given the economic reality which it in part wrought. I too find myself wondering where are the progressives but then again I’ve been thinking this through out this whole freaking mess. Even Mr. Patriotic Progressive himself Fiengold leaves my jaw dropping when push comes to shove. So we just have to keep pushing progressives until as it will the ‘center right’ myth they all live and die by dies.          

Comments have been disabled.